FLD2010-08003; 501 FT HARRISON AVE S; MEDICAL CLINICFLD2010-08003
501 S FT HARRISON AVE
Date Received: 8/3/2010 9:15:23 AM
Medical Clinic
ZONING DISTRICT:
LAND USE:
ATLAS PAGE: 295B
PLANNER OF RECORD: S -K
PLANNER: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
CDB Meeting Date: October 19, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-08003
Agenda Item: D. 2.
Owner/Applicant: Kernan Webb/ Webb's Building LLC
Representative: Braulio Grajales, High Point Engineering
Addresses: 501 S. Ft. Harrison Avenue
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a medical clinic within
the Downtown (D) District with a building height of 48.25 feet (to
top of cupola) and 43 parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 2-903.C. and a reduction to the
foundation landscape area on the front (east) facade from five feet to
zero feet, a reduction to the interior landscape requirements from 10
percent to 9.2 percent and to allow interior landscape islands of less
than 150 square feet and less than eight feet in width from back of
curb to back of curb as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under
the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING
AND LAND USE PLAN Downtown (D) District
CATEGORY: Central Business District (CBD)
DOWNTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN CHARACTER
DISTRICT: Downtown Core
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Offices
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic
EXISTING North: Downtown (D) District
SURROUNDING Automobile Service Station
ZONING AND USES: South: Downtown (D) District
Retail Sales/Services
East: Downtown (D) District
Nightclub
West: Downtown (D) District
Automobile Service Station
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 1 of 9
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The subject site comprises two parcels, one of which is comprised of 0.41 acres and the other is
0.24 acres. The larger parcel is located at the southeast corner of Chestnut Street and South Fort
Harrison Avenue and the smaller parcel is located south of the larger parcel approximately 160
feet east of the intersection of South Fort Harrison Avenue and Rogers Street. Both parcels are
located in the Downtown (D) District within the Downtown Core Character District of the
Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The Downtown Core is the government center and
principal employment core of the City. Many of the Pinellas County government offices are
located in the Downtown Core as well as private offices and support uses that desire the proximity
to the government center.
The larger parcel has an existing 14,050 square foot structure located on it and a portion of the
building is currently used for an office. Previously, Webb's Men's Store was located in another
portion of this building and has since closed. The smaller parcel is directly south of the larger
parcel, across Rogers Street, and is currently used as an off-street parking lot. The larger parcel is
bound by South Fort Harrison Avenue to the west, Court Street to the north, Rogers Street to the
south and an alley to the east.
Regarding uses, to the both the north and west of the subject property, are automobile service
stations. South of the subject parcel are retail sales and services and just east of the subject parcel
is a nightclub.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to redevelop the existing 14,050 square foot building for a medical clinic. While
a medical clinic is not specifically authorized in the Downtown (D) zoning district, it is
permissible in the Central Business District (CBD) land use plan category and other medical
clinics have been established in the Downtown (D) zoning district. St. Luke's Cataract & Laser
Institute plans to establish a mid Pinellas clinic at the subject location. The applicant proposes to
remove a previously constructed addition of 970 square feet to allow for a porte cohere on the
east side of the structure resulting in 13,080 square feet of gross floor area. It is anticipated that
patients for surgery will be dropped off under the porte cohere and the vehicle then will be
parked in one of 43 on-site parking spaces. All vehicular traffic will enter via the one-way alley
along the east side of the property.
Regarding architecture, the proposed re-design keeps much of the original building structure
such as the windows, door openings and building projections. To further articulate the facades
the proposal includes a significant corner tower and a corresponding and balancing smaller
corner element at Rogers Street. The most significant change to the building is the proposed
addition of a sloped roof. Accent treatments being proposed include arched heads to the
windows, shutters, and decorative window boxes to the second story windows.
Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan: In addition to the Clearwater Comprehensive
Plan, the Downtown Plan is the official statement of policy regarding the Downtown and in
particular with regard to the use of land and public policies. All development of land, both public
and private, undertaken within the Downtown shall be consistent with and further the goals of
the Plan.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 2 of 9
Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies: A review of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan was conducted and the development proposal has been determined to be
consistent with the following Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies:
Vision: Downtown will be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, office
and recreational opportunities. The development of a variety of residential
projects to attract new residents to Downtown is critical to the success of a
revitalized Downtown.
Vision: Downtown Clearwater is a major center of activity, business and governments.
Vision: Quality urban design is critical to new construction and renovated buildings.
Goal 1: Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and
recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents
and visitors to Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping
destination.
Objective ]A: All development within Downtown shall further the goals, objectives and policies
of this Plan and shall be consistent with the character districts, the design
guidelines and the Downtown zoning district.
Objective IE: A variety of businesses are encouraged to relocate and expand in Downtown to
provide a stable employment center, as well as employment opportunities for
Downtown.
Policy 1: The design guidelines establish the quality and design features expected for
renovation, redevelopment and new construction in Downtown with which all
projects must be consistent.
Policy 2: The character of each district shall be reinforced through the site plan and design
review process. Projects shall be consistent with and contribute positively to the
vision of the character district in which it is located.
Downtown Design Guidelines:
The Downtown Design Guidelines identify both appropriate and inappropriate direction with
regard to various elements associated with new construction and renovations in the Downtown.
A review of these Guidelines within the Plan was conducted and the following applicable items
were identified:
Block and Lot Characteristics: The Downtown Design Guidelines require the retention of the
existing street grid pattern where it contributes to an active pedestrian environment. All three
street frontages are being maintained with sidewalks to contribute to the pedestrian environment.
Access, Circulation and Parking: The Downtown Design Guidelines require that parking lots be
located behind the primary fagade of the principal building and that they be screened with either
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 3 of 9
a landscaped buffer or a solid wall or fence three feet in height. The proposal has the parking lot
in the rear of the primary facade and is screened with a wall/fence.
Buffering and Screening: The Downtown Design Guidelines require mechanical equipment
located on the roof a building to be integrated into the design of the building through the use of
parapet walls, towers or other architectural elements. The renovated building will have sloped
roof and a building tower to conceal the mechanical equipment.
Landscaping: The Downtown Design Guidelines require plant species that are appropriate to the
space in which they will occupy with regard to water needs, growth rates, size, etc. in order to
conserve water, reduce maintenance and promote plant health. The proposal includes some
native species with appropriate maturity size to limit maintenance and conserve water.
Facade Design/Primary and Corner Facades: The Downtown Design Guidelines require facades
to use a combination of architectural details, materials, window and door patterns and other
design features to form a cohesive and visually interesting design. The design proposed a
significant corner tower at the intersection of Chestnut Street and Fort Harrison Avenue and a
corresponding and balancing smaller corner element at Rogers Street. The corner treatments,
along with the center entry projection break the building down to a pedestrian scale. Vertically,
the proposed building design further defines the base, middle and cap by adding rustication to the
base, horizontal banding and window elements to define the body, and a slight frieze band to
transition into the top of the building.
Materials and Colors: The Downtown Design Guidelines require building constructed of high
quality, long lasting materials. The proposed buildings are utilizing durable materials such as a
stucco finish and metal balconies and railings. Additionally, the Downtown Design Guidelines
require the color scheme of the building to reflect a cohesive pattern and use three or less colors
on the building. The proposed building colors of "Forest Green", "Coral" and "Brick Red"
complement each other and create a cohesive pattern.
Community Development Code: A medical clinic is subject to the relevant review criteria of
CDC Sections 2-901.1 and 2-903.C.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, within the
Downtown Core Character District, the maximum allowable FAR is 4.0. The proposed medical
clinic will have a FAR of 0.457.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, there is
no maximum height restriction in the Downtown Core unless the property it is along Cleveland
Street. The proposed medical clinic has a building height of 48.25 to top of cupola. The proposal
is consistent with these Code provisions.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-903, the medical clinic use is not
specifically authorized and as such there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for
medical clinics. However, for a point of comparison the medical clinic use in the Office (O)
District requires five parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area and in the
Commercial (C) District, the medical clinic use requires three parking spaces per 1,000 square
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 4 of 9
feet of gross floor area. Based upon the above, the 13,080 square foot medical clinic will require
between 39 to 65 parking spaces and the proposal has provided for 43 parking spaces. The
applicant has provided a parking demand study showing a peak parking demand to be 3.21
spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The applicant studied both the Tampa and St
Petersburg clinics to arrive at the peak parking demand. Based on the peak parking demand of
3.21 spaces per 1,000 feet of gross floor area the proposed Clearwater clinic will require 42
parking spaces. While the proposal provides for 43 parking spaces, the applicant will lease from
the City of Clearwater Parking System 16 parking spaces in public parking lot #24 located at 615
Court Street. The public parking lot is approximately 280 feet from the proposed clinic and will
provide parking spaces for employees only. Based upon the above, staff supports the requested
reduction in the parking requirement.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize a refuse dumpster located at the southeast corner of the
building. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1, ten percent of the vehicular use area must
contain landscape islands a minimum of 150 square feet in size. The proposal provides for 9.2
percent of the vehicular use area to be interior landscape islands. Additionally, some interior
landscape islands are not 150 square feet or eight feet in width from back of curb to back of curb.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.2, foundation planting shall be provided for 100 percent of
the building facade along a street right-of-way. A minimum five foot wide landscaped area
composed of at least two accent trees or three palms for every 40 linear feet of building facade,
and one shrub for every 20 square feet of required landscape area is required. A minimum of 50
percent of the area shall contain shrubs with the remainder to be ground cover. The subject site is
bound by four street right-of-ways: The proposal meets the above requirements with the
exception of the east . facade facing the alley. The foundation landscaping consists of
washingtonia palms, yellow anise, flax lily, sand cord grass and Indian hawthorne.
As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program the applicant has proposed to plant additional
landscape material on the south side of the Rogers Street parking lot and a nine foot wide
foundation landscape buffer along the Court Street facade.
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G, the landscaping
requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a
Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria. The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with those criteria:
Community Development Board -October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 5 of 9
Consistent I Inconsistent
1. Architectural theme:
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a N/A N/A
part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed
on the parcel proposed for development; or
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment X
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.
