The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2010-07003; 2147 COACHMAN RD NE; CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA FLD2010-07003 2147 NE COACHMAN RD Date Received: 7/2/2010 3:49:07 PM Clinical Research of West Florida ZONING DISTRICT: Office LAND USE: Residential/Office General ATLAS PAGE: 280B PLANNER OF RECORD: PLANNER: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010 Case Number: FLD2010-07003 Agenda Item: C.5. Owner/ Applicant: Clinical Research of West Florida, Inc. Representative: Braulio Graiales High Point Engineerinp, Address: 2147 NE Coachman Road CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a medical clinic in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 25,000 square feet, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement and sidewalk), a side (west) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement, dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to building), a building height of 24.5 feet (to top of flat roof) and 24 parking spaces (including no loading space),as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.13, with reductions 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 CDC Section 3-1202.6. CURRENT ZONING: Office (O) District CURRENT LAND USE CATEGORY: Residential/Office General (R/OG) PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Medical Clinic Proposed Use: Medical Clinic EXISTING North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District SURROUNDING Detached dwellings ZONING AND USES: South: Pinellas County zoning Self Storage East: Pinellas County zoning Offices West: Office (O) District Offices Community Development Board-November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 1 of 11 ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.573 acre parcel is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,100 feet west of N. Belcher Road and 900 feet east of Graham Drive. The subject property is currently developed with a medical clinic building, presently occupied by the applicant, located on the northern portion of the site with four parking spaces north of the building (two that are within the right-of-way) and 10 parking spaces to the rear of the building. The site has 100 feet of frontage along NE Coachman Road. Properties adjacent to the north across NE Coachman Road are zoned Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District and are developed with detached dwellings. The property to the south is developed as a self storage facility. The property to the east is developed with office uses. The property to the west is zoned Office (O) District and is developed with office uses. Properties to the south and east are presently not located within the city limits of Clearwater. Development Proposal: Nonresidential properties along the south side of NE Coachman Road between Drew Street and Belcher Road can be characterized as having a mix of building and parking lot locations on the individual properties. Some properties have been designed with the building placed forward on the property with parking to one side and the rear of the building, while others have the parking area in front of the building. The proposal is to completely redevelop this site by demolishing the existing building and parking and construct a new two-story, 6,970 square foot building at the rear of the site for a medical clinic, which will be occupied by the applicant. Parking will be located to the front of this new building and includes a drop-off area at the building entrance for clients. This site layout satisfies the majority of Community Development Code (CDC), Building Code and Fire Code requirements, albeit with necessary setback reductions. The design of this site and building are similar to another parcel, owned by the same applicant, which was granted Flexible Development approval at the Community Development Board (CDB) meeting of September 21, 2010 (FLD2010-07002, 2135 NE Coachman Road). Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-1001.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Residential/Office General (R/OG) is 0.50. The proposal is to construct a total floor area of 6,970 square feet for a FAR of 0.279, which is consistent with the above Code provisions. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2- 1001.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.75. The proposed ISR is 0.709, which is consistent with the above Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no minimum required lot area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum lot area for a medical clinic use is 20,000 square feet. The site is 25,000 square feet of lot area, which exceeds the lot area for medical clinics. Pursuant to this same Table, the minimum lot width for medical clinic uses is Community Development Board- November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 2 of 11 100 feet. The site has 100 feet of frontage, which is consistent with this Code provision. Adjacent properties to the east and west have the same lot area and lot width. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there are no minimum required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum front setback for medical clinic uses can range between 15 - 35 feet. The same table provides that the minimum side and rear setbacks for medical clinic uses can range between 10 - 20 feet. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), side (east) setbacks of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement and sidewalk), side (west) setbacks of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement, dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), and a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to building). Nonresidential properties along the south side of NE Coachman Road between Drew Street and Belcher Road can be characterized as having a mix of building and parking lot locations on the individual properties. Some properties have been designed with the building placed forward on the property with parking to one side and the rear of the building, while others have the parking area in front of the building. A major Staff concern with this proposal, which was also shared with the approved, similar project at 2135 NE Coachman Road (FLD2010-07002), has been real or perceived impacts on the detached dwellings across NE Coachman Road. Building and parking area location designs were discussed with the applicant's design professionals to minimize negative impacts on these detached dwellings (to avoid future requests to change the land use and zoning to a nonresidential land use and zoning district). Potential site designs with the building located at the front setback line produced a thin building with minimal parking to the side of the building and a majority of the parking to the rear of the building. These designs produced unacceptable distances for fire and trash trucks entering the site and required truck turnarounds, which were unable to be provided without reducing required parking. The proposal includes locating the building at the rear of the property, with parking located between the building and the front property line. The parking lot is proposed at a front setback of 18 feet, compliant with the provisions under Level One, Flexible Standard Development. A wall is proposed for the purpose of screening the parking area from the detached dwellings across NE Coachman Road and to mitigate potential negative impacts (see additional discussion under Landscaping). The proposal includes locating the parking lot at a five-foot setback from the east and west property lines, which is consistent with parking lot locations on the nonresidential properties on this side of NE Coachman Road. The building is proposed at a 10-foot side and a 10.1-foot rear setback, which is also consistent with surrounding properties. Door landings/stoops and required sidewalks on the east and west sides of the building are designed at a five-foot setback from the side property lines. This proposed redevelopment of this site will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties, and it is compatible with both the residential properties across NE Coachman Road and the nonresidential properties to the east and west of this site. Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no maximum height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the maximum height for medical clinic uses can range from 30 - 50 feet. The proposal includes a Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 3 of 11 building height of 24.5 feet (to the highest point of a flat roof) and 28 feet (to top of the parapet), well below the allowed building height. Nonresidential buildings within this area are one or two stories in height. With the building's location at the rear of the property, this proposed height is compatible with the one-story detached dwellings across NE Coachman Road, as well as with the adjacent nonresidential buildings to the east, west and south of the subject property. