The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2014-04012� . � C �a.�� U MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT July 15, 2014 H.1 FLD2014-04012 REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit 12,800 square feet of inedical clinic use within an existing 20,866 square foot building in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 41,988 square feet, a lot width of 150 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard, front (south) setbacks of 15.2 feet (to pavement) and 68.1 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 2.6 feet (to pavement) and 50.6 feet (to building), side (west) setbacks of zero feet (to pavement) and 39 feet (to building), rear (north) setbacks of 1.2 feet (to pavement) and 66.9 feet (to building), a building height of 42.4 feet (to top of flat roo fl, and 88 off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infll Redevelopment Project pursuant to Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.E; and a reduction to a portion of the width of the side (east) perimeter landscape buffer from iive feet to 2.6 feet, a reduction to a portion of the width of the side (west) perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the width of the rear (north) perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the required eight foot dimension from back of curb to back of curb for an interior landscape island from eight to 4.06 feet, a reduction in the amount of required trees from 45 to 14 and an increase in the number of parking spaces allowed in a row from 10 to 13 spaces as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G. GENERAL DATA: Agent .... ... .......... .. ........ J. Paul Raymond - Macfarlane, Ferguson & McMullen Owner ..... ......................... 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, LLC Location .......................... 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard; The properiy is located on the north side of Gulf to Bay Boulevard approximately 400 feet west of US Highway 19. Property Size .................... 0.964 acres Future Land Use Plan...... Commercial General (CG) Zonin . Commercial C District g ........................ . Adjacent Zoning North: South East: W2Sf: Institutional (I) District Commercial (C) District Commercial (C) District Commercial (C) District Existing Land Use........... Medical Clinic Proposed Land Use......... Medical Clinic - ��. - --. �L �`' � 1�•�.l ... � . � — �„ �,�_, . - ., :�. ' ' �' ' , 4.....e.i� �..i�'; ��_af�� t � , f., 1 1�f�'�. . i � {� ,y . ,. �. ,� � ��a, �� # � Y- i �.� CI i�� •� <,�'�� =f � � "' , -� �%} '' '��;* � � . �r y r ,;� �;4• ' --- �� ; -. ' . +� �. SA�+ i`` • � � __ - - .. . - ; �- -y,. � �� Fey/� � �/� ' � .. � �.. a3 r� * �.~. .��'' ..� i'.�1"- ��-,� , � �� ""t f ; .' ; 4 ,� . � , -; �� n�:��.��'� ! � - T� �F d �1- � ,� +1 �'�+l.-. � � i� �' �'Srw, � t �� r i 1� t .! : _� d �:. � �t ^ . ' a-�t ��. Y ; J- a • �� y�"` �5 P__ 3� � so � '- ,u,=„ . . � ` . 1 i� � � .. � s; � 3� l �� . �� :, �•�= �, :� := �� . :� . . AERIAL MAP ' L+��.(�l �1(�l.ei Level II Flexible Development Application Review u. . rA^�1�?�e,',r , < .. . . ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.964 acre site is located on the north side of Gulf to Bay Boulevard approximately 400 feet west of US Highway 19 North with 150 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. There is vehicular access onto the site from Gulf to Bay Boulevard as well as from the adjacent property to the west. The access from the property to the west is allowed via a recorded ingress and egress easement with records book number 6226, page 1321. The parcel contains a 20,866 square foot three-story building that has historically been used as offices. In addition to the ingress/ egress easement, there is a recorded parking easement between the subject property and the property adjacent to the north currently occupied by a Greek Orthodox Church. The parking easement, with records book 6354, page 260, provides 30 parking spaces for the subject property to be used daily until six p.m. The parking easement does not specify what time the 30 parking spaces are available each day, but the applicant expects the operating hours to be similar to the existing with no change in when the parking spaces will be occupied. There is existing solid waste dumpster and screening located in the northwest corner of the property. The subject property is within the Commercial (C) District; the intent and purpose of which is to provide the citizens of the City of Clearwater with convenient access to goods and services throughout the city without adversely impacting the integrity of residential neighborhoods, diminishing the scenic quality of the city or negatively impacting the safe and efficient movement of people and things within the City of Clearwater. The medical clinic use is allowed in the C District but the existing structures (pavement) as well as building are non-conforming with regard to setbacks and height. The landscaping on-site is non-conforming with regard to widths and amount of landscape material within perimeter buffers. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ! ; �i� � ! �o , � �; Q � PRQJEGT I ,� � � SITE V jo i U O �I �o � �� I '_ � � _ _ GULF-TO-BAY BLVD ___, I� � ° i �-• -: � r � a , \, � ? + m' ; � � LOCATION MAP ( MDR 409 1 � N N ■ N�� ' —��i��Ml. GULFTO-BAYBLVD A N � ^ N N � t�y N N Y � I ,� r � N.T. J; �� i: _ 21028 20866 N.T. 20788�� 208E 20780 20774ATM I w ' � � W N ZONING MAP C7 �s Place of Worship � _ Restaurant I`�=� J � 1 � O 311 A:. Overnight IV.T. sa „. C !� 13i � a� ou�F raeare�w � � � � � � Restaurant � � � � � J ,;� Retail Sales and Servtces EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 1 ? C�e[�1 1'�aLel Level II Flexihle QevelA ment plication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P AP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION o. . .. �«r�r,,<. .._. The immediate vicinity is characterized by a variety of uses including the aforementioned place of worship to the north, restaurant and retail sales and services to the south, and overnight accommodations to the east and restaurant to the west. The surrounding properties are within the C and Institutional (I) Districts. Development Proposal: The proposal is to establish 12,800 square feet of inedical clinic (eye doctor) use in the existing three-story building with limited site development and no changes to the building. The primary changes will be removal of asphalt for landscaping, providing Code compliant drive aisle widths and relocation of handicapped off-street parking spaces. The applicant has requested flexibility with regaxd to the required side and rear setbacks and building height. Pursuant to CDC Section 2-703, the required the side setback is 10 feet and required rear setback is 20 feet and the maximum building height is 25 feet. As the existing side (east) setback is 2.6 feet, side (west) setback is zero feet and the existing building is 42.4 feet in height (to top of flat roo� the development proposal is being reviewed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project due to the flexibility requests. Due to existing site conditions and the lack of area available for landscaping, the applicant is requesting flexibility to the width of the north, east and west perimeter landscape buffers as well as a reduction in the number of required trees. The interior and foundation landscaping meets the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Article 3, Division 12. A detailed discussion of the landscaping follows later in the report. Development Parameters: Floor Area Ratio (FAR,�: Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) designation of Commercial General (CG) is 0.55. The proposed FAR is 0.497, which is consistent with Code provisions. Im_pervious Surface Ratio (ISR� Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable ISR for properties with a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) designation of Commercial General (CG) is 0.90. The overall proposed ISR is 0.847, which is consistent with Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, 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 2-703, the required lot area and lot width are to be a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 100 feet, respectively. The lot area is 41,988 square feet and the lot width is 150 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard which exceeds the otherwise minimum area and width required by Code. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, there are no minimum required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2- 703, front, side and rear setbacks to primary structures are 25, 10 and 20 feet, respectively. Setbacks to parking are based upon the required landscape buffers which for the front (south) is Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 2 '_ ��.t��Lllei Le�el II. Eleacible Development Applicati4n Revievv PLa�vINC & nEVF.LOrMExr DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION V . . ... . ��', . .. . 15 feet, side (east and west) five feet and rear (north) five feet. The proposal includes front (south) setbacks of 15.2 feet (to pavement) and 68.1 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 2.6 feet (to pavement) and 50.6 feet (to building), side (west) setbacks of zero feet (to pavement and 39 feet (to building), rear (north) setbacks of 1.2 feet (to pavement) and 66.9 feet (to building). Maximum Building Hei�ht: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no maximum height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, the maximum allowable height for medical clinic use is 25 feet and for office use is 50 feet. The existing building height of 42.4 feet (to top of flat roo� exceeds the 25 foot height for medical clinic use but is consistent with the office use provision. Furthermore, the height is acceptable to staff as the building height is consistent with the existing community character. This includes a place of worship campus to the north, Sam's Club to the south and a five story hotel to the east. Minimum O,�'f-Street Parkin�: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, the minimum required parking for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project is determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on the specific use and/or ITE Manual standards. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, the off-street parking requirement for medical clinic is five spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. For 12,800 square feet of inedical clinic use, this would result in 64 spaces spaces. As previously mentioned, the remainder of the building will remain as office use. And pursuant to CDC Table 2-702, office use requires three parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. For 8,086 square feet of office use, this would require 24 parking spaces. Thus a total of 88 spaces are required and the development proposal includes 88 spaces which is consistent with the Code provisions. Mechanical Ec�uipment.