2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is X
automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is
closed.
3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X
landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape I X
program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
5. Special area or scenic corridor plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the N/A N/A
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.
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and
criteria as per CDC Section 2-903 and the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) 4.0 0.457 X
Maximum Building Height None 48.25 feet X
Minimum Off-Street Parking Medical Clinic: N/A 3.29 parking spaces/ 1000 sq. ft. X1
43 parking spaces)
1 See above discussion with regard to Minimum Off-Street Parking.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 6 of 9
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility
criteria as per CDC Section 2-903.C (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the 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.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning
district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design
elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape
design and awrooriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 7 of 9
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The
following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use with the General
Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
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 X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of September 2, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally
sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the
following:
Findings of Fact: The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed.. all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:...
1. That the subject site comprises two parcels, one of which is comprised of 0.41 acres and the
other is 0.24 acres. The larger parcel is located at the southeast corner of Chestnut Street and
South Fort Harrison Avenue and the smaller parcel is located south of the larger parcel
approximately 160 feet east of the intersection of South Fort Harrison Avenue and Rogers
Street;
2. That the subject property is located within the Downtown (D) District and the Central
Business District (CBD) Land Use Plan category;
3. That the development proposal is subject to the requirements of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan as the property is located within the Downtown Core Character District;
4. The property was previously used as an office and retail sales;
5. The applicant, Webb's Building, LLC, proposes to redevelop the subject property with a
13,080 square feet medical clinic;
6. The structure is proposed at a height of 48.25 feet to top of cupola;
7. The proposal includes a reduction to the foundation landscape requirement from 5 feet to
zero feet on the east facade;
8. The proposal includes a reduction to the interior landscape requirement from 10 percent to
9.2 percent;
9. The proposal includes 43 parking spaces; and
10. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Community Development Board -October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 8 of 9
Conclusions of Law: The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the district vision of the Downtown Core
Character District of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
903.C of the CDC;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-914.A of the Community Development Code; and
4. The development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program criteria
as per Section 3-1202.G of Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development approval to permit a medical clinic within the Downtown (D) District
with a building height of 48.25 feet (to top of cupola) and 43 parking spaces as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-
903.C. and a reduction to the foundation landscape area on the front (east) facade from five feet
to zero feet, a reduction to the interior landscape requirements from 10 percent to 9.2 percent
and to allow interior landscape islands of less than 150 square feet and less than eight feet in
width from back of curb to back of curb as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the
provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G., with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That, prior to the submission for a site development building permit, a Unity of Title be
approved and recorded for parcels 16-29-15-94626-001-0050 and 16-29-15794,626-00270030;
2. That, all proposed landscaping be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
3. That all signage be permitted separately;
4. That any electric and communication panels, boxes, and meters located on the exterior of the
buildings be painted the same color as the building; and
5. That the final design and color of the building is consistent with the plans approved by the
CDB.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff:
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08003 - Page 9 of 9
Resume
A. Scott Kurleman
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
727-562-4553
Scott.kurleman(&myclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
• Planner III
• Planner II
August 2008 to present
June 2005 to August 2008
Regulate growth and development of the City in accordance with land resource ordinances and
regulations related to community development. Landscape plan review including: conceptual,
variance, and conditional use. Reviews and analyzes site plans and conducts field studies to
determine the integrity of development plans and their compatibility with surroundings.
Interdepartmental and zoning assistance. Respond as a City representative to citizens, City
officials, and businesses concerning ordinances and regulations. Make recommendations and
presentations at staff level at various review committees, boards, and meetings.
Land Resource Specialist
City of Clearwater June 1996 to June 2005
Coordinates with City Legal Department to initiate legal proceedings for non-compliance with
City land resource regulations. Landscape re-inspection program. Plans and directs program to
ensure that plant material installed per the approved landscape plan remains in a healthy growing
condition in perpetuity and restores deficient landscaped with new plant material. Certificate of
Occupancy Inspection. Perform inspections with contractors, owners, and City departments to
monitor the installation of required landscape material per an approved site plan. Process tree
permits ensuring that regulations governing the removal criteria are followed. Provide technical
tree evaluations for structural defects, hazards, proper pruning, and identification for trees on
public and private properties.
• Account Manager
Cherry Lake Farms, IMG Enterprise, Inc. 1993 -1996
Groveland, FL
Supervised and managed existing territory accounts, while handling a strategic marketing plan.
Planned and directed in-field inspection program for landscape architects, municipalities and
private corporations. Prepared technical training modules for corporate employees and customers
regarding arboricultural techniques related to trees.
• Licensed Marketing Representative
Allstate Insurance Company 1991 -1993
Clearwater, FL
Field inspections of insured structures. Policy service and account maintenance.
• Store Manager
William Natorp company, Inc. 1983 -1991
Cincinnati, OH
Managed a team of 20 sales people and sales associates in a landscape center. Responsible for
teams of employees including but not limited to payroll, budgeting, sales, store and equipment
maintenance, workplace safety, and advertising. Managed outdoor staff, merchandised and cared
for all outdoor products. Responsible for all indoor staff and horticultural products.
EDUCATION
GRADUATE - Certificate: Community Development, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA,
TAMPA, FLORIDA. Currently pursuing.
BS in Sustainability Management, ST. PETERSBURG COLLEGE, FLORIDA.
Currently pursuing.
BA in Business Administration, ST. LEO UNIVERSITY, ST. LEO, FLORIDA.
Graduated July, 2002 Cum Laude. Major: Management
AA in Business Administration, ST. PETERSBURG COLLEGE, FLORIDA.
Graduated 1998. Major: Management.
AS in Ornamental Horticulture, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, WOOSTER,
Graduated 1984 Cum Laude. Major: Horticulture Technology with emphasis in
Arboriculture.
ISA, International Society of Arboriculture, Certified Arborist, FL-0414.
LO 1 - 11 112 1131 o v L 864P v I m
2 M I 1 11 2 1 1 324 34 100 ---o
35
RT
CO
7 I I ?
- -
- ?
- -
U
ST
400 18648
I
-
I
z
2
I
1
3 1 4
1
I 3 1 4
1Im l 00 I I ?I LO I
I I 401 I I 33 j Q 15
------I-_--I-- 1 I ®
161 11108-1
-- 1
I
1
2 3
I
W I I 4 1 5 1 6 7 1 8
11
- - - - -? ?'-I ?- 1 _ - - Qa 47 1 32
4
23
12 1 5532 1 2 - 41 1 9 I
I I I 1
174
_ _ _ _ _ _ ?5 ae 31 Q 4
I
475
420 42
5
16 15
14
13 2 1
13 j
Go
e
tal U
-
2
V
n
1
r
v
rgmen
se tj t 30
70 S v?C42 6 E
N
6
1
5
rb
'
-1
4 4
51 28 27 1 1o m l 40
x 5 5 CHESTNUT ST
_8 _ 3e _ IAutc mobse Servile 70 - 4
_ I N N ,00
If2 1 7 -- Station Nht!•lu ?' 1 1 I
N 7
1
O 5
O
T
- ?- --
I 150 O
1 2 1
50
0)
I
U') 512
?' 13 _ 6_ _50 U,? -8 - - 51 y 0
s I
?
4 I 5 9 h M --_-_ .? _ 1 1 2 3
?"+ \ b >-
511(A-1) 4 ? 19
20 L
5250 - - - - 94626 J
526 m 517(A-2) 5 3 2 1
xb
I
1
1
30
1
1 O PT&?1 J31es/
1 10
_ ----
1 9 8
3 2 I 1 4
I s2ef?-41 ° I - - - - O
6
1 2 536 535(A-5) 6
I j
I
I
I
1
I a
2
10 541(A-6)
I s
- y
I
O
I L- 547 A-7J I
4
5
f3V
o
I
I
7 11
o
m wl o
M I J Q 11
Q W
553(A-8)
,`? °o m I
44
ZZ TURNER ST
10 O N 28 (n
? m M r- I- ?1 14 601 1 I 34
8
• 2 I I o m 2
603
? 0
5
-
2 92
2
- - - I
_I -
I
L
Q 80r 11 4 ? 4 I
I 6 try 3 2 1
1 2 I. 1 601 60°ki 6?^ I I_ a9
3
-
2
60 I Ix r- 1 I 1 5 I io l 2 3 1 2 3
2e _
X4626 I I- - - I
11
oy
-, I O
M
I I 6
O
e 1
Um
D)
3 4 9
8
I
10
11 7 1 0
- -
e
2
a2ro1 610 I
o l o Io 2 1
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
Owner: Kernan Webb Case: FLD2010-08003
Site: 501 S. Ft. Harrison Avenue Property Size: 0.656 Acres
PIN: 16-29-15-94626-001-0050 Atlas Page: 2956
16-29-15-94626-002-0030
co L `1
L cc HENDRICKS
w
EAI, ¢ q
o E
0a a
0
I1 ? n
PIERCE ST
tD 0
FRANKLIN
COURT ST D
D ?- SR-60
s,, a F•saRKLEY
1 ST ( IESTNUT ST
1
ROGERS ST Q R RS
g
w ? a
D Q
sr,CM& Peach 4
W,cd, PINE PINE
7y J C! Q Eo?art
0
DRUID RD = W DRUID
JASMINE yrtrgy
Eci
=1=
7.1=
LOTUS PAP-{
P
PROJECT
SITE
MAGNOLIA J
JEFFORDS
Location Map
a
GROVE
LAURA ? S' ? c
O 2 2
CLEVELAND
?U? y
ST
z
PIERCE ST PIERCE 7
oa
w ~
ST U
Z
? G
0 z
COURT a
BR(
C
SR-60 US-19ALT C
TURNER
?D
PINE ST
0 F-1
JASMINE
WAY
F-1
? York
U
DR
0 FQ?
LOTUS PATH
?aa
ST
Owner: Kernan Webb Case: FLD2010-08003
Site: 501 S. Ft. Harrison Avenue Property Size: 0.656 Acres
PIN: 16-29-15-94626-001-0050 Atlas Page: 2958
16-29-15-94626-002-0030
h O O V N rI _
c? 324
a
351 400 COURT ST h °
rn h 2 2
400
a
512
C 514
525
0
53
532
534
536
540
542
a
* 544
O
o
601
I
607
610
Owner: Kernan Webb
401
MARKLEY ST W
Q 411
413
415 Q) 417
420 421
425
CHESTNUT ST
two, ? *441
!OGERS ST
511(A-1)
517(A-2)
523(A-3)
529(A-4)
535(A-5)
541(A-6)
547(A-7)
553(A-8) v? $
TURNER ST
601
603
605
6p'1 ?9 61?