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum required parking for medical clinic uses requires five spaces per 1,000 square feet. Based on the high range for medical clinics, the required parking totals 35 parking spaces. The proposal includes 24 parking spaces. A Parking Demand Study was conducted for the current site, which is currently occupied by the applicant, to determine whether adequate parking would be provided for the proposed building. Based on the findings of this Parking Demand Study, the 24 proposed parking spaces will be adequate for the 6,970 square-foot building, which will continue to be occupied by the applicant. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Based on the plans submitted, mechanical equipment will be placed on the building roof. The proposed building design with its parapets should shield such mechanical equipment. This screening requirement will also be reviewed at time of building permit submission. Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the driveway on NE Coachman Road, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20- foot sight visibility triangles. In order to provide enhanced screening of the parking lot the applicant is proposing a four-foot high wall across the front of the property. Within the sight visibility triangle, this wall will need to be reduced in height to comply with these requirements for motorist/pedestrian visibility. Approval of this application will need to be conditioned on the proposed wall meeting this requirement. The proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. There exist overhead utility lines along the site frontage of this property within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way. On-site, utilities will be placed underground. Landscaping: The site is presently heavily treed. Due to overhead utilities within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way, trees along the front of the property have been hatracked. Other trees are not healthy, while other trees are located such that they restrict the location of proposed improvements. As such, the proposal includes the removal of a number of existing trees from the site. Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 4 of 11 Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.13, a 15-foot perimeter buffer is required along NE Coachman Road and a five-foot perimeter buffer is required along the east, west and south sides of the property. While the proposal requests reductions to the minimum setbacks along all sides of the property (see discussion under Minimum Setbacks above), the proposal provides the required perimeter buffers. CDC Section 3-1202.E.2 requires foundation landscaping along the front of the building facing the street. This proposal exceeds the minimum requirements by providing a minimum seven-foot wide foundation planting area (minimum five-foot wide area). CDC Section 3-1202.E.I requires interior landscaping in the amount of 10% of the vehicular use area. This site is providing 10.5% of the vehicular use area in interior landscaping. Interior landscape islands are required to be eight feet in width inside curbing and to be 150 square feet in area. This proposal includes, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, a request 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. The majority of the interior landscape islands adjacent to the east side of the main ingress/egress drive aisle are less than the required width, proposed at six feet in width inside curbing. The interior landscape island closest to the building is three-feet in width inside curbing. The provision of additional interior landscaping in the parking row divider and in other areas of the site compensates for this slight reduction in the width and area requirement of the interior landscape islands. The site is proposed to be planted with a variety of landscape material. Trees include shade trees (live oak, dahoon holly and drake elm), accent trees ("little gem" southern magnolias, crape myrtle and weeping yaupon holly) and palms (royal, queen, Mexican fan and cabbage). Shrubs include sandanqua viburnum, yellow anise, firebush, Indian hawthorne, dwarf walter's viburnum and bird of paradise. Groundcovers include variegated flax lily, sand cord grass and swamp lily. Minimum Code requirements for the front perimeter buffer are a continuous hedge, trees every 35 feet and sod. The proposal for this front perimeter buffer includes tiered landscaping of shrubs and groundcovers, along with the required trees, completely covering the front perimeter buffer. This proposed landscaping materials and the location of plant materials are demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted under the minimum landscape standards of the Code. The proposal includes shade trees (dahoon holly and drake elm) along the east and west property lines spaced approximately 20 feet apart, rather than the 35-foot spacing provided by Code. This proposed spacing is too close for shade trees, which would result in comingled branches, dead wood and the trees unable to grow to their natural form. The Landscape Plan also needs to accurately depict the required number of accent trees. This proposal includes raising the site elevations of the parking area pavement adjacent to the east and west property lines approximately 18-inches above the site elevation of the perimeter buffer, requiring retaining walls. To compensate for this increased elevation of the parking, the applicant proposes shrubbery within the perimeter buffers 48-inches in height at time of planting in order to provide screening of the vehicles within the parking lot. To ensure this screening requirement is fulfilled in the future when shrubs die and need to be replaced, the increased shrub height should be included as a condition of approval. Finally, there is an inaccurate plant count for Indian hawthorne in the planting material table on Sheet L-1. All of these landscaping concerns should be remedied on revised plans prior to the issuance of any permits. Community Development Board- November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 5 of I 1 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: 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 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. 1 See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency. Solid Waste: The existing building is served by black barrels for solid waste collection. The proposal includes the construction of a dumpster enclosure on the west side of the parcel just inside the front buffer wall that will contain a maximum four-yard rolling dumpster for use by the applicant. The exterior of the trash enclosure (material and color) will need to be consistent with the proposed building. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Signage: There exists a freestanding sign in front of the existing building that presently is located within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way. The proposal is to relocate this freestanding sign to the west side of the driveway in front of the proposed four-foot high screening wall. It is unclear whether this existing sign complies with current Code requirements. Should the CDB approve this request, any freestanding sign is recommended to be monument-style with a maximum height of six feet and be designed consistent with the exterior building material and color. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Community Development Board-November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 6 of 11 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-1001.1 and Table 2-1004: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent FAR 0.50 0.279 X ISR 0.75 0.709 X Minimum Lot Area N/A 25,000 sq. ft. X Minimum Lot Width N/A 100 feet X Maximum Height N/A 24.5 feet (top of flat roof) X 28 feet (to top of parapet) Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 18 feet (to pavement and X1 dumpster enclosure) Side: N/A East: 10 feet (to building) X) 5 feet (to sidewalk) 5 feet (to pavement) West: 10 feet (to building) X1 5 feet (to sidewalk) 5 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure) Rear: N/A South: 10.1 feet (to building) X1 Minimum Medical Clinic: 5 per 1,000 sf 24 parking spaces2 X1 Off-Street Parkin 35 required spaces) 1 See analysis in Staff Report z Based on a Parking Demand Study Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 7 of 11 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2- 1004.13 (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X1 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 appropriate distances between buildings. I See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board-November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 8 of 11 COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. Consistent I Inconsistent 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 adiacent properties. I See analysis in Staff Report. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meetings of September 2 and October 7, 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. The 0.573 acre parcel is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,100 feet west of N. Belcher Road and 900 feet east of Graham Drive; 2. The subject property is currently developed with a medical clinic building (occupied by the applicant) located on the northern portion of the site with four parking spaces north of the building (two that are within the right-of-way) and 10 parking spaces to the rear of the building; 3. The proposal is to completely redevelop this site by demolishing the existing building and parking and construct a new two-story, 6,970 square-foot building at the rear of the site for a medical clinic use, which will be occupied by the applicant, with parking located to the front of this new building; 4. The proposal includes reductions to the front (north) setback for pavement and the dumpster enclosure, side (east and west) setbacks for the building, sidewalks, pavement and dumpster enclosure and rear (south) setback for the building; 5. Comparatively, building and parking lot locations on the properties between Drew Street and Belcher Road do not meet current required front, side or rear setback requirements; 6. The site design with its proposed setbacks can be viewed as an emerging trend for this area, as the proposed setbacks are consistent with this developed character of the surrounding nonresidential properties, and where the design of this site and building are similar to another Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 9 of 11 parcel owned by the same applicant that was granted Flexible Development approval by the Community Development Board (CDB) at its meeting of September 21, 2010 (FLD2010- 07002, 2135 NE Coachman Road); 7. Required buffer widths, the foundation landscape width and the square footage amount of interior landscaping included with this proposal meets Code requirements; 8. Negative impacts of the site design, with its parking forward of the building, upon the residential properties across NE Coachman Road have been mitigated through the inclusion of a four-foot high buffer wall along the front of the property with enhanced landscaping; 9. The proposal includes 24 parking spaces, which is less than the 35 required parking spaces, but this provided number is justified by a Parking Demand Study; and 10. There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2-1001.1 and Table 2-1004 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 1004.B of the Community Development Code; and 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. 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program criteria as per Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to permit a medical clinic in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 25,000 square feet, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement and sidewalk), a side (west) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement, dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to building), a building height of 24.5 feet (to top of flat roof) and 24 parking spaces (including no loading space),as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B, with reductions 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 CDC Section 3-1202.G, with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That a four-foot high wall, consistent with the exterior material and color of the building, be constructed along the frontage of the property, extending to the east and west property lines and complying with the sight visibility triangle requirements; 2. That the dumpster enclosure be consistent with the exterior material and color of the building; 3. That, any freestanding sign be monument-style with a maximum height of six feet and be designed consistent with the exterior building material and color; Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 -Page 10 of 11 4. That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the increased shrub height along the east and west property lines as shown on the Landscape Plan be installed and maintained to shield views of parked vehicles, acceptable to the Planning and Development Department; 5. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, landscape plans be revised for the following: a. Accurately indicate on the Plan and/or Proposed Plant Material Table the number of Indian hawthorne shrubs; b. Provision of the required number of accent trees; c. Adequate spacing of shade trees; 6. That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, the tree removal spreadsheet be modified to include the tree inventory numbers and tree ratings; and 7. That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, all requirements of General Engineering and Stormwater Engineering be met. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff. Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager ATTACHMENTS: ? Location Map ? Aerial Map ? Zoning Map ? Existing Surrounding Uses Map ? Photographs of Site and Vicinity S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD) (Pending cases) Up for the next CDB WE Coachman 2147 Clinical Research (O) 2010.Ox - 11.16.10 CDB - R71NE Coachman 2147 Staff Report. doc Community Development Board - November 16, 2010 FLD2010-07003 - Page 1 I of 11 Robert G. Tefft 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 (727) 562-4539 robert.tefft a,mvcleartvater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ¦ Development Review Manager City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida August 2008 to Present Direct Development Review activities for the City. Supervise professional planners, land resource specialists and administrative staff. Conduct performance reviews. Serve as staff to the Community Development Board. ¦ Planner III City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida June 2005 to August 2008 Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports, and making presentations to various City Boards and Committees. ¦ Planner II City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida May 2005 to June 2005 Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports. ¦ Senior Planner City of Delray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida October 2003 to May 2005 Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for land development .applications such as, but not limited to: site plans, conditional uses, rezonings, land use amendments, and text amendments. Organized data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports. Make presentations to various City Boards. Planner City of Delray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida March 2001 to October 2003 Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for land development applications such as, but not limited to: site plans, conditional use and text amendments. Organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports. Provided in-depth training to the Assistant Planner position with respect to essential job functions and continuous guidance. Assistant Planner City of Delray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida October 1999 to March 2001 Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for site plan development applications. Performed reviews of building permit applications. Provided information on land use applications, ordinances, land development regulations, codes, and related planning programs/services to other professionals and the public. EDUCATION Bachelor of Arts, Geography (Urban Studies), University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida GRAND AVE l .1 WEAVER PARK DR % €iage Ln ARLINGTON Lant€m Way ?- r--- PROJECT c - - SITE CP Ih FT 1 .. MARILYN ST o Q of M N ST ?? SHARKEY 0 RI>*a.-+ v 4•.. A 19 A . Q. : ? Y x ; . °rvE(? ° DR N' LdF?EAd Yy tNRIIiNG PLAZA. MCKtNLEY CL a as W HARDING . 'j • ;c?tz ° .?1?,' .. LL) a • a^ .. . ? D aR>=»; e[ C1 . .? `.+ .DR' •?, ,•,' 1:..dRN1AH • a! PLAZA DREW w u ST w ¢ - CR-528 • r-rw^r ta °^? Fr ¢ a ? E C Q? C L ,. ST :. ?LLf . W TW r o O :D Ld rf 0? W 7 Z ? U z a 1: a 2 u L? z L 4 U, L L u Vt HITMAN DR -j F-1 I I Location Map Owner: Clinical Research of West Florida, Inc. Case: FLD2010-07003 Site: 2147 NE Coachman Road Property S ize: 0.573 acre PIN: 12-29-15-59184-000-0041 Atlas Page: 2808 2147 NE Coachman Road FLD2010-07003 Page 1 of 2 View looking south at subject property View looking SW at west side of subject property View looking S at west side of subject property (looking at access to rear parking area) (2143 NE Coachman Rd to right) View looking E at front of subject property (portion of existing parking and sign located within right-of-way) View looking S at access to rear of subject property with parking area and retention pond View looking SE at southernmost portion of rear parking area of subject property y L 'y+4 ? ate, 'tr gKY View looking SW at 2143 NE Coachman Rd (adjacently W of subject property) Detached dwelling across NE Coachman Rd from subject Detached dwelling across NE Coachman Rd from subject property property 2147 NE Coachman Road FLD2010-07003 Page 2 of 2 View looking N from rear of subject property at existing rear parking area, retention pond (to right) and building View looking SW at 2139 NE Coachman Rd (two properties to the W of subject property) O O?Z 2108 Z a (D 4?2 5 L ?Z 2 0 D??Z ?Z?Z ?Z ? VZ Zg? ??Z N N n ?Z?Z m "o OZ g Z 10 V ? Co ?2 J Z Q 622 y C11 (li m n - ? Z qZr ??Z b?rZ 10 0 cn P n 2 ` ti g?? ,f Dn? O :3 g??Z g6?Z ??2 ? 1 O M ? Z rpyZ ?? O VI IV O O < Q ? OZ?Z 0 n?Z L Q T ??Z 05yZ Q gZO ?Z 6?rZ ZgrZ V 2 Q O V Z ?y0 L??Z ?? q?2 6g bZ 94Z 2165 Z y - o N3 O 0 n g : •' ". tiA 14 2980 ?yp W CA) N . , N O ?9 • 14 :zrbl L?Z ' g gg?b 4469. • , ' 217 ••?• -Not to Scale- 1 Res' O ? 2186 V ' -Not aSLNeN- MARILYN ST s ?'V BD d 0 N t A A 21 20 0 5 0 B N? 's? ?mss.? 19 N?? 2 2 TERRACE LAKE ?0 1 t e4 7 s9 B e0i s N'sN end N ? 