• 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. Mechanical equipment is located on the roof of the existing building with no additional screening required as it is screened from view by existing oak trees from the overnight accommodation use to the east. Sight Visibilitv Trian Z�es.� Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveways on Gulf to Bay Boulevard, 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. This 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, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. The development proposal does not include any site development except for minimal vehicular use area and landscaping and no changes to utilities are proposed. Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD20 14-040 1 2 — Page 3 ' lilea�WaLer Leve1 II Flexible Qeue ment IICat10R R2YI2W PLANNING 8c DEVELOPMENT � �p DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION . _ . . St ,�'?•�� , . � Landscat�in�: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, required perimeter buffers are based on adjacent uses and/or street types. Further, pursuant to CDC Section 3-903.F, perimeter buffers to parking adjacent to rights-of-way are required to be 15 feet. The required landscape buffers are 15 feet (south — arterial street) and five feet (north, east and west — non-residential). In addition, Section 3- 1202.E provides that interior landscaping must be provided which is equal to or greater than 10 percent of the vehicular use area. The proposed vehicular use area is 27,217 square feet requiring 2,721 square feet of interior landscaped area. Section 3-1202.E also provides that no more than 10 parking spaces may be in a row. Finally, Section 3-1202.E requires that all facades facing a street must include a foundation planting axea of at least five feet of depth along the entire fa�ade excluding areas necessary for ingress/egress. The interior and foundation landscaping meets the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Article 3, Division 12. This proposal provides a 15 foot perimeter landscape buffer width along the south property. Flexibility is being requested for the perimeter landscape buffers along the north, east and west property lines which have been reduced to 1.2, 2.6 and zero feet respectively. The applicant has mitigated these deficiencies through the provision of landscape material in excess of the minimum otherwise required by the CDC. The landscape plan includes shade, ornamental and palm trees (live oak, crepe myrtle, foxtail palm), as well as shrubs and ground covers (hibiscus, podocarpus, azalea, Indian hawthorn, blue daze, liriope and Aztec grass). The south perimeter buffer and Code compliant foundation plantings along the south building fa�ade will be planted in such a manner as to create a tiered effect fronting the Gulf to Bay right-of-way providing adequate buffers between the subject property and adjacent right-of-way. There is minimal proposed landscaping along the north and east property lines due to, and as previously mentioned, the subject property lacks room for Code required landscaping. Staff finds the minimal landscaping along the north and east property lines acceptable due to the existence of a six foot wooden fence along these property lines and the commercial and institutional adjacent uses. Along the west property line, no landscaping is proposed pursuant to the recorded ingress and egress easement as well as parking easement. Solid Waste: A dumpster including Code compliant screening exists at the northeast corner property. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste and Fire Departments. S�ge: The proposal does not include any signage and any forthcoming signage package must meet Code requirements. General Applicability Criteria Requirements: The proposal supports of the General Applicability requirements of this Code as follows: Section 3-914.A.1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmonv with the scale bull� covera�e, densitv and character o�djacent properties in which it is located. As previously mentioned the subject property consists of an existing building and the proposal includes only limited vehicular use area and landscape development. The immediate area is characterized by a variety of uses including place of worship, overnight accommodation, retail Community Development Board — July I5, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 4 9 V1�,.c1��Wal.ei Level.II Flexible Deuel IX12[lt j1I1Cdtl�Il R2Yl2kV PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT �P M DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION c . . .. . �=:v,�.�q .. .. . . . sales and services and resta.urant uses with heights ranging from one to five stories. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed develo�ment will not hinder or discourage development and use o�adjacent land and buildin s� or si�nificantiv impair the value thereof. Surrounding properties are generally developed with a myriad of uses indicative of a commercial area. It has been operating in its current configuration for over 28 years without apparent detriment to adjacent properties. Staff anticipates that the establishment of the medical clinic use will have little to no change of public perception of the subject property. As such, the approval of the application will likely not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adverselv affect the health or safetv of persons residinQ or workin��in the neighborhood. Approval of the application will permit a change of use from office to medical clinic (eye doctor) for the majority of the building. Staff anticipates that there will be little to no change of public perception of the subject property. As such, the approval of the application will likely have no effect on the health andJor safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.4. The �roposed development is designed to minimize tra�c congestion. Approval of the application will likely have minimal effect, negative or otherwise, on traffic congestion since the vehicular use area is being brought up to dimensional and parking Code standards. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.5. The proposed development is consistent with the communitv character of the immediate vicinitv. As previously mentioned the subject property consists of an existing building and the proposal includes only providing Code compliant drive aisle widths, relocation of handicapped parking stalls and landscape development. The immediate area is characterized by a variety of uses including place of worship, overnight accommodation, retail sales and services and restaurant uses with heights ranging from one to five stories. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse e�'fects, including visual, acoustic and olfactorv and hours o�operation impacts on adjacent properties. Approval of the application should not result in any adverse olfactory, visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties as the only change proposed is use from office to medical clinic. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is in support of the following Goals, Objectives and/or Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Objective A.3.2 — All development or redevelopment initiatives within the City of Clearwater shall meet the minimum landscaping / tree protection standards of the Community Development Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 5 � 1�ivui ►T t�LLl Level II Fiexihte Qeuel nt . �cation Re�tiew PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � � � DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � ... . .. .f�s tx ` .. �. . � Code in order to promote the preservation of existing tree canopies, the expansion of that canopy, and the overall qualiry of development within the City; and Policy A.3.2.1 All new development or redevelopment of property within the City of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development Code. Gulf to Bay Boulevard is designated as a Primary Scenic Corridor within Section 3-1203 of the CDC and within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Primary scenic corridors are those roadways expected to have enhanced landscape standards applied to properties along them. Furthermore, Gulf to Bay Boulevard is specifically listed as a "Corridor to Redevelop" within the Linkages section of the FLUE of the Comprehensive Plan. While the proposal does not provide the required perimeter buffers along the north, east and west property lines, the requisite buffer width along the front (south) property line of the site along Gulf to Bay Boulevard is demonstrably better than that as required by the minimum standards of Article 3, Division 12 of the CDC. The minimum buffer landscaping consists of a hedge and one shade tree every 35 feet. Also, as mentioned previously, the proposed landscape plan provides for Code compliant foundation plantings for the south building fa�ade facing the Gulf to Bay right-of-way as well as interior landscaping. In these areas a tiered effect consisting of a mix of groundcovers, low- to medium-sized shrubs as well as shade, palm and ornamental trees is provided. Flexibility to the north, east and west perimeter buffers is supported by staff due to the existing site conditions including limited area for landscaping as well as recorded easements. Therefore, the submittal supports this Objective and Policy. Policy A.S.5.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned character of the neighborhood. The proposal provides for a change of use for the majority of an existing building. The building has historically been used for office and the medical clinic use is permitted as a flexible standard development within the C District. As market and demographic conditions have changed, the need for office space has declined. Allowing medical clinic use will result in increased building occupancy with little to no change by the public perception of the use of the property. Furthermore, the proposal with regard to landscaping is consistent with other properties which have been subject of Level I and Level II site plan approvals. In addition, the site design is consistent with the intent of the development parameters set by the Community Development Code with regard to setbacks and landscaping. These development parameters were specifically created because many areas of the City were inconsistent with the appeaxance and character desired by the citizens of Clearwater as evidenced by the creation and subsequent adoption of the City's current Community Development Code. Therefore, the proposal supports this Policy. Community Development Code: The proposal supports the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development and redevelopment which will enhance the value of surrounding properties. The subject property is located along a major arterial (Gulf to Bay Boulevard) approximately 400 feet west of US Highway 19. Surrounding properties to the north include a place of worship campus and multi-family development. Uses to the east and west include restaurant and Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 6 '�1Ltli 1'�[[�tLei Lexel II Flexihle Develoqmer►t.Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � . .. �k�. s':�� .. .. .. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION overnight accommodations. Uses to the south are restaurant and retail sales and services. The proposed development (eye doctor) will be conveniently located to the intersection of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and US Highway 19 and is surrounded by compatible uses. Furthermore, the proposed development provides for a landscape plan which provides for an appearance which will be demonstrably better than the minimum otherwise required by the CDC. It is anticipated that the proposal will result in a positive impact on those surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the ciry's economy and increasing its tax base as a whole. The proposal includes the redevelopment of an existing vacant restaurant use with a new medical clinic. The proposal will be consistent with the character of the area with regard to size, scope and scale as compared with other properties in the neighborhood. It is largely beyond dispute that the City of Clearwater is largely built-out where the primary option for improvement is the redevelopment and/or refurbishing of existing sites and buildings. Improving a property typically results in an increase in its value thereby positively contributing to the City's t� base and overall economy. The net result of the proposal will be another attractive redevelopment in the community which can only further interest in the improvement of surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the city a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the mcxximum extent permitted by law. The proposal includes a new medical clinic use with landscape buffers or portions thereof that are less than the otherwise minimum required width. The applicant has proposed a more Code compliant vehicular use area than what is currently on the site and that the landscape plans are better that what would otherwise be required by the CDC. The proposal with regard to site and landscape design is consistent with other beautification efforts undertaken, encouraged and installed by the City and private property owners in the City as a whole and along Gulf to Bay Boulevard specifically. As discussed above, Gulf to Bay Boulevard is a designated Primary Scenic Corridor. While a specific Corridor Plan has not been adopted the intent is clear in that properties along designated Scenic Corridors such as Gulf to Bay Boulevard are expected to provide landscaping at least consistent with the minimum standards set forth by the CDC if not more. The proposal includes a landscape design which is more attractive that that as required by the minimum standards of the CDC with regard to the numbers and arrangements of plant material. As mentioned previously, the proposed landscape plan provides for a tiered effect along the south side of the site and south building fa�ade consisting of a mix of groundcovers, low- to medium-sized shrubs as well as shade, palm and ornamental trees. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. ➢ Burden of Proof Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proo is upon the a�plicant to show b,y substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial competent evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC Section 4- 206.D.4. Community Development Board — July 15, 20l 4 FLD2014-04012 — Page 7 � C�bit� 1T (tLl.� Level II Flexihle. Develo ment IlCa�1011 ReuIQNL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � D ARD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION .:�'�'� ; •..,.;. .. , . .. . .. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Floor Area Ratio 0.55 0.497 X Impervious Surface Ratio 0.90 0.847 X' Minimum Lot Area N/A 41,988 square feet (0.964 acres) Xt Minimum Lot Width N/A 100 feet (Gulf to Bay Boulevard) X� Minimum Setbacks Front: South: N/A 68.1 feet (to building) Xl 15.2 feet (to pavement) Side: East: N/A 50.6 feet (to building) X' 2.6 feet (to pavement) West: N/A 39 feet (to building) X� Zero feet (to pavement) Rear: North: N/A 66.9 feet (to building) X' 1.2 feet (to pavement) Maximum Height N/A 42.4 feet (to top of flat roo fl X1 Minimum Off-Street Parking N/A 88 spaces XI � See Analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 8 ' ��+wi-►f��4A..LeVeLIIFI@XI�'lIBQeV$IQji[T12Rt.A�1C3tlORiEYIEW�� PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT � .. . . .. . �rr � ^�;��€.� ��.. , . . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-704.E (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent I Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations X from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and X policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the X proposed 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 shali 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 chazacter 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, baiconies, 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 landsca e desi and a ro riate distances between buildin s. See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 9 =0 �arwater �,��.� E�,� �,,�,t ,�►;�� . � . . 1?z a �+�� . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL APPLICABILITY STANDARDS: 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. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adiacent nroverties. Consistent � Inconsistent X X X X X X COMPL.IANCE WITH COMPRFHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM STANDA The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Comprehensive Landscape Program as per CDC Section 3-1202.G: 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; 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 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. 3. Community character. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 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. 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. Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 10 Consistent Inconsistent X N/A X X N/A ° Clearwater��►F� F►�►�.�vQ►��, �� . ...�a __. . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of June 20, 2014, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following iindings of fact and conclusions of law: Findings of Fact: The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed al: submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. That the 0.964 total acres is located on the north side of Gulf to Bay approximately 400 feet west of US Highway 19 North; 2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District corresponding Commercial General (CG) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. That the property is currently being used as office space within one building; evidence finds that Boulevard and the 4. That the proposal includes a change of use to medical clinic for 12,800 square feet of the existing building; 5. That the remaining 8,086 square feet of building will remain as office use; 6. That there is little space for the addition of landscaping along the north and east property lines; 7. That there are recorded parking and ingress and egress easements along the west property line; and 8. That 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 pattern of development of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Future Land Use Plan Element, Objectives A.3.2 and Policies A.3.2.1 and A.5.5.1; 3. That the proposal consistent with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of CDC Sections 1-103.B.2 — 3 and D.; 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the maacimum development potential pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1.; 5. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria pursuant to CDC Section 2-704.E.; 6. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals pursuant to CDC Section 3-914.A.; and 7. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria for a Comprehensive Landscape Program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to permit 12,800 square feet of inedical clinic use within an existing 20,866 square foot building in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 41,988 square feet, a lot width of 150 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard, front (south) setbacks of 15.2 feet (to pavement) and 68.1 feet (to building), side ( east) setbacks of 2.6 feet (to pavement) and Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 11 9\�J��ui 1'[�LLl Level Ii Flexibte DevebPrt►e�t ApPlicatian Review . . . . ... . ..{� .. . ... .... PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 50.6 feet (to building), side (west) setbacks of zero feet (to pavement and 39 feet (to building), rear (north) setbacks of 1.2 feet (to pavement) and 66.9 feet (to building), a building height of 42.4 feet (to top of flat roo�, and 88 off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project pursuant to Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.E; and a reduction to a portion of the width of the side (east) perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 2.6 feet, a reduction to a portion of the width of the side (west) perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the width of the rear (north) perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the required eight foot dimension from back of curb to back of curb for an interior landscape island from eight to 4.06 feet, a reduction in the amount of required trees from 45 to 14 and an increase in the number of parking spaces allowed in a row from 10 to 13 spaces as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G. subject to the following conditions: Conditions of A�proval: 1. That any/all future signage meets the requirements of Code and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the primary building; 2. That issuance of a development permit by the City of Clearwater does not in any way create any right on the part of an applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the City for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law; 3. That all other applicable local, state and/or federal permits be obtained before commencement of the development; 4. That application for a building permit be submitted no later than July 15, 2015, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407; 5. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, a wheel stop by placed at the south end of the handicapped off-street parking space that is oriented north to south; and 6. That prior to the issuance of any building permits; all Land Resource requirements shall be addressed. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: Matt Jackson, Planner III ATTACHMENT: Photographs and Resume Community Development Board — July 15, 2014 FLD2014-04012 — Page 12 View looking northwest at the south building facade View looking northeast at the south building facade View looking at the west building facade View looking north along the west building facade 2560 Gulf to Bay FLD2014-04012 View looking south from the subject property View looking east from the subject property View looking west from the subject property View looking west along Guif to Bay Boulevard from the subject property 2560 Gulf to Bay FLD2014-04012 Page 2 Matthew Jackson 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 (727) 562-4504 matthew.iacksonCa7mvclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ❑ Planner III February 2013 to present City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida 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 2011 to February 2013 October 2008 to June 2010 Regulate gowth and development of the City in accordance with land resource ordinances and regulations related to community development. Landscape plan review including: conceptual, and variance. Reviews and analyzes site plans and conducts field studies to determine the integrity of development plans and their compatibility with surroundings. Interdepartmental and zoning assistance. Respond as a City representative to citizens, City officials, and businesses concerning ordinances and regulations. Make recommendations and presentations at staff level at various review committees, boards, and meetings. ❑ Planner I Calvin-Giordano and Associates, Fort Lauderdale, Florida May 2005 to December 2007 Project manager for various development applications such as plat, site plan, rezoning and variances. In-depth government agency, in-house and client coordination to ensure that the projects maintained submittal schedules stayed within budget constraints and attained approval. Schedule and lead project kick-off ineetings, ensure municipal project conditions were resolved, produce supporting documents and make site visits as well. Research and prepare due diligence reports including subject matter such as zoning, land uses, densities, available public utilities and land development costs. Member of emergency mitigation committee formed to prepare and mitigate for natural or man-made disasters affecting Calvin, Giordano and Associates and local municipalities. ❑ Manager Church Street Entertainment, Orlando, Florida September 1999 to February 2004 Supervised and managed daytime and nighttime operations of a bar and nightclub entertainment complex including 100+ staff. Conducted hiring and training operations including security and inventory control. Managed and reconciled nightly gross revenues as well as preparing and delivering deposits. Assisted in taking inventory and preparing weekly inventory orders, marketing and special events. ❑ Linguist US Army, Fort Campbell, KY October 1991 to October 1995 Maintain fluency in the Arabic language and knowledge of customs and culture as well as military readiness for possible deployments or training operations. Co-managed intelligence gathering operation in Haiti including coordination between multiple Special Forces units and civilian authorities. Interpreter between U.S. and Egyptian soldiers during training exercises. Liaison between Special Forces battalions to coordinate certification training. EDUCATION ❑ Master of Arts, Urban and Regional Planning, Florida Atlantic University, 2007 ❑ Bachelor of Arts, Urban and Regional Planning, Rollins College, 2004 DEUEL & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS * LAND SURVEYORS * LAND PLANNERS 565 South Hercules Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33764 Office (727) 822-4151 Faac (727) 821-7255 May 12, 2014 Mr. Matt Jackson Planner III City of Clearwater Planning & Development Department P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33756 RE: FLD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard — Letter of Incompleteness Mr. Jackson, In response to the City of Clearwater's comments for the project located at 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, we offer the following responses: Engineering Review Prior to Building Permit: 1. As per City Construction Standard Index No. 109 for Sidewalks, applicant shall bring all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the project up to standard, including A.D.A. standards (raised detectable tactile surfaces or truncated domes per most recent FDOT Indexes #304 and 310). ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permi� 2. Please acknowledge in writing that as per Section 3-806 - Easements and rights-of-way, the City has the right to remove, without cost or obligation to replace or restore, any fence or wall and landscaping as may be necessary to maintain the utilities located in an easement. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit 3. Please update the vicinity map on the cover sheet. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit FLD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 2 4. Please show an accessible walkway from Gulf to Bay Boulevard to the building. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit Prior to Certificate of Occupancy: 1. Please provide a copy of an approved right-of-way permit from FDOT for any work in the state right-of-way prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. General Notes: 1. Only Sheet C3 was reviewed for General Engineering criteria. The additional details provided in the plan set may have been necessary for other departmental reviews to provide flexible development approval. Construction plans shall be reviewed in more detail prior to receipt of the building permit. ➢ Response: Acknowledged 2. If the proposed project necessitates infrastructure modifications to satisfy site-specific water capacity and pressure requirements and/or wastewater capacity requirements, the modifications shall be completed by the applicant and at their expense. If underground water mains and hydrants are to be installed, the installation shall be completed and in service prior to construction in accordance with Fire Department requirements. ➢ Response: Acknowledged Environmental Review Prior to issuance of Building Permit: 1. An Asbestos Survey is usually required prior to conducting any demolition or renovations. Contact Pinellas County Air Quality (727/464-4422) for more information. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit 2. Provide erosion control measures on plans sheet and provide notes detailing erosion control methods. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit General Note(s): 1. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Fi,D2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 3 ➢ Response: Acknowledged 2. Offsite discharge of produced groundwater from dewatering shall comply with dewatering guidelines from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), F.A.C.62-621(2). ➢ Response: Acknowledged 3. Additional permits from State agencies, such as the Southwest Florida Water Management District or Florida Department of Environmental Protection, may be required. Approval does not relieve the applicant from the requirements to obtain all other required permits and authorizations. ➢ Response: Acknowledged Fire Review 1) Other items to be addressed at building stage: Separate plans and permits for Fire Alarm, Fire Sprinkler, Fire Line Underground. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB ➢ Response: Acknowledged 2) Plan shows existing fire hydrant on Gulf to Bay to be used for firefighting use. An additional supporting fire hydrant is required to supply the FDC. This fire hydrant shall be located within 25-50 feet, as measured along a normal access route, of the fire department connection. FDC shall be a minimum of 15' from building. Fire Department Connection shall be a 2 1/2 inch Siamese connection listed for such use. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB. ➢ Response: Acknowledged. 3) FDC shall be identified by a sign that states "No Parking, Fire Department Connection" and shall be designed in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation standards for information signage and be maintained with a clearance of 7 1/2 feet in front of and to the sides of appliance as per Florida Fire Prevention Code 2010 edition. Please acknowledge intent to comply PRIOR TO CDB. ➢ Response: Acknowledged 4) All underground fire lines and hydrants must be installed by a contractor with a class I,II or V license. Please acknowledge intent to comply PRIOR TO CDB. ➢ Response: Acknowledged F'LD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 4 Land Resource Review: Prior to Building Permit: 1. After completing a site visit and reviewing the TPP all trees located on property rated below a 3.0 must either be removed or corrected by an ISA certified Arborist to bring them up to a 3.0 condition rating. Tree 555, 556, 557, and 558 are the trees in question. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permi� 2. Your TPP states that due to the high volume of off-site trees being invasive and the potential to spread to your site and cause problem you should look into removing them. That is something to look into and is an effort we would support if you were interested. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit 3. Apply for a Tree Removal permit. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit 4. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, prior to issuance of a building permit any and all performance based erosion and sedimentation control measures must be approved by Environmental and or Stormwater Engineering, be installed properly, and inspected. This comment only applies if site work is added at time of Building permit. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit Planning Review 1. All conditions are required to be addressed prior to CDB. ➢ Response: Acknowledged 2. Please clarify the square feet of interior landscape area provided. The application and plans reflect 2,852 square feet proposed but staff calculates only 1731.25 square feet. And please keep in mind that neither perimeter buffer areas nor the first five feet of foundation plantings can count toward interior. ➢ Response: The area of interior landscaping has been revised to 2, 730 sf. An inset is now provided on sheet 4, The Landscape Plan, showing the areas that were used for this calculation. 3. Provide a response to how the proposal is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. F'LD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 5 ➢ Response: Please see revised application Exhibit "D" 4. Provide responses to all of the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criterion number six. Only a and b were addressed. And while it is understood that no changes to the building are proposed, the criterion must be addressed. ➢ Response: Please see revised application Exhibit "D" 5. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1204.D, parking stall adjacent to required landscaping must have curbing and wheel stops. :� Response: Wheel stops have been added (with the exception of the east row of parking spaces, as discussed will be allowed to remain as existing.) 6. On Sheet two, revise the curb stops on the west side of the building to be aligned with the new parking stall layout. ➢ Response: The wheel stops are now aligned to the parking stalls. 