0
Zoning Map
Case:
b
(I
3
HAROLD CT
FLD2010-08003
Site: 501 S. Ft. Harrison Avenue Property Size: 0.656 Acres
PIN: 16-29-15-94626-001-0050 Atlas Page: 295B
16-29-15-94626-002-0030
501 S Ft. Harrison Ave.
Case Number FLD2010-08003
Page 1 of 2
Previous building addition to be removed.
View of west side of subject property.
View of east side of subject property.
View of south side of subject property.
-v U F4
Ili
s
x
View of property to the north of the subject
property.
501 S Ft. Harrison Ave.
Case Number FLD2010-08003
Page 2 of 2
View of 20 space parking lot.
View of 20 space parking lot.
View of property to the south of the subject
property.
Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
X SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
14 SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
X SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ 1, 4 0 5. 0 0
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
(Revised 07/11/2008)
PLEASE T'A'PE 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:
WEBB'S BUILDING, LLC
501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE CLEARWATER FLORIDA 33756
_(727) 443-1578 FAX NUMBER:
EMAIL:
KERNAN WEBB
BRAULIO GRAJALES /
630 CHESTNUT STREET
(727)723-3771
GH POINT ENGINEERING
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
FAXNUMBER: (727) 723-7150
EMAIL: BGRAJALES@HPE-FL.COM
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
PROJECT NAME: ST LUKE'S CATARACT AND LASER INSTITUTE PROJECT VALUATION: $ 12 5, 0 0 0
STREET ADDRESS 501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE CLEARWATER FLORIDA 33765
PARCEL NUMBER(S): 16/29/15/94626/001/0050 --16Z29/15Z94626/002/0030
PARCEL SIZE (acres): 0. 6 5 6 PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 2 8, 6 0 0
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEE ATTACHED
PROPOSED USE(S): MEDICAL CLINIC
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: SEE A
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.)
u:iuocuments and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\pianning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 1 of 8
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT
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)
25 SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D.
W
1. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A)
Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail:
The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it
is located.
SEE ATTACHED
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof.
SEE ATTACHED
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
SEE ATTACHED
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
SEE ATTACHED
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
SEE ATTACHED
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties.
SEE ATTACHED
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\pianning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
A Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA- Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this
zoning district.
SEE ATTACHED
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
SEE ATTACHED
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
SEE ATTACHED
I
4. I
Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
SEE ATTACHED
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 th
i
hb
h
e ne
g
or
ood; 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 th
Cit
'
e
y
s economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating
jobs;
G. 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.
SEE ATTACHED
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 develo
ment su
t
th
p
ppor
s
e established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of
the following design elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
SEE ATTACHED
iw aiw ?-euings\aereK.rerguson\DesKtop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill 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)
N A STORMWATER 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.
0 If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt.
At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following;
l Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
$! Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures;
D2 All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
14 Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
14 A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with
the City manual.
12 Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
X Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations.
? 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
? ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Stormwater plan as noted above is included
(5 X 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)
N SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies;
21 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) - please 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
N/A such trees;
X LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
14 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;
Q1 GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
C3 PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided);
0/A COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable;
C:\Documents and Setting s`derek.ferguson\Desktop\pIanning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infili Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 4 of 8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A)
Of SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
X Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
X North arrow;
X Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
X All dimensions;
X Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures;
........ _........
X Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures;
X All required setbacks;
X All existing and proposed points of access;
X All required sight triangles;
Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including
X description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements;
X 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
X and water lines;
X All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
X 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
X (per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701);
X Location of all landscape material;
...._........ ...
X Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities;
..................
X Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
..................
X 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
X Level Two approval.
-W SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form:
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
X Land area in square feet and acres; 2 8, 6 0 0. 6 5 6
........................................................................ ......................................... 28,600/0.656
......................................................
N1A Number of EXISTING dwelling units; .
N./.A Number of PROPOSED dwelling units;
X Gross floor area devoted to each use;
15 0„5 0 .................
13 0 8 0
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the
X number of required spaces; 4 7
6
6
...........................
.
4 3
Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways .._
.
.............................................
...................... ........
X expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; 16 , 5 3 0 16,437
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility
N/A easement;
X Building and structure heights;
_.___.........3._5.........5.0.......___._..__.
3 5
-
5
X Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and
....... ___ ...............................................
0. 8 9 8
............. ____.-..... _.._.._.._._......... ....... ...
.. ...... ......._.._.
_
..
..
0. 8 6 0
X Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. .
...___
.___...._0.......,5 2„6......_._ .......
_0 .457
-W REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8 Y2 X 11);
? FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan:
N/A 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)
X LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
X All existing and proposed structures;
X Names of abutting streets;
X Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations;
X Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
X Sight visibility triangles;
X Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
X tree survey);
Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
X schedule;
Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
X existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
X protective measures;
Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
X percentage covered;
W1 Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
X Irrigation notes.
N REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/? X 11);
19 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.
1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
X BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information:
X All sides of all buildings
X Dimensioned
X Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
X Materials
t& REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -same as above to scale on 8'h X 11
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS 1 Section 3-1806)
0 All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
:4 All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including 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).
N/A
? Reduced signage proposal (8 '/z X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
N/A
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\pianning 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)
? Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development:
N/A
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 Department's 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.
14 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-development levels of service for all
roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting.
b (?2• X - Traffic 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 CALCULATIONS/ 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.
X Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included.
y, Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW
CALCULATIONS/ 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.
Signature property owner or representative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ,? / day of
I A.D. 20 i n to me and/or by
LESLAhILJ _ , who is personally known kais
_W?ed
as4dentTfl2<`ation. If
Notary public,
My commissic
JERRY C. COBB
;r Expires September 14, 2011
?,1w,t; n, Bonded Thru Tmy Fain Insurance 3003857019
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehen L
Page 7 of 8
N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
1. Provide names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names:
WEBB'S BUILDING, LLC
2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location):
501 S. FORT HARRISON, CLEARWATER FLORIDA 33756
3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request)
REMODEL OF THE EXISTING 2-STORY BUILDING INCLUDING A NEW FACADE REHABILITATION
OF PAVEMENT, NEW CONFIGURATION OF PARKING LOT AND DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPE.
4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
BRAULIO GRAJALES / HIGH POINT ENGINEERING
as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition;
5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City
representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application;
?
N
,?
?,
7. That (1/we), the undersigned authority
hereby certify that the fore
oin
is true
nd
t
,
g
g
a
correc
.
Property Owner Property Owner
Property Owner Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this day of
M -Al
__ / personally appearedLr ((rPr" _ who having been first duly sworn
Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/ache signed.
JERRY C. COBB
:•. :.= Commission DD 708461
Expires September 14, 2011
?
nP„ ,`.°•
Bonded ThN Troy Fain Insurance BW-385-7
Notary Public Signature
Notary Seal/Stamp My Commissi x Tres:
v
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 8 of 8
ARCHITECTURE ( INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
D. 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.
This request is for the renovation of the existing Webb Building and its conversion to medical office use. The
exterior, massing and bulk of existing building is to be maintained with renovations only to the finishes and roofs.
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.
This proposed development seeks to bring new vitality to the area and will hopefully be a benchmark for future
redevelopment of the street. The building and its site plan are designed to set a planning standard by which a
property owner can plan an economically feasible building with adequate parking while maintaining the
downtown, urban character, and historic character of the area.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the proposed use.
This proposed development is designed with safety and ease of use for the occupants and clients as the
predominant guiding points. The parking is and building entry sequence is being revised to facilitate ease of entry
and car drop-off.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
We are proposing to close off the existing driveway accesses on Chestnut Street and Rogers Street and moving the
primary access to the building to be through the alley running between Chestnut and Rogers. This arrangement
reduces the ingress and egress points on to Chestnut.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development.
This project leaves the existing building, largely intact, but dresses up the overall building facades, parking areas,
and street and building landscaping.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and
hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
As stated above, this proposal leaves the building largely intact. The proposed new use, of medical clinic, is
relatively low intensity and is less intense than commercial or retail, thereby keeping the overall impact of this
building and uses, on the area, essentially unchanged.
Page 11
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704
{Tampa } 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater. Florida, 33756 ({Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727,446.3194 Jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola 1 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
ter.
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
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 requested medical clinic use group is not specifically spelled out in the zoning ordinance, for this area.
There have been other similar uses approved within the district, recently. This application is required to
specifically allow the, medical clinic use, within the 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.
• This proposed development is generally consistent with the abovementioned goals and policies of this
district. We are asking for minor deviations from the code to allow this use within the district.
The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
surrounding properties.
• We believe this development will set design and planning standards for redevelopment within this
neighborhood and will spur other redevelopment in this area. The design of this development
demonstrates good design and planning principles and can serve as a guide for meeting current Code
requirements while preserving resources and allowing for economically viable redevelopment.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
The design of the proposed development maintains necessary Building Code requirements for setbacks
and height thereby avoiding detrimental impact on planning and construction on adjacent lots. The uses
proposed in this development are consistent other uses within this district and will be in keeping with
those uses permitted on adjacent properties.
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.
The proposed office and medical clinic uses are similar in type and intensity to other uses permitted
within the district. Also this medical use has been recently granted to another applicant in the district.
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.
The applicant is a current employer and will add jobs through the growth and expansion of their business.
The proposed renovation and adaptive reuse of this building will fill an otherwise, nominally occupied
building. The addition of the employees and clients of this facility will also enliven the area and provide
customers for the neighboring businesses.
Page 12
Behar + Peteranecz: inc. AA26001704
(Tampa) 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater. Florida, 33756 1 {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic
contributor.