6 E ?O% ° Rio N ' D 15 N? F ?G 14 es eta e q N'? 1 G G 1?N? Ni F elh $ N? 0 N ' N N'W G 11 12 Place of Worship 0 -:0 ? De ch V.D. IPA ? ?.. K Dw in 6 N 6 N ficq, . . • .. ? x ' ??b • ? 298 ; N?o f I S ... ? a w ^.' acant 91a' L N? V-1 ? ` ` Nw .' ? ? 'Self . .. 8as• .. . :. 0 es N? Self Storage _1i: •'12 ry A 13 CGS 2 ... .. _ , \ 6 \ \O O 5 < \ Y i l U i Q r v on a a 4 Co mercial es 31, °3 N?ao o- N V l e$ er a o DREW ST Existing Surrounding Uses Map Owner: Clinical Research of West Florida, Inc. Case: FLD2010-07003 Site: 2147 NE Coachman Road Property Size: 0.573 acre PIN: 12-29-15-59184-000-0041 Atlas Page: 280B `Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 0 SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION Da 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 N 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 TYPE OR PRINT- A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: AYDIN KESKINER, PRESIDENT MAILING ADDRESS: 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD CLEARWATER FLORIDA PHONE NUMBER: 727 466-0078 FAX NUMBER: 727 461-7 CELL NUMBER EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER(S): CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA, INC 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 FAXNUMBER: (72_7) 72_3-7150 CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: BGRAJALES@HPE- B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) PROJECT NAME: CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA PROJECT VALUATION: $ 1, 2 0 0, 0 0 0 STREET ADDRESS 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD CLEARWATER FLORIDA 3 3 7 6 5 PARCEL NUMBER(S): W29 /15/59184 000 0041 PARCEL SIZE (acres): 0 . 5 74 PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 2 5 , 0 0 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEE ATTACHED PROPOSED USE(S): ME DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: SEE ATT 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.) C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 1 of 8 DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (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. Do 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\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 2 of 8 WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria) X 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 4. 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 the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the followi.ng 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. 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 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 appropriate distances between buildings. SEE ATTACHED C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\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) ? 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. N If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt X At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following; 51 Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; 0 Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; D2 All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; 0 Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; 0 A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City manual. 0 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): I? '6 X Stormwater plan as noted above is included Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall be provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) 25 SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies; M 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; 4Q TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees; X LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; ? PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). A 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; 01 GRADING PLAN, as applicable; L3 PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided) ?A COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 4 of 8 G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) 91 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.pian typieals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring X Level 'Two approval. SITE DATA TABLE fc,r existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: X Land area in square feet and 'acres-, N A Number of EXISTING dwelling units; N/A Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; X Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the X number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, X expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility NZA easement; X Building and structure heights; X Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and X Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. _W REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'/s X 11); EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED 25,000/0.574 _ 25.000/0.,574 4,170 6,970 41 --- - ---- 24 - 8,282 11,655 15.0 ---- 8 24.5 517 0. 0.75 0.709 0.167 0.50 0.279 ? 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) 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; N_ZA Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); X Irrigation notes. REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'%X 11); 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) DI 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 51 REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 8'/z X 11 J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3-1806) IN All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. X 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 '/= X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. N/A C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 6 of 8 K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) ? 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. N 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. 6, (y. 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. 0A. X 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 of pr arty owner or representative STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sworn and subscribed before me this -I- day of '1 11 A.D. 20_ to me and/or by S , who is personally known has as Notary public, ?u?u¦? My commission expire : COMM# DDOTVA49 Notary Assn.. Inc C:\Documents and Settings\d erek.ferguson\Desktop\plannIng dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infll Prot +, r bR ?,ti gym.¦..¦.¦¦¦¦ ?•.¦7.'. ¦ ?¦7? Page 7 of 8 N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names: CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA, INC 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CONSIST OF 8,180 SF OFFICE BUILDING 28 PARKING SPACES, SINGLE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, STORMWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM, POTABLE WATER LINES, SANITARY SEWER 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; 7. That (1/we), the un rsig d au y, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. f Prop Ovtwner Property Owner If/ roperty Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by theaws of the State o l:Florida, on this day of f 11 IV a6l personally appeared r; who having been first duly sworn OE?kvre- 44 c t?v,3, r ose and says that he/she fully understands the contents of he affidavit that he/she sig eh d. ?.... 05111111V f REN+ANNFRITZN„M...... 'Atilltif", Comm# DD0705449 sti Expires 9/21/2011 Avun - ' 'ate' "?qc,',F Florida Notary Assn., Inc i .............................................. Notary Publi Sjgna ure Notar l/St Se ?? '7 M C i i y a amp c y omm ss on Expires: / C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FI-D) 2008 07-11.doc Page 8 of 8 i 'I Yy. ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 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. The structures along this section of NE Coachman Road are, at best, a varied amalgam one and two story structures. They are typically single family structures converted to commercial uses or newer commercial buildings in a wide cacophony of styles; from 70's style single pitched roof buildings, to gambrel roofed churches, to non-descript shoebox shaped gas stations. The building locations on the site also vary; some are pulled close to the road and face NE Coachman Road while others are turned perpendicular to the road. Parking along this stretch also tends to be haphazard; some with cars parking perpendicularly on Coachman Road, several with entire paved front yards, and others with the entire side yard devoted to parking. Along this section of NE Coachman Road the properties along the southern side of the street are zoned commercial and office while the properties to the north are zoned low to medium residential. Also directly behind, adjacent the applicant property is a commercial storage facility. The above three mentioned site plan schemes were developed prior to the inception of many of the current fire, service vehicle access and stormwater regulations. The proposed development takes one of the adjacent planning schemes, with the building located in the rear of the property with parking placed toward the front. The proposed building is a 6,970 sf, y.wo-story simple structure of shiAzir scale, height and bulk, to the neighboring commercial properties on the street. Additionally this planning scheme allows us to conform to current fire safety codes and provides an opportunity to create a landscape screen and enhanced planting to buffer the residential properties across the street. While this proposal requests variances to the minimum setback requirements, we see this site design, with its proposed setbacks, as an emerging trend for this area, in that the the proposed setbacks are consistent with the developed character of the surrounding nonresidential properties. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The following components will ensure that the proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development of adjacent land and buildings by: 1. Being consistent with existing development patterns of the commercial development. 2. siting the building and parking layout to conform with current fire codes and service vehicle access requirements 3. By visually buffering the residential component to the north in order to maintain and preserve the residential character through the use of enhanced landscaping and hardscaping, providing a four foot high parking screen wall and creative architecture to create an attractive streetscape, building facade and overall development that will set a high standard of quality. Page 11 of 7 Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704 {Tampa} 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida, 33756 I {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jordan@architecturebp.corn {Pensacola} 113 W. Strong Street Pensacola, Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439.0235 istvan@architecturebp.com i ARCHITECTURE ( INTERIORS ( PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 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 pulled off Coachman Road so that motorists will no longer need to back out into the right of way, and the proposed 90 degree onsite parking improves the usability and safety of the guests and employees of the proposed development as well as improving the safety of the motorists along NE Coachman Road. Additionally a sidewalk within the ROW will improve pedestrian safety. Also by placing the buildings in the rear we are conforming to the maximum pull in distance for a fire truck we are bringing the property up to current fire safety code. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. By their nature corporate offices and are moderate volume uses. To minimize traffic congestion this development limits the ingress and egress to one driveway; versus the current angled parking directly off the right-of way. This scheme allows for efficient and controlled stacking of vehicles entering and exiting the site. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. We are maintaining the consistency with'the-community character in several ways. First; by. redeveloping the proposed project , on an existing individual commercially zoned property as opposed to a property assemblage; next by placing the building in the rear of the property, similar to other non-residential properties in the district. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed development will have normal business hours of operation and will not adversely affect the other commercial projects in the area. Fortunately, office uses are complimentary to residential since they are occupied at different times of the day. During normal business hours when the office is open the residences will be vacant and on weekends and in the evenings when the residents are at home the office will be closed. The proposed landscaping and hardscaping will provide visual and acoustic screening to the residents across the street and the side yard landscaping buffers will provide acoustic and visual screening to the adjacent properties. The smallest required dumpster is proposed and will be screened in accordance with current design guidelines to reduce the visual effects. Also, the buildings and dumpster will be used as normal office and medical clinics and will not generate adverse olfactory effects Page 12 of 7 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 ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS ( PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 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. This proposal seeks to reduce the required structure setbacks to allow for the development of a project that is of adequate size and usable area to accommodate the applicant's business needs, is economically feasible, and will offset the projects redevelopment costs; specifically, the building construction costs, and its requisite parking, sidewalks, stormwater, and landscaping requirements. In order to conform to current codes and regulations, and create an economically feasible project we are requesting reductions to the front, side, and rear structure setbacks. To compensate for the reduced setbacks we are proposing enhanced landscaping and a parking screening wall. 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 proposal seeks to meet the intent purposes of CDC 1-103 and CDC 2-1001. The basic thrust of the CDC 1-103 is to promote. orderly -redevelopment, `enhance and protect the values of this property and neighboring properties, and to strengthen the City's tax and employment, base. CDC 2-1001 calls for the provision of convenient access to professional services and high quality jobs while maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods, the scenic quality, and maintaining the safe and efficient movement of people throughout Clearwater. This development and its sister project, 2135, by being developed together and by their designs will set an example for feasible and economically viable redevelopment in this district. By redevelopment of this site, and 2135, a current quality Clearwater employer will be able to continue to grow their business in the same location and continue to add to Clearwater's economic and employment base. The successful development of this project demonstrates the feasibility and practicality of maintaining and growing a business at this location. With the quality and the high level of services provided by the project's owner other business will be drawn to this area, and through their continued success, will be encouraged to invest in this area. Because of the quality of this project the general aesthetics of the streetscape will be enhanced and set a standard for future development, as well as providing an attractive foreground to the residences on the residentially zoned side of the road. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The project seeks to set a positive example for redevelopment of this area through its sensitivity to the adjacent commercial and residential properties. Despite the fact that the lots in this area are small and difficult to develop the strategic use of screening walls, enhanced landscape, attractive architecture, safe traffic flow, safe parking, accessible design and stormwater Page 13 of 7 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 istvanr_Warchrecturebp.com ARCHITECTURE I INTERIORS I PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 management will allow this area to develop in a positive direction and provide a project that is consistent with existing patterns of the neighborhood. 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 with the Comp Plan and this district and will be in keeping with those uses permitted on adjacent properties. Additionally, by providing a model for redevelopment within the commercially zoned areas we will reduce the pressure for redevelopment in the residentially zoned district. 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. The proposed office uses are permitted under the future land use category and are the same as the current uses of the adjacent buildings. Through redevelopment this project will maintain the professional business character of the commercial zoning district. The proposed professional office use is considered a suitable use adjacent to residential areas because of their complementary hours of operation and traffic cycles. a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a flexible standard or flexible development use. b. The proposed office and medical clinic uses are permitted as a flexible standard or flexible development use in the current "O" office zoning as well as the future "R/OG" zoning category. c. 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. d. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor. This development project, and its sister project, are necessary for the continued success of the applicant's business. The approval of this development proposal will permit the applicant to carry on with their business growth plans and the sustained success of this company will preserve existing, high quality jobs and bring additional high quality professional jobs to Clearwater. As stated in CDC Section 1- 103: a development should ... enhance and protect the values of this property and neighboring properties, and to strengthen the City's tax and employment base. e. N/A Page 14 of 7 Behar + Peteranecz: Inc. AA26001704 {Tampa} 103 Rogers Street. Clearwater, Florida, 33756 {Tel} 727.488.9490 {Fax} 727.446.3194 jorde+n@architecturebp.com {Pensacola} 113 VV. Strong Street Pensacola; Florida 32501 1 {Tel} 850.377.1870 {Fax} 850.439,0235 istvanra,architecturebp com ARCHITECTURE ( INTERIORS ( PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 f. N/A g. 