7. Add a note to Sheet four that a permanent and automatic irrigation system is either existing or will be installed to preserve the required landscaping. ➢ Response: A note has been added to the Landscape plan. 8. Revise the plant list on Sheet four to add the plant symbol adjacent to the applicable plant name. ➢ Response: The plant symbols are now incorporated into the plant lis� 9. On page two of the application, clarify the gross floor area for multiple uses as only 6,962 square feet is shown. What does the 6,962 number represent? Please clarify if the entire building is to be used for medical use or office use as well. And please note that if the entire building is to be used for medical clinic, a parking demand study with methodology approved by staff will need to be submitted to justify any reduction in parking. For medical clinic use five parking spaces per 1,000 feet of gross floor area are required and for office use, three spaces per 1,000 feet of gross floor area are required. ➢ Response: 12,800 SF of the building will be used for the medical clinic. Therefore, 64 spaces are required for the clinic. 8,086 SF of the building will be used for offices. Therefore, 24 spaces are required for the offcces. Total number of spaces required = 88. F'LD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 6 10. Either show that there is existing shrubs along the east property line or provide a continuous row of shrubs. ➢ Response: As discussed, the north end of the east property line will be mulched (to allow for code required parkin� and a row of hibiscus is proposed along the south end of the east property line. There are some existing hibiscus shrubs along this portion of the property line. 10. Provide the correct amount and properly designed handicapped off-street parking stalls pursuant to CDC Section 3-1409 once the correct amount of required parking is determined based on the floor area for each use. ➢ Response: There are a total of 88 spaces required. As a result 4 h✓c spaces are required and are proposed. 11. Either show that there is existing shrubs along the east property line or provide a continuous row of shrubs. ➢ Response: As discussed, the north end of the east property line will be mulched (to allow for code required parkin� and a row of hibiscus is proposed along the south end of the east property line. There are some existing hibiscus shrubs along this portion of the property line. Stormwater Review 1. As per the introduction of the City of Clearwater Drainage Design Criteria, redevelopment of property where no stormwater facilities exist requires the addition of stormwater facilities. As the changes to existing land features are minimal, this requirement will be waived. ➢ Response: Acknowledged, thank you. 2. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. ➢ Response: Acknowledged Traffic Eng Review Prior to CDB: F'L,D2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 7 1. All parking spaces including drive aisle dimensions shall comply to City standards. The web address is provided below for your use, see index 120. http•//www myclearwater com/ o� v/depts/pwa/enginlpublications/stddet/index.asp ➢ Response: Parking and drive aisles meet these requirements See plan revisions 2. The 2 accessible parking spaces that are not adjacent to the building shall be relocated to be close to the building's accessible entrance. ➢ Response: These hvo spaces have been relocated to be closer to the building's accessible entrance. 3. Provide an accessible path from a building's accessible entrance to a public sidewalk and to multiple buildings on site compliant with 2012 Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction, Section 206. ➢ Response: An accessible path is now shown on the plans Prior to a Building Permit: 1. Provide accessible parking stall and accessible sign details compliant with City standards. The details can be accessed through the City's web address below, please use Index No. 118 & 119 http•//www myclearwater.com/gov/d�ts/pwaJen�publications/stddet/index.asp ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permit 2. Provide stop sign with stop bar at the access to S.R. 60 per current MUTCD standards. ➢ Response: This will be addressed prior to Building Permi� General Note(s): 1. Applicant shall comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule and paid prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). The TIF amount for the proposed eye clinic with credit is $63,054.83. The entire floor area (sq.ft.) of 3 story building was used for the TIF calculation. ➢ Response: The Client understands the TIF and will comply with payment, however, the TIF should be re-calculated with the following: 12,800 SF of the building will be used for the medical clinic 8,086 SF of the building will be used for offices. F'LD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 6/10/2014 Page 8 2. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. ➢ Response: Acknowledged If you have any questions, or need additional information, please call me at (727) 822-4151 x203. Sincerely, DEUEL & ASSOCIATES � f,,.;� ____ Brian Barker, P.E. Principal Engineer � . ° ir � ��rr�ater � _��r �_ U .,.. _ Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Attached Dwellings, Mixed-Uses or Non-Residential Uses IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE ANQ CORRE(.? INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AN� SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 1� COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND lO COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE dEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATtON, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $20Q APPLICATION FEE: $1,205 PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): 255o Gulf to aay Bl�a. , LLc MAILING ADDRESS: 630 Chestnut street, clearwater, FL 33756 PHONE NUMBER: EMAIL: AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: J. Paul Raymond, Macfarlane, Ferguson & Mcmullen MAILINGADDRE55: P• �- Box 1669, Clearwater, FL 33757 PHONE NUMBER: �72�� 441-8966 EMAIL: �Pr@macfar.com ADDRESS OF SUBIECT PROPER7Y: 2560 Gu1f to say slvd. , Clearwater, FL PARCEL NUMBER(S): la/29/i6/8568i/000/ooio LEGAL DESCRIPTION: see attached Ext,ibit "z�" PROPOSED USE(S): M�dical clir.ic DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: see Exhibit "B" Specifica!!y rdentify the request (include all requested code flexrbility; e_g., reductron in requrred number of parking spaces, height setbacks, !ot size, lot width, specific use, etc.J: Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 8 Revised 01/12 � �� 1.<� t • 'a � � �< �'�9 � Planning & Development Department Flexible Development AppIication Data Sheet PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS FILLED OUT, IN ITS ENTIRETY. FAILURE TO COMPLETE THIS FORM WILL RESULT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEfERRED UN7tL THE FOLLOWING APPUCATION CYCLE. ZONING DlSTRICT: FUTURE tAPID USE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial (C) Commercial General (CG) EXISTING USE (currently existing on site}: General Office PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; pius existing, if to remain): Generai office/juedi �C a� ��/hlG SITE AREA: 41, 988 sq.ft. °•964 acres GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage of alI buildings): Existing: zo, ee6 sq. ft. Proposed: 2o,aa6 Sq ft Maximum Allowable: zs, 093 sq. ft. GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each us,g , if there will be multiple uses): First use: -�-i2, ��sq. ft. /hL°OC I G/t ��/1 !flG Second use: g sq. ft: Q f� 0�i Third use: sq, ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO (total square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: 0 . 497 Proposed: °•997 Maximum Ailowable: o. ss BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (i" floor square footage of all buildings}: Existing: 6� 692 Sq, ft. � 16. 6 % of site) Proposed: 6� g62 Sq. ft, ( 16. 6 / of site) MaximumPermitted: Z'�093 sq,ft, ( ss.6 %ofsite) GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existing: 2� q 96 sq. ft. (`�- 9, � % of site) Proposed: �*�`� 2, 7_� sq. ft. (^6"'$' �Q % of site) —�--r*- VEHICULAR USE AREA (perking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: 2"T"%��' �7'��% sq. ft. ('�"°�' �$ % of site) Proposed: �,2%{ �� sq. ft. (�""�" 6 H, II` % of site) Planning 8, Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 09 8 Revised 01/12 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the iotal square footage of entire site}: Existing: o.asi Proposed: o.ea� Maximum Permitted: 0.90 DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per acre) Existing: N/A Proposed: Maximum Permitted: OFf-STREET PARKING: Existing: 91 Proposed: `� g �' Minimum Required: '�'° g g BUtLDING HEIGHT: Existing: 42 - 4 ` Proposed: 42.4' Maximum Permitted: Zs.o� WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VAIUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 20, 000. o0 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR ALL ADIACEIVT PROPERTY: No�Yh: Commercial (C) $OUth: P�lic Row - SR 60 EBSt: Institutional (I) W25t: Commercial (C) � STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELlAS �� I, the undersigned, acknowledge that al) Sworn to and subscribed before me this -��,: day of representations made in this application are true and f �' � :tt�'�..�. , `'� �`/ .tomeand/orby accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize " City representatives to visit and photograph the �� `l� `� `�; E� `' �. �f F`.`:; , who is�ersonali�known has property described in this application, produced ^ T as identification. � ,-- - l.� :.:---"".� ____ --, Signature of property owner or representative .�`� , <., <�_ Notary public, My commission expires: ,.x �. /�, d - �, <. . . .: ,� ��, -; , ">' ��V*Y �Vy Notary Public Slate of F!urida Brian D Layton y'-. - Po° MY Comn'�ission EE'. 1 20>9 ?or�ti� :xpiresG7/13/2015 ,r�+'"�J`R�.�k/'v^�/A..+�./�..