While this is a new use proposed for this building the applicant is a major employment contributor to the
area.
d. N/A
e. N/A
f. N/A
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 objectives.
a. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district.
• This proposal to change uses of the building is similar in intensity to the surrounding uses and, as such,
will not have an adverse or disharmonious effect on the neighborhood. We believe this development will
set design and planning standards for redevelopment within this neighborhood and will spur other
redevelopment in this area.
b. The proposed development complies with the design guidelines adopted by the City.
• Again, in this proposal we are planning to simply renovate and enhance design and historic nature of the
existing building. The proposed redesign incorporates much of the historic architectural flavor of Florida
and Clearwater and St. Pete, while still keeping some memory of the original Webb Building.
c. The design, scale, and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging
character of an area.
• As stated above, the design and scale of this proposed redevelopment is to largely remain the same. The
proposed change to medical clinic use is similar in intensity to other uses, and other previously approved,
medical uses in the district.
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 building designs propose variation of
building mass, both horizontally and vertically.
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos,
balconies, railings, awnings, etc, this design incorporates distinctive material changes,
cantilevered awnings and entry covers, and a corner tower.
• Variety in materials, colors, and textures; this design proposes two stucco colors, awnings to
enliven the street, window flower boxes, and decorative metal brackets and balconies.
Page 13
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704
(Tampa) 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida. 33756 {Tel} 727 488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola. Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
.
t
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
• Distinctive fenestration patterns: The fenestration includes curtain wall facades, tall doors and
window elements, and simple punched windows.
• Building setbacks: The design of this building incorporates distinctive building stepping
and vertical building offsets.
• Distinctive roof forms: For practical reasons we are proposing to add a sloped roof and corner
elements to the building. These modifications add to the design of the existing building and
serve to reinforce the historically influenced design.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate
distances between buildings.
• As stated before, the existing building is to be kept, so its relation to the adjacent buildings and
properties shall remain unchanged. We are proposing to enhance the building foundation
landscaping, add landscaping to the former vehicular entry drives, and to add green landscape
buffers along Chestnut St., Ft. Harrison Ave., and Rogers St.
Page 14
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704
{ Tampa } 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida, 33756 ( {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727,446,3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola 1 113 W Strong Street Pensacola.. Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850,439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
A
u?
k
4
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
D. 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.
This request is for the renovation of the existing Webb Building and its conversion to medical office use. The
exterior, massing and bulk of existing building is to be maintained with renovations only to the finishes and roofs.
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.
This proposed development seeks to bring new vitality to the area and will hopefully be a benchmark for future
redevelopment of the street. The building and its site plan are designed to set a planning standard by which a
property owner can plan an economically feasible building with adequate parking while maintaining the
downtown, urban character, and historic character of the area.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the proposed use.
This proposed development is designed with safety and ease of use for the occupants and clients as the
predominant guiding points. The parking is and building entry sequence is being revised to facilitate ease of entry
and car drop-off.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
We are proposing to close off the existing driveway accesses on Chestnut Street and Rogers Street and moving the
primary access to the building to be through the alley running between Chestnut and Rogers. This arrangement
reduces the ingress and egress points on to Chestnut.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development.
This project leaves the existing building, largely intact, but dresses up the overall building facades, parking areas,
and street and building landscaping.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and
hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
As stated above, this proposal leaves the building largely intact. The proposed new use, of medical clinic, is
relatively low intensity and is less intense than commercial or retail, thereby keeping the overall impact of this
building and uses, on the area, essentially unchanged.
Page I 1
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001 704
{ Tampa } 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida. 33756 ( {Tel} 727,488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850377,1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
4
ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
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 requested medical clinic use group is not specifically spelled out in the zoning ordinance, for this area.
There have been other similar uses approved within the district, recently. This application is required to
specifically allow the, medical clinic use, within the 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.
• This proposed development is generally consistent with the abovementioned goals and policies of this
district. We are asking for minor deviations from the code to allow this use within the district.
The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
surrounding properties.
• We believe this development will set design and planning standards for redevelopment within this
neighborhood and will spur other redevelopment in this area. The design of this development
demonstrates good design and planning principles and can serve as a guide for meeting current Code
requirements while preserving resources and allowing for economically viable redevelopment.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
• The design of the proposed development maintains necessary Building Code requirements for setbacks
and height thereby avoiding detrimental impact on planning and construction on adjacent lots. The uses
proposed in this development are consistent other uses within this district and will be in keeping with
those uses permitted on adjacent properties.
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.
The proposed office and medical clinic uses are similar in type and intensity to other uses permitted
within the district. Also this medical use has been recently granted to another applicant in the district.
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.
The applicant is a current employer and will add jobs through the growth and expansion of their business.
The proposed renovation and adaptive reuse of this building will fill an otherwise, nominally occupied
building. The addition of the employees and clients of this facility will also enliven the area and provide
customers for the neighboring businesses.
Page 1 2
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704
{ Tampa} 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater. Florida. 33756 1 {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727.446 3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
x
a
ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS I PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic
contributor.
While this is a new use proposed for this building the applicant is a major employment contributor to the
area.
d. N/A
e. N/A
f. N/A
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 objectives.
a. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district.
• This proposal to change uses of the building is similar in intensity to the surrounding uses and, as such,
will not have an adverse or disharmonious effect on the neighborhood. We believe this development will
set design and planning standards for redevelopment within this neighborhood and will spur other
redevelopment in this area.
.b. The proposed development complies with the design guidelines: adopted by the City.
• Again, in this proposal we are planning to simply renovate and enhance design and historic nature of the
existing building. The proposed redesign incorporates much of the historic architectural flavor of Florida
and Clearwater and St. Pete, while still keeping some memory of the original Webb Building.
c. The design, scale, and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging
character of an area.
• As stated above, the design and scale of this proposed redevelopment is to largely remain the same. The
proposed change to medical clinic use is similar in intensity to other uses, and other previously approved,
medical uses in the district.
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 building designs propose variation of
building mass, both horizontally and vertically.
• Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos,
balconies, railings, awnings, etc, this design incorporates distinctive material changes,
cantilevered awnings and entry covers, and a corner tower.
• Variety in materials, colors, and textures; this design proposes two stucco colors, awnings to
enliven the street, window flower boxes, and decorative metal brackets and balconies.
Page 13
Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704
{ Tampa } 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater. Florida, 33756 1 {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727,446,3194 jordan@architecturebp com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
I A
ARCHITECTURE ( INTERIORS ( PLANNING
Re: Comp. Infill Application for the Webb Building, 501 S. Ft Harrison Ave.
• Distinctive fenestration patterns: The fenestration includes curtain wall facades, tall doors and
window elements, and simple punched windows.
• Building setbacks: The design of this building incorporates distinctive building stepping
and vertical building offsets.
• Distinctive roof forms: For practical reasons we are proposing to add a sloped roof and corner
elements to the building. These modifications add to the design of the existing building and
serve to reinforce the historically influenced design.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate
distances between buildings.
• As stated before, the existing building is to be kept, so its relation to the adjacent buildings and
properties shall remain unchanged. We are proposing to enhance the building foundation
landscaping, add landscaping to the former vehicular entry drives, and to add green landscape
buffers along Chestnut St., Ft. Harrison Ave., and Rogers St.
Page 14
Behar+ Peteranecz: Inc, AA26001704
(Tampa} 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida. 33756 1 {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jordan@architecturebp.com
{ Pensacola } 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola. Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850 439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
RIVER SITE BUILDING
501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
HPE PROJECT: 10-012-GIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 2010
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Flexible development approval for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as per
the standards contained within Section 2-901 of the City of Clearwater Community
Development Code with the following reductions/deviations:
• The permitted use within the Downtown zoning district so that the building can be
used for medical clinic. The proposed use is consistent with the goals and
policies Comprehensive Plan as well as the intent of the Community
Development Code.
• The minimum off-street parking required for medical clinic use from 66 spaces to
43 spaces.
• The required 12 feet x 35 feet loading zone.
INTRODUCTION:
The project site is part of Wallace's Addition Subdivision and is comprised of two
parcels identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser with numbers:
16/29/15/94626/001/0050 - 16/29/15/94626/002/0030. The property is located in
Section 16, Township 29 South, Range 15 East within the incorporated area of the City
of Clearwater. The total area of the two parcels is approximately 0.656 acres (28,600 sf)
and is bounded by Fort Harrison Avenue to the West, Chestnut Street to the North and
Rogers Street to the South. The property address is 501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue,
Clearwater, Florida 33756.
The proposed project will consist of remodeling the existing 2-story building including a
new facade, rehabilitating the existing pavement and installing an attractive drought
tolerant landscape. The proposed setbacks, parking and landscaping will adequately
support the proposed remodeling.
1
`Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
Qi SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets
CASE NUMBER:
RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* 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)
APPLICANT NAME: WEBB ' S BUILDING, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE CLEARWATER FLORIDA 33756
PHONE NUMBER: (727) 443-1578 FAX NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER: EMAIL:
PROPERTY OWNER(S): KERNAN WEBB
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME: BRAULIO GRAJALES / HIGH POINT ENGINEERING _
MAILING ADDRESS: 630 CHESTNUT STREET, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
PHONE NUMBER: (727) 723-3771 FAX NUMBER: (727) 723-7150
CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: BGRAJALES@HPE-FL. COM
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.
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.
SEE ATTACHED
C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningforms-07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc
Page 1 of 2
2. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
SEE ATTACHED _
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.
SEE ATTACHED
4. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which
the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located.
SEE ATTACHED
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.
Signature of property owner or representative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
S orn to and subscribed before me this 10 day of
, A.D. 20_10 to me and/or by
0 , who is personally known has
produced
as iden ification.
ry publi
My commission expires:
A
e- S
" f,
C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningforms 07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc
Page 2 of 2
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
RIVER SITE BUILDING
501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765
HPE PROJECT: 10-012-GIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 2010
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
To allow the following landscape reductions:
Eliminate the required foundation planter along the east building facade with
frontage on the 15' alley.
The percentage of interior landscape for the vehicular use areas from 10.0% to
9.2%.
- The minimum required area and width for the interior landscape islands of less than
150 sf and less than eight feet in width.