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. 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 planning principles and can serve as a guide for meeting current Code requirements while preserving resources and allowing for economically viable redevelopment. The design for this development, by example, will demonstrate that new office and clinic development are achievable in this neighborhood even with all the site constraints. Those future applicants can develop a business in this redevelopment area and do not have to go elsewhere to grow or start their businesses. Additionally, by providing a viable model for development in the non:residential diste ict, the pressure for redevelopment of properties in the residential areas maybe lessened. b. The proposed development complies with the design guidelines adopted by the City. While there are no design guidelines for this area, as mentioned previously, this development complies with many nationwide planning and building design and zoning requirements. To meet the required health and safety access requirements, off-street parking requirements, and green preservation principles of the City, given the small sizes of the properties in this area, we are requesting reductions to the minimum standard setbacks. c. The design, scale, and intensity of the proposed development support the established or emerging character of an area. This is a redevelopment area with a "cacophony" of building types, styles, parking layouts, and setbacks. We believe that our proposal will support and create a positive emerging character for the area. • Good buffering from the road and the residential across Coachman Road, • Preservation of mature trees and/or replanting with long-lived trees, • Reduce the visual clutter of the street, • Create safer parking and egress and ingress, • Show that it is possible to develop and build an up-to-date business on the properties in this neighborhood. 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: Page 15 of 7 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 ( INTERIORS PLANNING Re: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 The proposed building designs propose a varied building mass, both horizontally and vertically. • Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings„ etc,; BPA: Within the more modern design proposed this design incorporates distinctive material changes, cantilevered awnings and entry covers, and stucco colors. • Variety in materials, colors, and textures; This design proposes two stucco colors and glass curtain wall facades. Please see attached Color Exhibit. The two primary stucco colors are White and Soft Gray. • 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 step backs and vertical building offsets. These step' backs also animate the structure's fagade, adding visual interest to the project. • Distinctive roof forms: While the building's primary roof is pitched, for drainage efficiency, the predominant impression is that of a stepped, horizontally and vertically articulated flat topped building. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. As stated above, the buffers proposed are code compliant and where applicable have enhanced landscaping and all building setbacks are within the Florida Building Code requirements. Please see Civil landscape plans for enhanced landscaping. Page 16 of 7 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: FLD2010-07003, 2147 NE Coachman Road Written Submittal Requirements: 15 Oct 2010 BUILDING COLOR SELECTIONS: Stucco 1 Medium Gray Stucco 2 White Awnings Page 17 of 7 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 CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 HPE PROJECT: 10-009-CRW DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Flexible development approval for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project for medical clinic use as per the standards contained within Section 2-1004 of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code with the following reductions: • The front setback to pavement along the northwest property boundary (NE Coachman Road) from 35 feet to 18.5 feet. • The side setback to pavement along the northeast property boundary from 20 feet to 5.0 feet. • The side setback to pavement and dumpster enclosure along the southwest property boundary from 20 feet to 5.0 feet. • The rear setback to building along the southeast property boundary from 20 feet to 10.1 feet. • The minimum off-street parking required from 35 spaces to 24 spaces. INTRODUCTION: The property is located in Section 12, Township 29 South, Range 15 East within the incorporated area of the City of Clearwater. The project site is part of Mosell Acres Subdivision and is comprised of a single parcel identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser with number: 12/29/15/59184/000/0041. The total area of the parcel is approximately 0.574 acres (25,000 sf) and is bounded by NE Coachman Road (S.R. 590) to the Northwest, Twin Oaks Assisted Living Facility to the Southwest, Budget Self Storage to the Southeast and Brandes Design-Built to the Northeast. The proposed Clinical Research of West Florida facility will include a 2-story medical clinic building with total gross floor area of 6,970 sf, 24 surface parking spaces, stormwater collection system and attractive drought tolerant landscape. The setbacks, parking, drainage, utilities and landscaping are designed to support the proposed redevelopment. Clinical Research of West Florida is a research clinic that specializes in clinical studies and drug trials for market leader drug companies. The clinic works with board certified physicians to conduct examinations and test on patients participating in drug trials. The clinic does not provide full medical services to walk- in patients or overnight stay. The first floor of the facility will be used for clinical studies and the second floor will be used as corporate office where staff and the pharmacy company monitors work on research procedures and evaluations. 1 Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-5624865 a 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: AYDIN KESKINER, PRESIDENT MAILING ADDRESS: 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER_, _ FLORIDA 33' PHONE NUMBER: 0727) 466-0078 FAXNUMBER: (727) 461-7793 CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER(S): CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA, INC List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: BRAULIO GRAJALES / HIGH POINT ENGINEERING MAILING ADDRESS: 630 CHESTNUT STREET, CLEARWATERr FLORIDA 33756 PHONE NUMBER: (727) 723-3771 FAXNUMBER: (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 SettingsWerek.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 PINELI 4S S n to and subscribed before me this ? day of V_Lk A.D. 20 -C-to me and/or by -?-S , who is personally known has produced as identi cation. ,Nota publ , My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA Lynn A. Matthews Commission #DD717600 •,,, Expires: OCT.13, 2011 BONDED THRU AT1,&N-r1C BONDLNG CO., iNC C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningfonns 07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc Page 2 of 2 COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 HPE PROJECT: 10-009-CRW DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST To allow the following landscape reduction: - The minimum required area and width for the interior landscape islands of less than 150 square feet of area and less than eight feet of width. INTRODUCTION: The property is located in Section 12, Township 29 South, Range 15 East within the incorporated area of the City of Clearwater. The project site is part of Mosell Acres Subdivision and is comprised of a single parcel identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser with number: 12/29/15/59184/000/0041. The total area of the parcel is approximately 0.574 acres (25,000 sf) and is bounded by NE Coachman Road (S.R. 590) to the Northwest, Twin Oaks Assisted Living Facility to the Southwest, Budget Self Storage to the Southeast and Brandes Design-Built to the Northeast. The proposed Clinical Research of West Florida facility will include a 2-story medical clinic building with total gross floor area of 6,970 sf, 24 surface parking spaces, stormwater collection system and attractive drought tolerant landscape. The setbacks, parking, drainage, utilities and landscaping are designed to support the proposed redevelopment. Clinical Research of West Florida is a research clinic that specializes in clinical studies and drug trials for market leader drug companies. The clinic works with board certified physicians to conduct examinations and test on patients participating in drug trials. The clinic does not provide full medical services to walk- in patients or overnight stay. The first floor of the facility will be used for clinical studies and the second floor will be used as corporate office where staff and the pharmacy company monitors work on research procedures and evaluations. 