*+,� Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562•4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 3 of 8 Revised o1/t z LL °�� r�vater � � _ Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Site Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, A!L FLD APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE fOLLOWING INFORMATION AND/OR PLANS: �t�' Responses to the flexibility criteria for the specific use(s) being requested as set forth in the Zoning District(s) in which the subject property is located. The attached Flexible Development Appiication Flexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide t ese responses. Responses to the General Applicability criteria set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexible Development Application Ge rai Appiicability Criteria sheet shali be used to provide these responses. A signed and sealed survey of the property prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property, dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of all public and private easements inciuding official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site. ❑ If the application would result in the removal or relocation of mobile home owners residing in a mobile home park as provided in F.S. § 723.083, the application must provide that information required by Section 4-Z02.A.5. ❑ If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other similar marine structure, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair ar replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or reinforcing of existing piling on �rivate and commercial docks. � A site plan prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape architect drawn to a minimum scaie of one inch equals 50 feet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches that includes the following information: �Index sheet of the same size shall be included with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon. l�le" North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared. ❑ Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be constructed in phases. ❑ Location of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL}, whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable. [7J� Location, footprint and size of all existing and proposed buildings and structures on the site. L94'' Location and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems, both on-site and off-site, with proposed points o�access. C�' Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, fire hydrants and seawalls and any proposed utility easements. ❑ Location of onsite and offsite stormwater management facilities as well as a narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including calculations. Additional data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City of C�arwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual may be required at time of building construction permit. �Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection. � Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406. ! C�°'�All adjaceni right(s)-of-way, with indication of centerline and width, paved width, existing median cuts and intersections and bus shelters. D,,,�mensions of existing and proposed lot lines, streets, drives, building lines, setbacks, structural overhangs and building s��rations. f �Y'' Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height and building materials. Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 4 of 8 Revised 01/12 ❑ Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage. ❑ Demolition plan. ❑ Identification and description of watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, specimen trees, and other environmentally sensitive areas. ❑ If a deviation from the parking standards is requested that is greater than 50% {exduding those standards where the difference between the top and bottom of the range is one parking space}, then a parking demand study will need to be provided. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved. Please see the adopted Parking Demand Study Guidelines for further information. L3F� A tree survey showing the location, DBH and species of ali existing trees with a DBH of four inches or more, and identifying ose trees proposed to be removed, if any. A tree inventory, prepared by a certified arborist, of all trees four inches DBH or more that reflects the size, canopy, and condition of such trees may be required if deemed applicable by staff. Check with staff. �/�❑ A Traffic Impact Study shall be required for al� proposed developments if the total generated net new trips meet one or more of the foliowing conditions: ■ Proposal is expected to generate 100 or more new trips in any given hour (directional trips, inbound or outbound on the abutting streets) and/or 1,000 or more new trips per day; or ■ Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable levels; or � The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with five reportable accidents within a prior twelve month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided by the City of Clearwater Police Department; or ■ The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review process. Examples include developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments / with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. �A landscape pian shall be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improved or remodeled in a value of 25% or more of the valuation of the principal structure as reflected on the property appraiser's current records, or if an amendment is required to an existing approved site plan; or a parking lot requires additional landscaping pursuant to the provisions of Article 3, Division 14. The landscape plan shall include the foilowing information, if not otherwise required in conjunction with the application for development approval: �ocation, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including b,otanical and common names. �E�isting trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line. C�1, interior landscape areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressed both in square feet, exclusive of perimeter landscaped strips, and as a percentage of the paved area coverage of the parking lot and vehicular use areas. Location of existing and proposed structures and improvements, including but not limited to sidewalks, walis, fences, pools, patios, dumpster pads, pad mounted transformers, fire hydrants, overhead obstructions, curbs, water fines, sani ry sewer lines, storm drains, seawalis, utility easements, treatment of all ground surfaces, and any other features t� t may influence the proposed landscape. �F, f� Location of parking areas and other vehicular use areas, including parking spaces, circulation aisles, interior landscape islands and curbing. �,(�� ❑ Drainage and retention areas, induding swales, side slopes and bottom elevations. as` Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562•4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 5 of 8 Revised 01/12 LL j- :. � �' �� `' �T Planning & Development Department ' N='�;�+ ��j ►'� t��e� Flexible Develo ment A lication p pp " General Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 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. SEE EXHIBIT "C" 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 EXHIBIT "C" 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhpod of the proposed use. SEE EkHIBIT "C" 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. SEE EXHIBIT "C" 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. SEE EXHIBIT "C" 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. SEE EX.HIBIT "C" Planning & DevelopmenY Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 6 of 8 Revised 01ft2 o �a. �� , } � �� r�ater U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Flexibilitv Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES T� THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE(S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(S� IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAiI, EACH CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARY). See Exhibit "D" 1. 4. 5. 6. Pianning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 7 of 8 Revised 01/12 o,� � � Planning & Development Department �� :��=��r�vater �� .��,;.� Flexible Develo ment A lication P pP �� Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT fuli names: r- �'��',T� � � �' � � ,i�9 '�� ,�� '" �e�, c, E�; �' f=., 3�l 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: ,,; ,f -, ; � _ . 1 , � , ,: %, , ,,� � � ! � �: ._� � ;'_ f )'T i ,� 'A !�!� �' 1� � i!� y�_ �t ( �t': ^ /: 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): Please see Exhibit "B" 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: Maci'arlane, Ferguson & McMullen 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 Ciearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order ta process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 7. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. �._..--�__ _. � . __. _ � _ s �-- — - - Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUIWTY OF PINELLAS Property Owner Property Owner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON < THIS DAY OF f , PERSONALLY APPEARED � WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. �"i.�'�d v+°`,�'.,•r^.•'�. n °�� x� fr; R,�( � t3•y P�trii S at� c�f Fbrda �} , �, �s �n D Lavtc�,r .`' '"S ��k° My Con� r*i 5nioi ! c 2-'7a ��r r�u xpires 07/13/2G 15 `.::-..r'h.,:�'�,.�`°`.-.�`'^aJ"` .d`�..��`,,r``,,�'°'...+ir"`,a''u`+./"�.�''�.. Notary Seal/Stamp Notary Public Signature My Commission Expires: Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtie Avenue, Ciearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 8 of 8 Revised 01/12 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1: LOT 1 OF "STUDEBAKER'S", A SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 92, PAGE 39, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 2: TOGETHER WITH NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS BENEFITING PARCEL 1, CONTAINED IN MUTUAL AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AND CROSS-PARKING RECORDED MAY 14, 1986, IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6226, PAGE 1321; AS AFFECTED BY FIR5T MODIFICATION THERETO RECORDED NOVEMBER 5, 1986, IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6354, PAGE 260; AND BY SECOND MODIFICATION THERETO RECORDED NOVEMBER 8, 1988, IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6872, PAGE 1462, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. EXHIBIT "B" TO FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Description of Site: The subject property is the former Tampa Tribune Building, located at 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard. The applicant proposes change the use of the majority of the Building (12,800 sfl from General Office to Medical Clinic. 8,086 sf of the building will remain as General Off'ice. Specifically, the Applicant requests: 1. Flexible Development approval to permit the Change of Use in the Commercial (C) District, with a. a building height of 39.2 feet to roof deck (42.4 feet to architectural feature); b. a side (east) setback of 50.6 feet to building and 2.6 feet to asphalt parking; c. a side (west) setback of 30.8 feet to building and 0.0 feet to asphalt parking; d. a rear (north) setback of 66.9 feet to the building and 1.2 feet to asphalt parking; e. 88 parking spaces f. a side (east) landscape buffer of 2.6 feet, a rear (north) landscape buffer of 1.2 feet, a side (west) landscape buffer of 0.0 feet through the Comprehensive Landscaping Application as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.0 of the Code; Eacisting Use The property is the site of the former Tampa Tribune Building and currently operates as a variety of general offices. Proposed Use The Applicant proposes to change the use of a portion of the building from general offices to a Medical Clinic. There are minimal changes proposed to the site and parking for the clinic will take place in the existing onsite and offsite parking lot. EXHIBIT "C" 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 building currently exists and has been operating as various offices for numerous years. There are no proposed improvements or modifications currently proposed for the building. It is in harmony, scale, bulk, coverage, density and character with the adjacent developed 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 office building currently exists and the change of use to an Eye Doctors Office (Medical Clinic) will not hinder or discourage the use of adjacent land. All adjacent land is developed. 