INTRODUCTION:
The project site is part of Wallace's Addition Subdivision and is comprised of two
parcels identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser with numbers:
16/29115/94626/001/0050 - 16/29/15/94626/002/0030. The property is located in
Section 16, Township 29 South, Range 15 East within the incorporated area of the City
of Clearwater. The total area of the two parcels is approximately 0.656 acres (28,600 sf)
and is bounded by Fort Harrison Avenue to the West, Chestnut Street to the North and
Rogers Street to the South. The property address is 501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue,
Clearwater, Florida 33756.
The proposed project will consist of remodeling the existing 2-story building including a
new facade, rehabilitating the existing pavement and installing an attractive drought
tolerant landscape. The proposed setbacks, parking and landscaping will adequately
support the proposed remodeling.
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 development
N/A
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
• A balanced design for the interior landscape islands that mixes shade and accent
flowering trees, palms, evergreen shrubs, and small plants / ground cover.
• A balanced design for the building foundation landscape along Fort Harrison Avenue,
Chestnut Street and Roger Street that mixes palm trees, evergreen and flowering
shrubs, grass, and small plants / ground cover.
• A balanced selection of landscaping materials that includes 100% drought tolerant
trees of which 39% are Florida native.
• The project will use Florida Grade #1 plant materials in the proposed landscape
treatment including: 7 Southern Magnolia, 2 Southern Red Cedar, 6 Crape Myrtle, 4
'Weeping' Yaupon Holly, 24 Washingtonian Palms, 69 Sandanqua Viburnum, 53 Yellow
Anise, 55 Sand Cord Grass, 62 Indian Hawthorne, 675 Variegated Flax Lilly and Bahia
sod.
• The project will implement a tree preservation plan that includes provisions to protect
and recover two (2) mature trees (i.e. 56" Live Oak, 19" Southern Red Cedar) impacted
by the existing asphaltic pavement.
2. LIGHTING
Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is
automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is
closed
Outdoor lighting will meet the City of Clearwater Community Development Code.
3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will
enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater
The existing development is poorly landscaped and does not provide interior islands in
the parking lot. The proposed redevelopment will add new interior landscape islands to
break the monotony as well as will improve the existing building foundation planting
areas. Further, the proposed 48" fence wall along Chestnut Street and Roger Street will
buffer the parking lot from the right-of-ways so the sight of adjacent properties and
downtown pedestrians will no longer be negatively affected. In addition, the proposed
planting materials described above and shown in the landscape plan will enhance the
look of the remodeled building as well as the look of surrounding commercial properties.
2
4. PROPERTY VALUES
The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will
have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development
The proposed redevelopment will preserve a 56" live oak tree that provides a positive
visual effect for adjacent properties along Roger Street as well as will remove a
declining 34" live oak tree to eliminate the potential hazard for pedestrians and vehicles
in the property and adjacent properties. Furthermore, the number, size, quality of the
proposed landscaping materials described above and the balanced design shown in the
proposed landscape plan will offer upgraded and positive value to the immediate
commercial properties.
5. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN
The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program is
consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of
Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed
for development is located
The proposed drought tolerant evergreen and flowering landscaping materials
described above and shown in the landscape plan will create a positive visual effect on
pedestrians and vehicles driving on Fort Harrison Avenue and Chestnut Street.
Written narrative for compliance with the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan.
This application is for the proposed renovation and rehabilitation of the Webb Building and its
accompanying property. The property is situated at an important crossroad, the intersection of
Chestnut Street and Ft. Harrison Avenue. Chestnut Street is the eastbound entry to the Downtown
Core District from Clearwater Beach and Ft. Harrison Avenue is downtown Clearwater's primary north-
south thoroughfare. As such, the Webb building site can be an important visual entrance signpost to
downtown Clearwater.
Given the importance of the site as an entry marker to the City, the design of the building and site are
equally important. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan's Design Guidelines call for specific
planning and building design elements to be incorporated into the redevelopment of this site.
• -Access, Circulation, and Parking and Buffering and Screening.
The Guidelines call for grouping vehicular entrances and eliminating excessive curb cuts, for simplifying
traffic circulation, and for the shielding of parking lots. They also emphasize the need for clearly
articulated and protected pedestrian access into and around the site.
The proposed site plan eliminates existing entry and egress curb cuts on Chestnut Street and Rogers
Street. The primary access to the property is proposed to be via the existing alley immediately to the
east of the site. We are proposing a right-in only entry from Chestnut St. and entry and exit points on
Rogers St. Along Chestnut and Rogers Streets we are also proposing continuous decorative parking
screening walls with integrated, but clearly articulated, pedestrian entrances to the parking and
entrances on the east side of the building. This design proposal further shields pedestrians by creating
planting strips between the roadway and the public sidewalk along Chestnut and Rogers Streets and Ft.
Harrison Avenue.
• -Landscaping.
The guidelines require the incorporation of continuous building foundation plantings. This design
proposes to enhance and extend the existing foundation planting beds. Along the alley we are
proposing some smaller planting islands with ground cover and trees.
• Building Design and Architecture: Form, Mass/Scale, Height, Width, Depth, and
Rhythm/Spacing, Facade Design, Primary and Corner Facades, Side Facades, Windows and
Doors, Roof Design, and Materials and Colors.
In our proposed redesign of the Webb Building we are planning to keep much of the original building
structure, such as the windows and door openings and building projections but to further articulate the
facades with the addition new design elements as discussed in the Design Guidelines.
The new design proposes a significant corner tower at the intersection of Chestnut and Ft. Harrison and
a corresponding and balancing smaller corner element at Rogers Street. These corner treatments, along
with the center entry projection break the building down to a pedestrian scale. The taller tower also
serves as a key visual gateway marker for people entering Clearwater from the east, as well as an
appropriate place for building signage.
Vertically, we are further defining the base, middle and top of the building by adding rustication to the
base, horizontal banding and window elements to define the body, and a slight frieze band to transition
into the top of the building. This design scheme continues around all sides of the building.
The east side of the building is the primary parking entrance so it is visually as important as the Ft.
Harrison fagade. We are extending some key elements of the Ft. Harrison fagade to the east side,
namely the corner elements, horizontal building delineations, and window treatments. On this side of
the building we are incorporating a Porte Cochere to protect patrons and to shield the larger pieces of
mechanical equipment from view.
The most significant change to the original design is our proposed addition of a sloped roof to the
building. The primary goals of the roof modification are: to address water and interior environment
concerns, to provide concealment for mechanical equipment, and to give the building more of a
Mediterranean revival design. Capping the roof is a cupola that serves to re-center the design and
accentuate the building, when viewed from a distance. The cupola also serves as a design memory point
and visual linking element, making the building identifiable from all sides.
As discussed earlier we are planning to maintain most of the existing window and door patterns, yet
adding some accent treatments to reinforce the new design. We are adding arched heads to the
windows in the corner elements to integrate the existing arched entry and fanlight into the new design.
We are proposing to add appropriately sized, shutters and flower boxes to the second story windows.
These serve to add color and provide interest to the facade, and visually tie the building together from
all sides.
The guidelines suggest colors and materials that are appropriate to the architectural period and style of
the building. This building is a Mediterranean revival building, allowing us to use a more vibrant color
and material palette. As with the original Webb building, we are proposing to use a pink color range for
the main body of the building with a darker base and accent color and white trim.
It is our belief that this building design fully embraces the tenants of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan and its integral Design Guidelines as they relate to planning and building design.
The planning goals are addressed through the redesign of the site's vehicular and pedestrian access and
flow patterns, and the screening of parking and enhancement of the building, site landscaping, and
hardscaping while the building design criteria are addressed through the appropriate use of
Mediterranean Revival design elements and colors.
PARKING DEMAND STUDY
For
RIVER SITE BUILDING
501 S. Fort Harrison
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Prepared for:
RIVER SITE, LLC
43309 US Highway 19 North
Tarpon Springs, Florida 34689
Prepared by:
HIGH POINT ENGINEERING, INC
630 Chestnut Street
Clearwater, Florida 33756
(HPE Job No. 10-012-GIL)
Date: August 10, 2010
Revision: September 10, 2010
PARKING DEMAND STUDY
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of our parking demand study for the
proposed St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute in Clearwater. The proposed eye clinic will
operate in the Webb's Building (to be named River Site Building) located at 501 S. Fort Harrison
Avenue in Clearwater. The parking demand study was performed to estimate if 43 parking
spaces located in two adjacent parking lots could accommodate the future parking demand of
the proposed clinic in Clearwater. The referenced parking lots will have access connections to
Rogers Street and a 15-ft wide Alley.
BACKGROUND
St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute is a premier cataract and intraocular lens practice made up
of experienced and caring medical professionals. The institute currently has five clinics
throughout Pinellas County, Hillsborough County, Pasco County and Hernando County. The
institute has a strong presence in Pinellas County with two facilities in Tarpon Springs and St.
Petersburg. The other three facilities are located in Tampa, Bayonet Point and Spring Hill. The
institute's main clinic is located in Tarpon Springs and includes a 3-story building of
approximately 80,000 sf Gross Floor Area (GFA). The buildings in Tarpon Springs, St.
Petersburg and Tampa are used exclusively by the institute while the buildings in Bayonet Point
and Spring Hill are shared with other tenants. The-proposed. St.. -Luke's Cataract & Laser
Institute in Clearwater will be the third clinic in Pinellas County, and will serve patients from
central Pinellas County.
The Webb'6- Building property is located r ection.16, Township 29+:South, Range 15 East
within the incorporated area of City of Clearwater. The property ,ls part of'Wallace's Addition
Subdivision and is comprised of two parcels identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser
with numbers: 16/29/15/94626/001/0050 and 16/29/15/94626/002/0030. The total area of the
two parcels combined is approximately 0.656 acres (28,600 so. The Webb's Building property
includes a 2-story structure of approximately 14,050 sf GFA and two parking lots with a total of
47 surface parking spaces. Parcel A (16/29/15/94626/001/0050) includes the 2-story building
and 27 parking spaces and is bounded by Chestnut Street to the North, Fort Harrison Avenue to
the West, Rogers Street to the South and a 15-ft wide Alley to the East. Parcel B
(16/29/15/94626/002/0030) includes 20 parking spaces and is bounded by Rogers Street to the
North, a Shopping Center to the West and South and a vacant parcel to the East.