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 1 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 landscape buffers that mixes evergreen and flowering shade trees, existing mature shade trees adjacent to the property boundary and evergreen shrubs. • A balanced design for the interior landscape islands that mixes shade trees, accent flowering trees, palms, evergreen shrubs, and small plants / ground cover. • A balanced design for the building foundation landscape that mixes three palm species, accent trees, flowering shrubs, grass, and small plants / ground cover. • A balanced selection of landscaping materials that includes 50% drought tolerant trees of which 65% are Florida native. • The project will use Florida Grade #1 plant materials in the proposed landscape treatment including: 1 Live Oak, 7'Little Gem' Southern Magnolia, 7 Dahoon Holly, 7 Drake Elm, 4 Crape Myrtle, 4 'Weeping' Yaupon Holly, 3 Royal Palms, 3 Queen Palms, 3 Washingtonian Palms, 6 Sabal Palms, 210 Sandanqua Viburnum, 28 Yellow Anise, 23 Firebush, 20 Sand Cord Grass, 115 Indian Hawthorne, 18 Swamp Lilly, 31 Bird of Paradise, 35 Dwarf Walter's Viburnum, 630 Variegated Flax Lilly and Bahia sod. • The project will implement a tree preservation plan that includes provisions to protect four (4) mature trees adjacent to the site (i.e. 18" Live Oak, 18" Cherry Laurel, 24" Slash Pine and 24" Twin Live Oak) impacted by the proposed building and parking lot. 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 proposed planting materials described above and shown in the landscape plan will enhance the look of the proposed building as well as the look of adjacent properties. Further, the proposed 48" buffer wall in the front of the property will screen the parking lot so the future sight of the residences across NE Coachman Road will not be 2 negatively affected. 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 number, size, quality of the proposed plant 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 NE Coachman Road. PARKING DEMAND STUDY For CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 Prepared for: CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA, INC 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33.765: Prepared by: HIGH POINT ENGINEERING, INC 630 Chestnut Street Clearwater, Florida 33756 (HPE Job No. 70-009-CRW) Date: July 26, 2010 Revision: September 9, 2010 Revision: October 15, 2010 PARKING DEMAND STUDY OBJECTIVE The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of our parking demand study for Clinical Research of West Florida, a research clinic located at 2147 NE Coachman Road in Clearwater. The parking demand study was performed to estimate if 24 parking spaces could accommodate the future parking demand of the redeveloped facility. The proposed medical clinic will have one 2-way driveway connection to NE Coachman Road (S.R. 590). BACKGROUND The property is located in Section 12, Township 29 South, Range 15 East within the incorporated area of the City of Clearwater. The project site is part of Mosell Acres Subdivision and is comprised of a single parcel identified by Pinellas County Property Appraiser with number: 12/29/15/59184/000/0041. The total area of the parcel is approximately 0.574 acres (25,000 sf) and is bounded by NE Coachman Road (S.R. 590) to the Northwest, Twin Oaks Assisted Living Facility to the Southwest, Budget Self Storage to the Southeast and Brandes Design-Built to the Northeast. The existing Clinical Research of West Florida facility includes one 1-story building with total gross floor area of 4,170 sf, 15 surface parking spaces, and two dry detention/retention ponds. The proposed Clinical Research of West Florida facility will include a 2-story medical clinic building with total gross floor area of 6,970 sf, 24 surface parking spaces, stormwater collection system and attractive drought tolerant landscape. The setbacks, parking, drainage, utilities and landscaping are designed to support the proposed redevelopment. Clinical Research of West Florida is a research clinic that specializes in clinical studies and drug trials for market leader drug companies. The clinic works with board certified physicians to conduct examinations and test on patients participating in drug trials. The clinic does not provide medical services to walk-in patients or overnight stay. The first floor of the proposed building will be used for clinical studies and the second floor will be used as corporate office where staff and the pharmacy company monitors work on research procedures and evaluations. The City of Clearwater Community Development Code (Code) requires a minimum of 5.0 off- street parking spaces per 1,000 sf Gross Floor Area (GFA) of medical clinic. The Code requirement for the proposed redevelopment is 35 parking spaces. The proposed site plan for the redevelopment shows a total of 24 parking spaces on-site, representing a deficit from the Code requirements of 11 parking spaces. See Attached. • Site Location (Exhibit A) • Proposed Site Layout and Parking Plan(Exhibit B) DATA COLLECTION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS Parking observations were undertaken at the existing facility which includes a parking lot comprised of 14 regular parking spaces and one handicap parking space. The observations Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 took place on Monday July 19, 2010, and Tuesday July 20, 2010, from 8 a.m. to 5 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 80°F and 90°F. Clinical Research of West Florida staff currently includes 13 employees between part time and full time shifts. The average number of patients visiting the existing facility range between 8 and 12 per day. Each appointment is scheduled in intervals from 30 to 60 minutes and each visit ranges between 1 to 4 hours. The observations taken on Monday, July 19, 2010, show the peak parking demand occurred between 8:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. At the time of observation, 13 of the 15 parking spaces were occupied, leaving 2 spaces available. The Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA computed was 3.12 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. The data also indicates that between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. the parking lot had a parking demand ratio of 2.88 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. On Tuesday, July 20, 2010, the peak parking demand was observed between 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. and between 1:00 pm and 4:00 pm. At the time of observation, 13 of the 15 parking spaces were occupied, leaving 2 spaces available during the periods of highest usage. The Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA computed was 3.12 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. Further, the data indicates that between 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 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 Monday, July .19y 2010; and Tuesday, July 20, 2010 (Exhibit C) Peak,Periad Parking Demand Ratio io Gross Floor Area. Graphs for ..Monday, duly 19, 2011:, and Tuesday, July 20, 2010 (Exhibit Di . PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS In this analysis, the parking demand measured at the parking lot of the existing facility is used to estimate the future parking demand of the clinical research facility after redeveloped. Exhibit D illustrates the Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA at the existing parking lot. During the two days of observation, the Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA (i.e, 3.12 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA) was significantly less than the minimum off-street parking (i.e, 5.0 per 1,000 sf GFA) required by the Code. Table 1 shows a statistical analysis of the parking demand observations at the existing facility. Based on the location and similarities between the existing facility (i.e, 4,170 sf GFA) and proposed facility (i.e, 6,970 sf GFA), the peak parking demand obtained during the two days of observation can be extrapolated and used for the proposed facility. Thus, the highest expected Peak Parking Demand Ratio to GFA for Clinical Research of West Florida after redeveloped is 3.12 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA. The projected 3.12 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA Peak Parking Demand Ratio applied to the proposed facility calls for: 3.12 x 6,970 sf GFA / 1,000 sf = 22 spaces Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater. Florida 33765 Therefore, the extrapolated parking demand is less than the future parking supply so the probability that the expected parking demand for the proposed facility would be accommodated by the 24 parking spaces shown on the proposed site plan is acceptable. Table 1 Peak Period Parking Demand Projection (1,000 sf GFA) Period Monday Tuesday 8:00 am-9:00 am 3.12 3.12 9:00 am-10:00 am 3.12 3.12 10:00 am-11:00 am 3.12 3.12 11:00 am-12:00 m 3.12 3.12 12:00 m - 1:00 m 3.12 2.88 1:00 m - 2:00 m 2.88 3.12 2:00 m - 3:00 m 2.88 3.12 3:00 m - 4:00 m 2.88 3.12 4:00 m - 5:00 m 2.88 2.88 Peak 3.12 3.12 Mean 3.01 3.12 Range 2.88-3.12 2.88-3.12 Notes: Ratios rounded to two decimal. Source: High Point Engineering, July 2010. 