3) The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. It is proposed to change a portion of the existing office building to a professional Eye Doctors Office (Medical Clinic). The proposed use will not adversely affect anyone in the neighborhood. 4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The current office building currently serves various different independent offices. The goal of this project is to change the use to serve an Eye Doctor's group and operate a clinic to serve their patients. The existing building currently has an existing driveway entrance and cross access agreement to the neighboring property to the west. The traffic circulation is proposed to remain as existing. 5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The office building currently exists and has been operating as such for numerous years. There are no proposed improvements or modifications currently proposed for the building. The site is bordered by commercial and institutional development and it is consistent with the character in this area. 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 change of use from office to medical clinic would not cause any adverse effects. The professional Eye Clinic would be contained inside the building and not cause any negative visual, acoustic or olfactory affects. The hours of operation would most likely be less than the hours that the existing office building operates. EXHIBIT "D" COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The proposed deviations from Code, which are discussed in detail below, are necessary and minimal deviations to Code without which the project would not be feasible at this location. The Change of Use will not modify the external building fa�ade or structure. He� The building currently exists and it is not practical to reduce the building height to 25 feet as is required by the Code. Building Setbacks/Landscape Buffers The building and site currently exist and it is not practical to increase the setbacks or buffers. There is landscaping on the site and it is proposed to be further enhanced through the Comprehensive Landscape Application. Parking The parking currently exists on the site. There is also a parking easement from the adjacent property to the west. 91 parking spaces currently exist. It is proposed to reduce the parking by 3 spaces to allow for additional "green space". The code requirement is 88 spaces and 88 spaces are being provided. 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. A Medical Clinic is allowed in the Commercial (C) Zoning District. The site is fully developed and operating in accordance with this zoning district as Office. The Change of Use requires the Flexible Development Review due to the previously listed items which cannot be met due to existing conditions. The proposed development is consistent with many goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The policy, A.6.2 states that The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding environment. This proposed use is an economic contributor and is an expansion of the current Eye Clinic which operates at a different location. The proposed project will generate new jobs in the City of Clearwater which will include professional services. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will not impede other development. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. The existing development has operated in harmony with the other adjoin properties for years. The proposed development will in no way affect the adjoining properties. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, fle�ble standard or fleauble 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 e�sting 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. A Medical Clinic is permitted by the "Commercial General" land use. The Change of Use is a significant economic contributor to the City. This proposed use is an economic contributor and is an expansion of the current Eye Clinic which operates at a different location. The proposed project will generate new jobs in the City of Clearwater which will include professional services. 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. Flexibility is not being requested for lot width. The proposed use is a use permitted in the Commercial zoning district without this approval. The building and parking lot currently exist and the site is constrained and will require flexibility to setbacks, height and off street parking. Surrounding properties to the west, east and north are already developed. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. The development is existing. The use is proposed to be changed to a Medical Clinic, which is allowable in the Commercial (C) zoning district. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The commercial development is existing. The use is proposed to be changed to a Medical Clinic, which is allowable in the Commercial (C) zoning district. The character is established as a commercial corridor. 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; • DistincNve fenestration patterns; • Building stepbacks; and • Distinctive roofs forms. The existing building is very unique in appearance and design. All of the bullet point mentioned items were utilized and existing. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The existing/proposed development provides for appropriate buffers to the greatest extent possible. The comprehensive landscape program is being utilized to provide enhanced landscape design. 0 LL ° P��l��rwater �, U ,,.� Planning & Development Department Comprehensive Landscaping Application IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON {NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, IF NECESSARY, WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERlALS (10RIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED fNTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. PROPERTY OWNER {PER DEED): 2560 Gulf to Bay Blvd., LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 630 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 PHONE NUMBER: EMAIL: AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: MAILING ADDRE55: J. Paul Raymond, Macfarlane, Ferguson & McMullen P. O. Box 1669, Clearwater, FL 33757 PHONE NUMBER: 727 441-8966 EMAi L: 1Pr@macfar. com ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Specifica(Iy identify the request (include a!f requested code flexibiliYy; e.g., reduction rn required number of parking spaces, height setbacks, lot size, lot width, specific use, eTc. j: 2560 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Clearwater, FL See Exhibit "B" STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS r, I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ day of representations made in this application are true and . to me and/or by accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize �' City representatives to visit and photograph the % , who is personaily known has property described in this application. produced as identification. _ �: . �-" .-� �.. ,._ Signature of property owner or representative l Notary public, My commission expires .� � . ��5� . ' Pianning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 2 Revised 01l12 . . ,�/`.a^�./"^tI °a.r`v�e°�l id �.�+�I`+��i"v'^.� c��,µr r,,� f� :a,ry PubliC S e"e } F!��rid2 � E�n�n t) Layto+� �b �� Mu C�on�missian t�-C i.-.-'g � �` �r�uue�C°' k�x4i�r8507/13/2l�1:. � �� d LL ., o ; �� .: �� ar�vate� U r,a, Planning & Development Department Comprehensive Landscaping Application Flexibility Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE FIVE (5) FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS COMPREHENSIVE LANQSCAPING PROPOSAL. 1. Architectural Theme: a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscaping 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. The proposed landscape design is an extension/addition to the existing well established landscaping that is present on the site and suitable forthe commercial development. OR b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping program shail be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. The landscape design provides an appropriate theme for the commercial development. The proposed design consists of multiple layers with several different species which are all suitable for this environment. 2. Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive Landscaping program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. This is noted and will be adhered to. There is no additional lighting proposed. 3. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. The landscaping provides aesthetically pleasing views and utilizes plant material which are conducive to the Commercial Environment. 4. Property Volues. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate viciniry of the parcel proposed for development. The proposed landscaping is consistent with the general theme of the area and will have a positive and beneficial impact on the surrounding 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 landscape design is well suited for the commercial/corridor. Planning 8, Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 of 2 Revised 01112 � FLD2014-04012 — 2560 Gulf to Bay Boulevard ELEVATION VIEWS NORTH ELEVATION „� � , . �� ,� � �� .�� : �� fix .�. �. , � . � �� . . ,�.�� _ �:," �s�� . . °�'-,«.�- "" �,d �v�s�-�,�,.s��$r.��` � *i° ,^*�. ..��, n� �� 4,� �. r.�-.�� `� ` c _ � .�: ' '��.. �:+�s ,: ? < ,�="' ��,.'a � WEST ELEVATION (OVERALL) WEST ELEVATION (FROM SOUTH END TO NORTH END) �• �:.:. *; :� s�� . �� fn t�i�ti� SOUTH � ��.�_��, & � �.� �.. 