The proposed River Site Building project consist of remodeling the 2-story building including a
new fagade and a Porte Cochere, constructing a roll-off dumpster enclosure, rehabilitating the
existing pavement and installing an attractive drought tolerant landscape. The project includes
demolition of an attached 1-story room on the east side of the building and restriping the two
parking lots to provide a total of 43 parking spaces. The remodel of the building will reduce the
total GFA to 13,080 sf. The building setbacks, parking and landscaping will adequately support
the proposed remodel.
The City of Clearwater Community Development Code (Code) requires a minimum of 5.0 off-
street parking spaces per 1,000 sf GFA of medical clinic. The Code requirement for the
Parking Demand
September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
proposed redevelopment is 66 parking spaces. The proposed site plan for the remodel shows a
total of 43 parking spaces onsite, representing a deficit from the Code requirements of 23
parking spaces.
See Attached.
• Site Location (Exhibit A)
• Proposed Site Layout and Parking Plan(Exhibit 8)
DATA COLLECTION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
Parking observations were undertaken at St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute in St. Petersburg
and Tampa. The facilities located in Tarpon Springs, Bayonet Point and Spring Hill were not
used in this parking demand study due to the building size (i.e. Tarpon Springs) as well as land
use and tenant composition (i.e. Bayonet Point and Spring Hill).
Data Collection in St. Petersburg
St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute in St. Petersburg is located at 9400 9m Street North. The
facility is comprised of a 1-story building with approximately 6,530 sf of GFA and a parking lot
with a total of 27 parking spaces of which two are handicap parking spaces. The clinic currently
serves patients from south and central Pinellas County. Parking observations in St. Petersburg
took place on Thursday July 29, 2010, and Friday July 30, 2010, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
The observations consisted of identifying the number of parking spaces occupied at 5-minutes
intervals. The weather condition on both days was clear with sunny skies and temperatures
between 85°F and 95°F.
During the, two days of observations, the clinic staff consisted of 16 employees between part
time and full time shifts including two physicians and two assistants per physician. The average
number of patients visiting the clinic ranged between 50 and 75 per day.
The observations taken on Thursday, July 29, 2010, show that the peak parking demand
occurred between 8:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. At the peak time, 25 of the 27 parking spaces were
occupied, leaving 2 spaces available. The Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA computed was
3.83 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. The data also indicates that between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.
the parking lot had a parking demand ratio of 3.06 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA.
On Friday, July 30, 2010, the peak parking demand was observed between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00
p.m. and between 1:00 pm and 3:00 pm. At the peak time, 25 of the 27 parking spaces were
occupied, leaving 2 spaces available during the periods of highest usage. The Peak Parking
Demand Ratio to GFA computed was 3.83 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. Further, the data indicates
that between 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. the parking lot had a parking demand ratio of 3.52 spaces
per 1,000 sf GFA.
See Attached:
• Peak Period Parking Demand Summary Tables for Thursday, July 29, 2010, and Friday,
July 30, 2010 (Exhibit C)
• Peak Period Parking Demand Ratio to Gross Floor Area Graphs for Thursday, July 29,
2010, and Friday, July 30, 2010 (Exhibit D)
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Data Collection in Tampa
St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute in Tampa is located at 13303 N. Dale Mabry Highway (S.R
597) and includes a 1-story building with approximately 6,240 sf of GFA. The parking lot at the
Tampa facility is comprised of 26 regular parking spaces and two handicap parking spaces. The
clinic provides service to patients from Carrollwood, Tampa Palms, Land O' Lakes and Temple
Terrace. Parking observations in Tampa took place on Tuesday September 7, 2010, and
Wednesday September 8, 2010, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. As implemented in St. Petersburg,
the observations consisted of identifying the number of parking spaces occupied at 5-minutes
intervals. The weather condition on both days was overcast and temperatures between 80°F
and 90°F.
During the two days of observations, the clinic staff consists of 16 employees between part time
and full time shifts including two physicians and two assistants per physician. The average
number of patients visiting the clinic ranged between 25 and 55 per day.
The observations taken on Tuesday, September 7, 2010, show that the peak parking demand
occurred between 8:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. and between 12:00 pm and 3:00 pm. At the peak
time, 20 of the 28 parking spaces were occupied leaving 8 spaces available. The Peak Parking
Demand Ratio to GFA computed was 3.21 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. The data also indicates
that between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. the parking lot had a parking demand ratio of 2.88
spaces per 1,000 sf GFA and between 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. a parking demand ratio of 2.40
spaces per 1,000 sf GFA.
On Wednesday, September 8, 2010, the peak parking demand was observed between 9:00
a.m. and 11:00 a.m. and between 12:00 pm and 3:00 pm. At the peak time, 20 of the 28 parking
spaces were occupied, leaving 8 spaces available during the periods of highest usage. The
Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA computed was 3.21 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. Further, the
data indicates that between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.
the parking lot had a parking demand ratio of 2.88 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA.
See Attached:
• Peak Period Parking Demand Summary Tables for Tuesday, September 7, 2010, and
Wednesday September 8, 2010 (Exhibit E)
• Peak Period Parking Demand Ratio to Gross Floor Area Graphs for Tuesday, September 7,
2010, and Wednesday September 8, 2010 (Exhibit F)
PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS
According to River Site, LLC, the proposed River Site Building will be a multi-use building
including an eye clinic and administrative office. Both uses are part of the proposed Clearwater
St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute. The future eye clinic will employ two or more physicians
and services to be provided will include minor surgery procedures without overnight stay.
Exhibit D and F illustrate the Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA measured in St. Petersburg
and Tampa. During the four days of observations, the Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA was
significantly less than the minimum off-street parking (i.e, 5.0 per 1,000 sf GFA) required by
Code. Besides, the Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA measured in St. Petersburg and
Tampa are considerably different.
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater. Florida 33756
Table 1 shows a statistical analysis of the parking demand observations at the St. Petersburg
and Tampa facilities.
Table 1
Peak Period Parking Demand Projected (1,000 sf GFA)
i
d St. Petersburg Tampa
Per
o Thursday
7/29/10 Friday
7/30/10 Tuesday
9/7/10 Wednesday
9/8/10
8:00 am - 9:00 am 3.83 3.37 3.21 2.88
9:00 am - 10:00 am 3.83 3.83 3.21 3.21
10:00 am - 11:00 am 3.83 3.83 3.21 3.21
11:00 am - 12:00 m 3.83 3.83 2.88 2.88
12:00 m - 1:00 m 3.83 3.37 3.21 3.21
1:00 m - 2:00 m 3.06 3.83 3.21 3.21
2:00 m - 3:00 m 3.06 3.83 3.21 3.21
3:00 m - 4:00 m 2.60 3.52 2.40 2.40
4:00 m - 5:00 m 1.38 2.60 1.92 1.60
Peak 3.83 3.83 3.21 3.21
Mean 3.25 3.56 2.94 2.87
Range 1.38-3.83 2.60-3.83 1.92-3.21 1.60-3.21
Notes: Ratios rounded to two decimal.
Source: High Point Engineering, July and September 2010
In this an,alysis.,,the,parking demand measured is used to estimate the future parking demand of
the proposed facility.in Clearwater. The land use, building size, degree of occupancy, number of
physicians__and customer base of the St. Petersburg, Tampa and proposed Clearwater facilities
are comparable.
The geographic area served by the St. Petersburg clinic includes south and central Pinellas
County. The distance between the St. Petersburg and proposed Clearwater facilities is
approximately 15 miles so the patients from central Pinellas County will have a second choice.
In our opinion, after the proposed facility in Clearwater is opened to the public, the geographic
area to be served by the St. Petersburg clinic will be reduced to south Pinellas County. This
reduction in geographic area is expected since the patients from central Pinellas County will
rather visit the proposed clinic in Clearwater. Consequently, the peak parking demand
measured during the two days of observation in St. Petersburg does not best estimate the future
parking demand for the proposed Clearwater facility.
On the contrary, the parking demand measured in the Tampa facility is not limited by location
and geographic area served. For this reason, based on the land use, building size, number of
physicians and customer base between the Tampa facility and proposed Clearwater facility, the
peak parking demand obtained during the two days of observation in Tampa can be adequately
extrapolated and used for the proposed eye clinic in Clearwater.
The expected Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA for the proposed River Site Building is 3.21
spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. The projected Peak Parking Demand Ratio applied to the proposed
eye clinic calls for:
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
3.21 x 13,080 sf GFA / 1,000 sf = 42 spaces
The projected number of parking spaces required to satisfy the future parking demand of the
River Site Building is less than the proposed parking supply onsite as shown on the proposed
site plan. Therefore, the probability that the expected parking demand for the River Site Building
after remodeled would be accommodated by the proposed 43 parking spaces onsite is
acceptable.
Additionally, River Site, LLC will lease from City of Clearwater Parking System 16 parking
spaces in public parking lot 24 located at 615 Court Street between Chestnut Street and Court
Street approximately 280 ft from the proposed River Site Building. These 16 additional parking
spaces will be assigned to the clinic employees so the proposed 43 parking spaces onsite will
be reserved for the use of patients only. City of Clearwater Paring System Division has indicated
that River Site, LLC can prepay up to 12 months of monthly parking in lot 24.
Furthermore, Average Peak Period Parking Demand data from Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 3rd Edition for land use: 720 Medical-Dental Office Building
was also used to evaluate the future parking demand for the proposed facility as well as to
compare with the results from the observations taken at the Tampa facility.
ITE Parking Generation, 3rd Edition describes a medical-dental office building as a facility that
provides diagnoses and outpatient care on a routine basis, but is unable to provided prolonged
in-house medical and surgical care. One or more private physicians or dentist generally operate
this type of facility.