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 clinical research facility :as well asap compare with the results from the observations taken at the existing facility. ITE Parking. Generation, 3rd Edition describes a medical-dental office building as a facility thafr 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 Generation, 3rd Edition presents Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sf GFA. On a: Weekday. 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. Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 However, the peak parking demand ratio measured falls within the range of peak parking demand ratios of the studies publicized in the ITE Parking Generation, 3`d Edition. Additionally, the peak parking demand periods observed on Tuesday match 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 clinical research facility may require between: 2.34 x 6,970 sf /1,000 sf = 17 spaces and 5.35 x 6,970 sf /1,000 sf = 38 spaces It is important to note that the author of ITE Parking Generation, 3rd 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. According to Aydin Keskiner, President and CEO of Clinical Research of West Florida, the clinic's future staff will include 14 employees consisting of medical directors, study coordinators, regulatory manager, laboratory manager and office support, 2 pharmaceutical company monitors and 8 patients at the busiest hour. Therefore, based on the ITE Parking Generation, 3`d Edition peak period parking demand range and the information provided by Mr. Keskiner of Clinical Research of West Florida, the probability that the future parking demand for the proposed clinical research facility would be accommodated by the 24 parking spaces shown on the proposed site plan is acceptable. See Attached: • Institute of Transportation Engineers (IT) Parking Generation, 3rd Edition Data Summary for Land Use: 720 Medical-Dental + ^ff6 Building (Exhibit E) CONCLUSION As demonstrated in the foregoing analysis, the proposed 24 parking spaces (i.e. 3.44 spaces per 1,000 sf GFA) is projected to adequately meet the future parking demand of Clinical Research of West Florida during all periods. 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 October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 EXHIBITS Exhibit A Site Location Exhibit B Proposed Clinical Research Facility Parking Layout Exhibit C Peak Period Parking Demand Summary Tables for Monday, July 19, 2010, and Tuesday, July 20, 2010 Observations Exhibit D Peak Period Parking Demand Ratio to Gross Floor Area Graphs for Monday, July 19, 2010, and Tuesday, July 20, 2010 Observations Exhibit E Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 3rd Edition Data Summary for Land Use: 720 Medical-Dental Office Building Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 EXHIBIT A Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 a i IEI -- 3 E r`, IR I_- 5fTE _ T]ON U =1 F? F- H E FF I- 1 Ell 1 *w 3 f ,,ti?1 t Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 EXHIBIT B Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater. Florida 33765 / / / / / / / Y / \ c9a°ti \ i c , , / D 0 o cn U) / r \ ° m / o \ / m mCBPOIIRIENGINEERING coxrexr: BRaecT w: ,oaovc SITE LAYOUT & PARKING PLAN iswE pnrE: 7rovlo vBOJECT: DESIGEpBV: PB a4a a? CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA DRAW Bwcn>:Inn s+? rm.ln7)7-771 .,.raaaa 370 F..I7z7)-7,m 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD cH Cx?per: aG L=LFA`NNING-CIVIL ENGINEERING- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 PBBOVEp Br: ec on. REVISIONS EXHIBIT C Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 15, PARKING SUPPLY = 3.59 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. Observations Taken on Monday, July 19, 2010 Time Period Peak Period Parking Spaces Used Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking Lot Occupancy (/a) Peak Period Parking Demand (1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.) 8:00 am-9:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 9:00 am-10:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 10:00 am-11:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 11:00 am-12:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 12:00 m-1:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 1:00 m-2:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 2:00 m-3:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 3:00 m-4:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 4:00 m-5:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 TOTAL PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE = 15, PARKING SUPPLY = 3.59 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. Observations Taken on Thusday, July 20, 2010 Time Period Peak Period Parking Spaces Used Unused Parking Spaces Peak Period Parking Lot Occupancy ( /o) Peak Period Parking Demand (1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.) 8:00 am-9:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 9:00 am-10:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 10:00 am-11:00 am 13 2 87% 3.12 11:00 am-12:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 12:00 m-1:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 1:00 m-2:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 2:00 m-3:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 3:00 m-4:00 m 13 2 87% 3.12 4:00 m-5:00 m 12 3 80% 2.88 EXHIBIT E Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater. Florida 33765 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 500 400 as > 300 a 200 L o- 100 n IL 0 0 20 40 60 80 x = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 100 120 • Actual Data Points Institute of Transportation Engineers Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate 178 Parking Generation, 3rd Edition EXHIBIT D Parking Demand Study October 15, 2010 Clinical Research of West Florida 2147 NE Coachman Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 PARKING DEMAND STUDY FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA AT 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 DATA TAKEN: MONDAY, JULY 19, 2010 5.0 Q 4.0 d N O O O 0 3.0 Z Q w 0 0 Z R 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 FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA AT 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 DATA TAKEN: TUESDAY, JULY 20, 2010 5.0 a 4.0 a N O O O 0 3.0 Z Q w 0 0 Z R 2.0 a 0 O w w a Y Q ` 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 \ r? I/ / F s ?c o? F 11 \ 11 11 c? u D U) Z / r / m / R= f0WfI04GINEEWNG cow,on. rnaBC.w ,BOOVCRN SITE LAYOUT & PARKING PLAN B5UB0ATE 1NL,B 1 MWECf: DEBIGNm Br: m 1 CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA m ,o-,s,B crtr6Tee I111i;n111 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD -Br: BG ? m ae,B cmacrF,wwnrm Ckarwarer. Fbltle 33]56 Fax p27) 79-7,50 LAND PLANNING- CIVIL ENGINEERING- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING C LEARWATER. FLORIDA 33765 ^ 'FO er.m REVisia+s ,X \ II n \ II /II J m mlrp Nmarw ml= r F LANDSCAPE PLAN H P ?? GEGGNEGBY P9 rnuww ev: w CLINICAL RESEARCH OF WEST FLORIDA eG iois?o cm ar aEwwr,iEn ?w sreet e? nza n3am F ce wee 2147 NE COACHMAN ROAD aECKEUev: ec ec aaia cina aEww?rER a, trnlz:3.>>w ,, Fa?ea 33 LAND PLANNINZ- CIVIL ENGINEERING- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33765 ?acROVm ev: ec REVISIONS 1 ? I sr•4• / / / I I I Up lah Manager \ I 11 171171 \ III IIII liilJiil I I I r_ r d I 1 v } - Sp rometry lah Storage ? I ! J o f I I l i ? r--- ?eo Ceor n tars / / 1 1 Ra<ien?t lounge ? I / ? I I I $ I s Eci PwR ?? ? _ _ _ \ I I Prtoxcz mom. _ ElcNfor \ I _ _ _ ? I dam as I _ - - 4) o UU Work 0.oorn Covcrd Enhy iF= C 0 N orsy nNm ..... I Ev N { `o ` U ? l O w § i fl' z -- E. O v d N U 00 Eneryand I Arco • ? I i ? - ? ? Drop-o w?rtmg ? ._ / r _ / I I I i ` / \ \ ?Bp. y v` I i I 1 &am ? iI J I i - - ? \ / ? r J\ JJJ ? G de 0 n msol.10 PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS LEVEL ONE I I Level One floor Plan I 02 July 200 I \ / I I / / Solo. 3/16•.1•-0' crEn. PRflNNNARY PLAN / 1 I I 1 I I PaFuge I I F ` EEEI - Financial Storage I I O((v oa \ I Nth I Mah \ OHia2 RcqulatoryAiea ? I I/ - - _ \ Wark /Making / / I \ t / / I r?+aII COOIvenax iii of l ,.• I 1 I R p \ I moaw*m? Elnamr \ / raga Con(er<nm I / \ L ? y v Gaopy valor, , - - ' 1 ? N U C I 'E v LL. w m o? O w 6ahm? I a z Msh N Li ?•' O od o. - - - Drop-of D wtan?a / I e " ° \ \ \ / t \ dt?• \ \ KES01-10 PRELIMINARY - --------?---- ---------------- ---- ----- --- FLOOR PLANS ? / ? LEVEL TWO I 1 I I I I / I 02 July 2010 / I L evel Two Floor Pldo 1 A 2 _ . PRR-RY P- H.p?wHY?$ ,.. .wr...°.is..IF,+sw .i.; ...lv 1 -_ - +•wmu Fiain=R TMd Tup afw"pdk Q .. - iep afwropek? TeVoFwHpd® 1- -4 a ? • e ' E + ? Y Eta - ;A r S Rig ht Elevation (NW) en 13 teFt Elevation (SE) SHk: Y'd'•T?" Snk: lre'•1'-0' °' ? Top ofgropAC High ;eel - ' -a.+..vu?+«wp. ? eu1 : [t' l T?.f wHM k Myh .wF ( ? W . . a. - .yam r a 4 v • _ T o ? a e ; + e w i.,.Nf I oa.?o mom. PRELIMINARY z Rear Elevation (NE) 1 Fromm Elevation (SW) ELEVATION a?.r-r leak: tre••r-n eai 02 July 2010 A.1-3 . - . PPpla,WhRY PLiM . Street Elevation iookioq SE _.. 4.r1-. vu'•r-n- "I.. ?I I? µ MtWiLPN.FCL ? ROIMOw PRGJECI Irt,E? , ?? I to c 1 N o V ? o U LL (D a U ? .^!.« cP?n v.+•i?.crrr, g.ar, pa.. l.r-....sr. LeM hk?« .?. v. Ohrie. n.e F?.ry. t"?' '+. rr ' KES01-10 PRELIMINARY I SITE SECTIONS site Section lookfnq NE ImUR o+rc: 02 July 2010 . .... saL•. Uln'9'-e' A.1-4 PR W.1&wR'/P.AA