For medical-dental office building, ITE Parking Gerreratior, 3rd Edition presents Average Peak
Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sf GFA.' On a: W6,ekda?. ;The ITE Parking Generation, 3rd
Edition statistical summary for medical-dental office building is presented as follows:
Peak Period: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Number of Study Sites: 18
Average Size of Study Sites: 43,000 sf GFA
Average Peak Period Parking Demand: 3.53 vehicles per 1,000 sf GFA.
Standard Deviation: 0.87
Range: 2.34 - 5.35 vehicles per 1,000 sf GFA.
33rd Percentile: 2.92 vehicles per 1,000 sf GFA.
85th Percentile: 4.30 vehicles per 1,000 sf GFA.
The average peak parking demand ratio presented in the ITE Parking Generation, 3rd Edition is
larger than the peak parking demand ratio measured during the two days of observation in
Tampa. Nevertheless, the peak parking demand ratio measured falls within the range of peak
parking demand ratios of the studies publicized in the ITE Parking Generation, 3rd Edition. In
addition, the peak parking demand periods observed on Tuesday and Wednesday approximate
to the peak parking demand periods of the studies publicized in the ITE Parking Generation, 3rd
Edition.
Using the ITE Parking Generation, 3rd Edition peak period parking demand range, the proposed
Clearwater facility may require between:
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
2.34 x 13,080 sf /1,000 sf = 31 spaces and 5.35 x 13,080 sf /1,000 sf = 70 spaces
It is important to note that the author of ITE Parking Generation, Td Edition recommended
including in future studies the number of doctors working at a study site. This variable will
improve the accuracy of parking demand for this type of facility since the number of patients
visiting a medical-dental office building is driven by the number of physicians/dentists working.
Therefore, based on the ITE Parking Generation, 3rd Edition peak period parking demand range,
the probability that the future parking demand for the proposed St. Luke's Cataract and Laser
Institute in Clearwater would be accommodated by the 43 parking spaces is acceptable.
See Attached.
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 3rd Edition Data Summary
for Land Use: 720 Medical-Dental Office Building (Exhibit G)
LOADING ZONE
The City of Clearwater Community Development Code Section 3-1406 requires one loading
space of 12 ft by 35 ft to be provided for office buildings with gross floor area greater than 8,000
square feet.
The remodel of the 2-story building has triggered the off-street loading space requirement by
Code since the proposed Clearwater facility will have a total of 13,080 sf GFA. However, due to
the size of the parcels and space limitation to provide a loading space dedicated to delivery
trucks only, River Site, LLC is requesting to eliminate this requirement for the proposed facility.
The proposed River Site Building is surrounded by public right-of.way.. In particular, Parcel A
(16/29/15/94626/001/0050) is bounded by Chestnut Street to the North, Fort Harrison Avenue to
the West and Roger Street to the South. Chestnut Street is an arterial road owned by the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), Fort Harrison Avenue is a collector road and
Roger Street is a low traffic dead end local road.
According to River Site, LLC, medical supplies, hearing aids and overnight correspondence are
usually delivered from and to the clinics by private shipping companies once a day. Office
materials are normally supplied from the company headquarters in Tarpon Springs and
delivered to the clinics by the company van once a week.
The timing and frequency of deliveries at St. Luke's Cataract & Laser Institute in St. Petersburg
and Tampa were observed concurrently with the parking demand study. On the four days of
observation, one delivery was performed by a private shipping company between 9:00 a.m. and
11:00 a.m. The delivery truck dimensions are typically 7.5 ft by 22 ft. No office supplies were
delivered in the four days of observation.
Therefore, based on the frequency of delivery and the information provided by River Site, LLC,
Roger Street can be used by delivery trucks to adequately satisfy the loading zone needs of the
proposed River Site Building without causing traffic disruption.
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
CONCLUSION
As established in the foregoing analysis, the proposed 43 parking spaces onsite is projected to
adequately meet the future parking demand (i.e, 3.21 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA) of the proposed
River Site Building during all periods. Furthermore, the lease of 16 parking spaces in public
parking lot 24 for employees will guarantee additional parking for visitors.
The 12 ft by 35 ft off-street loading space required by Code is not necessary for the normal
operation of the proposed eye clinic since the projected loading zone demand can be
adequately satisfied within Roger Street without causing traffic interruption.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
HIGH POINT ENGINEERING, INC.
Braulio Grajales, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A Site Location
Exhibit B Proposed River Site Building Parking Layout
Exhibit C Peak Period Parking Demand Summary Tables for Thursday, July 29, 2010,
and Friday, July 30, 2010 Observations
Exhibit D Peak Period Parking Demand Ratio to Gross Floor Area Graphs for Thursday,
July 29, 2010, and Friday, July 30, 2010 Observations
Exhibit E Peak Period Parking Demand Summary Tables for Tuesday, September 7,
2010, and Wednesday, September 8, 2010 Observations
Exhibit F Peak Period Parking Demand Ratio to Gross Floor Area Graphs for Tuesday,
September 7, 2010, and Wednesday, September 8, 2010 Observations
Exhibit G Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 3rd Edition
Data Summary for Land Use: 720 Medical-Dental Office Building
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
EXHIBIT A
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
ri
Jilt;]
LE?IELA?WD-S?
,? -
i _ FEI ENMT
_.._ u TT L
N SITE ! ?_....?_ - ?8 `•. ` E=
LIT F
71 r r I------- -, -?? rnTr? r -.
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
EXHIBIT B
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE
/f' RIGM'-C)k'-Y?AY i>ER PINt_AS COGNTY +hARS
11 SOD pNi
? ( II (
I OmT
2 > ; I
11 J M
: II z
I?°T o e o I I
n r II I M
M
AV IO p- I I OI
I
O O `_
Boa .
LT
r
I
1 IS
.I
°i
?) 1
0
1 v o
D
o =
n r^
? D VJ ® Z
r
o m
li
,n
m
N
O
HmPoORIENGINEERING caxrexr FROIECi"a IBOttcB
SITE LAYOUT & PARKING PLAN
5511E DATE: b9L10
?? DE3I BT:
B.:
.? ?.?w..? RIVER SITE BUILDING -BY M
B3D Cns?m s?..PE T.c; 17271723"377 501 S. FORT HARRISON AVENUE <sEC?.D BT: ec
C1.a.,..., Fwne. T°'P?717Z''714 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 BovEDBT: ec
LANG PLANNING- CIVIL ENGINEERING - GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EREVI51oN5
EXHIBIT C
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
PARKING DEMAND STUDY AT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
9400 9TH STREET NORTH, ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33702
TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 27, PARKING SUPPLY = 4.13 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Observations Taken on Thursday, July 29, 2010
Time Period Peak Period Parking
Spaces Used
Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking
Lot Occupancy
(%) Peak Period Parking
Demand
(1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.)
8:00 am-9:00 am 25 2 93% 3.83
9:00 am-10:00 am 25 2 93% 3.83
10:00 am-11:00 am 25 2 93% 3.83
11:00 am-12:00 m 25 2 93% 3.83
12:00 m-1:00 m 25 2 93% 3.83
1:00 m-2:00 m 20 7 74% 3.06
2:00 m-3:00 m 20 7 74% 3.06
3:00 m-4:00 m 17 10 63% 2.60
4:00 m-5:00 m 9 18 33% 1.38
PARKING DEMAND STUDY AT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
9400 9TH STREET NORTH, ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33702
TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 27, PARKING SUPPLY = 4.13 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Observations Taken on Friday, July 30, 2010
Time Period Peak Period Parking
Spaces Used
Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking
Lot Occupancy
(%) Peak Period Parking
Demand
(1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.)
8:00 am-9:00 am 22 5 81% 3.37
9:00 am-10:00 am 25 2 93% 3.83
10:00 am-11:00 am 25 2 93% 3.83
11:00 am-12:00 m 25 2 93% 3.83
12:00 m-1:00 m 22 5 81% 3.37
1:00 m-2:00 m 25 2 93% 3.83
2:00 m-3:00 m 25 2 93% 3.83
3:00 m-4:00 m 23 4 85% 3.52
4:00 m-5:00 m 17 1:0 63% 2.60
EXHIBIT D
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
PARKING DEMAND STUDY AT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
9400 9TH STREET NORTH, ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33702
DATA TAKEN: THURSDAY, JULY 29, 2010
5.0
Q
4.0
N
O
O
O
0 3.0 - -
Z
Q
w
0
O
Z
R
Q 2.0
0-
a
O
w
w
a
Y
W 1.0
CL
0.0
8:00 am-9:00 am 9:00 am-10:00 am 10:00 am-11:00 am 11:00 am-12:00 pm 12:00 pm-1:00 pm 1:00 pm-2:00 pm 2:00 pm-3:00 pm 3:00 pm-4:00 pm 4:00 pm-5:00 pm
TIME PERIOD
PARKING DEMAND STUDYAT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
9400 9TH STREET NORTH, ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33702
DATA TAKEN: FRIDAY, JULY 30, 2010
5.0
Q
LL 4.0
N
O
O
O
r
3.0
Z
Q
w
0
0
Z
Y
2.0
CL
0
O
w
w
a
Y
w 1.0
a
0.0
8:00 am-9:00 am 9:00 am-10:00 am 10:00 am-11:00 am 11:00 am-12:00 pm 12:00 pm-1:00 pm 1:00 pm-2:00 pm 2:00 pm-3:00 pm 3:00 pm-4:00 pm 4:00 pm-5:00 pm
TIME PERIOD
EXHIBIT E
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
13303 DALE MABRY HIGHWAY NORTH, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33618
TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 28, PARKING SUPPLY = 4.49 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Observations Taken on Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Time Period Peak Period Parking
Spaces Used
Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking
Lot Occupancy
(%) Peak Period Parking
Demand
(1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.)
8:00 am-9:00 am 20 8 71% 3.21
9:00 am-10:00 am 20 8 71% 3.21
10:00 am-11:00 am 20 8 71% 3.21
11:00 am-12:00 m 18 10 64% 2.88
12:00 m-1:00 m 20 8 71% 3.21
1:00 m-2:00 m 20 8 71% 3.21
2:00 m-3:00 m 20 8 71% 3.21
3:00 m-4:00 m 15 13 54% 2.40
4:00 m-5:00 m 12 16 43% 1.92
PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
13303 DALE MABRY HIGHWAY NORTH, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33618
TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 28, PARKING SUPPLY = 4.49 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.
Observations Taken on Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Time Period Peak Period Parking
Spaces Used
Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking
Lot Occupancy
(%) Peak Period Parking
Demand
(1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.)
8:00 am-9:00 am 18 10 64% 2.88
9:00 am-10:00 am 20 8 71% 3.21
10:00 am-11:00 am 20 8 71% 3.21
11:00 am-12:00 m 18 10 64% 2.88
12:00 m-1:00 m 20 8 71% 3.21
1:00 m-2:00 m 20 8 71% 3.21
2:00 m-3:00 m 20 8' 71% 3.21
3:00 m-4:00 m 15 13 54% 2.40
4:00 m-5:00 m 10 18 36% 1.60
EXHIBIT F
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
PARKING DEMAND STUDY AT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
13303 DALE MABRY HIGHWAY NORTH, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33618
DATA TAKEN: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
5.0
Q
?- 4.0
N
O
O
O
0 3.0
Z
Q
W
0
0
Z
R
Q 2.0 --
a
0
O
w
w
a
Y
--
W 1.0
a
0.0
8:00 am-9:00 am 9:00 am-10:00 am 10:00 am-11:00 am 11:00 am-12:00 pm 12:00 pm-1:00 pm 1:00 pm-2:00 pm 2:00 pm-3:00 pm 3:00 pm-4:00 pm 4:00 pm-5:00 pm
TIME PERIOD
PARKING DEMAND STUDY AT ST. LUKE'S CATARACT & LASER INSTITUTE
13303 DALE MABRY HIGHWAY NORTH, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33618
DATA TAKEN: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2010
5.0
Q
4.0
C7
C'
N
O
Cl
O
r
3.0
Z
Q
W
O
Z
Y
OL 2.0
d
O
O
w
W
a
Y
W 1.0
CL
0.0
8:00 am-9:00 am 9:00 am-10:00 am 10:00 am-11:00 am 11:00 am-12:00 pm 12:00 pm-1:00 pm 1:00 pm-2:00 pm 2:00 pm-3:00 pm 3:00 pm-4:00 pm 4:00 pm-5:00 pm
TIME PERIOD
EXHIBIT G
Parking Demand Study September 10, 2010
River Site Building
501 S. Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Land Use: 720
Medical-Dental Office Building
Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sq. ft. GFA
On a: Weekday
Peak Period 10:00 a.m.-12:00 .m., 2:00-5:00 .m.
Number of Stud Sites 18
Average Size of Stud Sites 43,000 s q. ft. GFA
Average Peak Period Parkin Demand 3.53 vehicles per 1,000 s q. ft. GFA
Standard Deviation 0.87
Coefficient of Variation 25%
Range 2.34 - 5.35 vehicles per 1,000 s q. ft. GFA
85th Percentile 4.30 vehicles per 1,000 s q, ft. GFA
33rd Percentile 2.92 vehicles per 1,000 s q. ft. GFA
Weekday Peak Period
Parking Demand
rn 500
m.
400
4)
> 300
200
L
a 100
u
IL 0
P-3.49x-1
R` = 0.82
t
40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
x = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA
• Actual Data Points
Institute of Transportation Engineers
Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate
178
Parking Generation, 3rd Edition
N l DREW
STREET
z
/?\
W
COACHMAN 2
z
tl
a
¦?
N.T.S.
O PARK
5 m; a .
Q GROVE.ST.., Z
vi a _ HENDR v~i V
4 W
14
3C
x r:
o
<
LL
(Lot Under
z
Construction)
FLARBR' o
?: Z Cn
MFM
El(IT6R SIN
Z POSTw
?/q
2 c C ZF In i ¦
OFIG
1"
JC4 1
c9
Gs CLEVELAND"
STREET
L
?9?l
? 11 W i
, ' .
L
a
Q
C
z
15
} Jb STREET
H
d
?
? J
W ?, 10 1C
B
? O
MgB,
U D
3
RATE TIME LIMIT
?No Char
e Unlimited W
- FIRE , ; ] , o:
s
STATION
a
O
g a , Q
uNo Charge Limited
21 19
-
$.25/Hr. 10 Hours a
L
$.50/Hr. 72 Hours
X
®$.50/Hr. 3 Hours
U5
e`TZ0M$.501Hr. 2 Hours
1 H
50/H 16
o
in
our
$.
r.
x$.50/Hr. 30 Minutes OURT o- STREET W
7 `
®Restricted Parking
® Permit Only Q
R-60 COURT ?-
-
STREET 5
L
City Parking Garages
RT
HOUSES
COU
9 17
p
0
Rates and # of Spaces
Subject to Change
?
13
rn ST.
Y
4
V
z
a
STREET
a -
-60
-a
CHESTNUT
I _v
m
j ? r
ROGERS STREET (J J
a a
G ER
R
CITY GARAGES ADDRESS NO. SPACES HOURLY/MONTHLY RATE
A GARDEN AVENUE GARAGE 28 GARDEN AVE. 250 $.50 ($3.501day, $48.15/mo.)
B MUNICIPAL SVCS. GARAGE 640 PIERCE ST. 474 Employees only M-F 6am-5pm
C STATION SQUARE PARKING GARAGE 628 CLEVELAND ST. 96 $.50 ($5.00/day, $48,15/mo.)
PARKING LOTS ADDRESS NO. SPACES
1 LIBRARY / STEIN MART 36 N. OSCEOLA AVE. 135
2 HARBORVIEW CENTER 300 CLEVELAND ST. 168
4 N. GARDEN AVE. 35 WATTERSON AVE. 9
5 COACHMAN 101 DREW ST. 261
10 CITY HALL 112 S. OSCEOLAAVE. 51/66
11" DOWNTOWN BOAT SLIPS SOUTH 150 PIERCE ST. 44
P
13 LARGE COURTHOUSE LOT 475 OAK AVE. 36 ARKING
14' DOWNTOWN BOAT SLIPS NORTH 100 DREW ST. 19
15 CITY HALL OVERFLOW 220 PIERCE ST. 63 F?
16 COURT ST. & GARDEN AVE. 318 GARDEN AVE. 7
17 COURT STREET & FT. HARRISON 351 S. FT. HARRISON AVE. 20
19 COURT ST. & OSCEOLA AVE. 311 S. OSCEOLA AVE. 39 Notes:
21 COUNTY PARKING GARAGE 310 COURT ST. 11 . Downtown rates in effect 8:00 am - 6:00 pm,
22 OAK AVE.
23 PARK/ PIERCE ST. 450 OAK AVE.
620 PIERCE ST. 85/39
18/12
Monday - Friday, all other times no charge
;
24 CHESTNUT ST. 615 COURT ST. 37 • Lot 11 & 14 enforced 8:00 am - 6:00 pm,
29 FT. HARRISON AVE. 420 S. FT. HARRISON AVE. 26 everyday, all other times no charge;
1C PINELLAS COUNTY LOT NE CORNER PIERCE AND FT HARRISON 105 . Does not include handicap spaces
DAILY RATE: $5 w/$15 MAXIMUM
ACCEPTS VISA/ MASTER CARD / AMERICAN EXPRESS
DOWNTOWN STREETS NO. SPACES Clealvater
ON STREET PARKING
368 r
U
Parking System Hotiine: (727) 562-4892
aw,9 0 ?g wao -u ov„a -,20100503. 0,q
General Parking Information: (727) 562-4704
CHESINV/'SIRfET
- I
__ ___ \
\\
KAI
?jl
i
i 22•
O
Il I
1 I i '
1
i
a
..
WAITING
ROOM TECH. Q
ROOMS \\
\ i
I /
/
/
--
---------- ? i
J i
V
1
LEV CHIN
RECEPTION ROOM
'"
I I
I ?
/
I
------------
\
n
MMSn
RoR
o Q
? ? ?
I
I
o
c ? / \\
?
vROJE[in
TLE
:::J § 1
F
-:D
j
,
W
n ?
\ _ - - - - 0 L3
CK .
SVRGERY
f N
LL N
>
o
i
I I
{{ S
-
.. I..L ? L4i U
s m I t
?EOOR.wNo
e s I t e
up s s
-
I
I
I ------------ -
I
U79E 10-01
LOWER
FLOOR PLAN
N
q
m lk TARUu`
LOWER FLOOR PLAN
1 1-Y-y LOWERF R ca;? .Fi.
scW: 1T•1'-0' kGGlkSSTR!!T ??YV INVfR fL000. 660250. Ff
TOTAL: 130/9 SQ FT
02 AUG 2010
A.1.1
PRI -RY PLAN
E ¢ E
CHEF .N!?51AEET
i
---------------------
/ I
j
_
r \
___________________, \1
I
22?
i
1 I
\ I
I I
/
sVPPORT
F ? I?`
I II
j
I
EV -__
'
? ?N I I x
I
j
?\
F lu.
2 mmawrsws 9
_ /
I \
` mo.[cYm
- o z OFFlCES&
x (
1
I
M P-0OM5
_.
j __ --------------
0\I
21")
I
j Uj
`
svPPORT j
? ?` /^1
v
J C om
DN
vv
W N =
m
f
t _
LLm
\ 0
/
C o t
j
I
{ ... 6L ? u4i U
• x I i
i
lm P..EY«/
xx
• j I A
n
j A.e,,.
llu A_
j
I -------------'- A_
I pAp_
A_
01
M910
.
-- UPPER
FLOOR PLAN
N
AREATABVIATION xx,P wre:
02 AUG 2010
UPPER FLOOR PLAN RaERSS>uE°T
T
RF R
VPPER FLOOR 660350. FT.
r W*
rota.: Hors sa. F A. 12
PM-Y PUN
Chestnut Street Elevation (North)
b
- - ? South Fort Harrison Avenue Elevation (West)
s
a
_____--___---??------_- .?w..?.?
__ ---__-
I -d
x
W
F-
U) C o v
.2
16 0 LL
W> Zii
\ ry W
/_ C y ?
Qa?
W00-01
PRELIMINARY
ELEVATION
02 AUG 2010
A.1 3
PRB.RNNARYP-