0 EAST BUILDING HEIGHT = 39.2' MATERIALS = STUCCO & MASONRY Shared Parking between 2560 Gulf to Bay Blvd and Greek Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity Total Shared Parking Spaces = 30 2560 Gulf to Bay has an easement to use the easternmost 30 spaces that is owned by the Church 7 days a week prior to 6pm. The office hours of the proposed Eye Clinic will be 8am - 5pm Monday through Friday. It is anticipated that the proposed Eye Clinic may utilize 25-50% of these spaces during their office hours. The Church does not use these 30 spaces except on the weekends or during special events and sometimes after 6pm during the week. There is not anticipated to be any overlap in usage. Mayberry Tree Consulting LLC Tree Inventory/Gulf — to - Bay Ciearwater, Florida April 19, 2014 Prepared by: Alan Mayberry, Consulting Arborist ISA Certified Arborist #SO-0305 Tree Risk Assessment Qualification Prepared for: Deuel and Associates The following report is submitted by Alan Mayberry, Consulting Arborist, and includes findings that I believe are accurate based on my education, experience and knowledge in the field of Arboriculture. My findings are clinical in nature and based on scientific research in the field of Arboriculture. In addition, my findings are based on personal observations of over 30 years of experience in the broad field of Arboriculture. I have no interest personally or financially in this property other than the preparation of this report and I believe my report is factual and unbiased. The purpose for this report is to conduct an assessment of trees at the subject property in respect to their health and structure and considerations for preservation potential. Tree Inventory and Site Overview The following tree inventory provides an overall condition rating for trees and palms defined as protected species by the provisions of City of Clearwater Code. The inventory also includes species that are identified as Category one or two invasive species in the Florida Exotic Pest Plant council's (FLEPPC) 2011 invasive species list. Protected trees with a trunk diameter of 4" and greater and palm species with a 10' clear trunk and greater are included in the tree inventory. In addition, trees located within 25' of the property lines are evaluated for the overall condition rating. This site contains a mixture of live oak (Quercus virginiana) and laurel oak (Quercus IaurifoliaJ trees that were planted to meet landscape codes when the site was developed. Several of the trees were planted in ill-advised locations and have grown too large for the space they occupy. Several trees are growing just outside the boundaries of this property and are in need of maintenance as their canopies are growing too low over the vehicular use areas. Trees in this category will be noted in the tree inventory. An area on the adjacent site that abuts this property to the east contains a proliferation of the category one invasive exotic Woman's tongue tree (Albizia lebbeck). This area is just east of the east property line. If possible, these trees should be removed as they are growing into the subject property and will continue to reproduce. In addition, they will grow large and their branches and root systems will cause future maintenance problems. I recommend contacting the adjacent property owner and 1 informing them of the situation and requesting that they remove the trees before their branches and root systems cause damage to the site. These trees will be noted in the tree inventory. Off-site tree. See note #1 above. The following tree inventory rates each tree using an overall condition rating that measures the quality of the trees health and structure and to a lesser degree the tree's aesthetic contribution to the site. The overall condition ratings range from 0(a dead tree) to 6(a specimen quality tree). Increments of 0.5 are used for accuracy. A tree rated 3.0 is an average tree that has sufficient health and structure to warrant consideration for preservation. A tree rated 2.5 is slightly below average but may improve with minor remedial maintenance. Trees that are rated 2.0 or less are recommended for removal. Trees rated 4.0 and above are high quality trees that warrant consideration for site plan modifications to incorporate them into the site. The tree inventory includes specific arboricultural terminology justifying the overall condition rating. The Tree Inventory Data section that follows the tree inventory provides a more thorough explanation of the rating system and how individual trees are scored and evaluated. The following notes preceding the tree inventory contain information relative to understanding the tree inventory in general and understanding specific recommendations that appear in the tree inventory. The methodology for conducting this tree assessment is defined in the arboricultural industry as a Visual Tree Assessment (VTA). Trees are assessed by visual observation of the foliage, major scaffold branches, secondary branches, the trunk and portions of the root system that are visible. NOTE: A tree inventory is typically valid for 3-5 years. However, events such as drought, lightning, mechanical root damage, freeze, improper maintenance and severe storms can downgrade the rated value of a tree. Conversely, remedial maintenance can upgrade the value. If you suspect that a tree has been adversely affected, have the tree inspected by a qualified International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist. NOTE: Whenever possible it is advised to adhere to inventory recommendations when selecting trees to be preserved. For example, trees or palms rated 4.0 and higher are strong candidates to be considered for preservation, while trees or palms rated 2.0 and lower should be removed unless otherwise noted in the inventory. Trees or palms rated 2.5 are generally recommended for removal unless remedial work is performed to upgrade them. Trees or palms rated 3.0 and 3.5 are average trees that have good potential and are worthy of preservation efforts. NOTE: Tree size references trunk diameter in inches for trees (measured at 4.5' above grade unless the tree forks below that point - then the diameter is measured at the narrowest area between grade and the fork. Palm species are measured in feet of clear trunk (the distance in feet from grade to where the first frond emanates from the trunk. 2 NOTE: Any references in the following tree inventory recommending tree pruning should only be performed by International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists skilled in pruning to the standards defined in the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) publication, ANSI-A300 Part 1: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance — standards Practices, Pruning and the International Society of Arboriculture's companion publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Pruning (Revised 2008). NOTE: Any reference to future monitoring of trees or further inspections of trees should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists who have verifiable proof that they have attended and received CEU's (continuing educational units) in ISA supported tree hazard risk assessment seminars. NOTE: Any recommendations for cabling and bracing of trees in this tree inventory should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists skilled in this arboricultural practice and in conformance with the methodology as defined within the International Society of Arboriculture's publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Support Systems: Cabling, Bracing, Guying and Propping (Revised). NOTE: Any recommendations in this tree inventory for structural pruning should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists skilled in this type of pruning and in conformance with the methodology as defined within the International Society of Arboriculture's publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Pruning (Revised 2008). This tree inventory was conducted on April 19, 2014 The following tree inventory starts with tree #540 and ends with tree #574. Trees located on adjacent properties within 25' of the subject property will be noted as such in the comment section of the tree inventory. All trees inventoried will be tagged with numbered aluminum tags with the exception of trees on adjacent properties and palms. Tree Inventory Tree # Size Species Rating 540. 21" laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) 3.0 Comments: This tree is growing in a large green area at the northeast corner of the property, The structure is very good and the health is above average. The canopy has been subjected to pruning to clear branches from adjacent overhead wires to the east and from a power pole 3 with a transformer located southwest of the trunk and within the island. Several branches have been stubbed off. The tree will need continued pruning due to the position of the poles and wires but the tree has sufficient structure and overall health to warrant preservation. Recommend pruning to maintain adequate clearance from utility wires and over grade and remove all stubs. Recommend preservation. 541. 27" (est.) live oak (Quercus virginiana) 4.0 Comments: Off-site tree. Diameter was estimated as this tree was growing within a locked fenced in area. Raise canopy a minimum of 15' above the vehicular use area. 542. 32"' live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.5 Comments: Off-site tree. Raise canopy a minimum of 15' above the vehicular use area. 543. 19" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.5 Comments: Off-site tree. Raise canopy a minimum of 15' above the vehicular use area. 544. 33" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 4.0 Comments: Off-site tree. 545. 17" Comments: Off-site tree. live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.0 546. 16" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.0 Comments: Off-site tree. Raise canopy a minimum of 15' above the vehicular use area. 547. 11" Comments: Off-site tree. 548. 16" Comments: Off-site tree. 549. 14" Comments: Off-site tree. laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) live oak (Quercus virginiana) live oak (Quercus virginiana) n 2.0 2.5 2.0 550. 21" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.0 Comments: This tree has good structure but its heaith is average as the crown is slightly thinning and the leaves are under-sized. The declining health is likely due to compacted soils and lack of water due to surrounding impervious area. Recommend the removal of all deadwood 1" and greater in diameter and raise the canopy a minimum of 15' clearance above the vehicular use area. Recommend preservation. 551. 7" laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) 2.0 Comments: This tree has poor overall structure and health. The crown is anemic and dieback is present in the crown. Recommend removal. 552. 29" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 4.0 Comments: The tree has good structure and health. In addition, the tree has a spreading symmetrical crown. This is the best site tree. Recommend the removal of all deadwood 1" and greater in diameter and raise the canopy a minimum of 15' clearance above the vehicular use area and 10' over the adjacent sidewalk. If possible increase the green space around this tree. Recommend preservation. 553. 22" laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) 2.0 Comments: This tree has very poor structure as the trunk forms included codominant scaffold branches. The tree has a significant wound with decay on the south side of the trunk 7' above grade where the codominant is attached. The north codominant has a large area of decay 15' above grade. In addition, the tree is located on a raised landscape island adjacent to a parking drive that prohibits proper root development to the west. Recommend removal. 554. 27' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 4.0 Comments: This tree has a minor trunk restriction but is healthy with an appealing curved trunk. Recommend preservation. 555. 14" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 1.5 Comments: This tree appears to be on the property line. The trunk forms a codominant trunk 1' above grade which has a wound with decay spreading into the codominant area. Also, 25' above grade the leader broke and decay will affect remaining branch likely leading to future branch failure. This tree is also a noxious invasive species. Survey to determine ownership and remove this tree if it is on the subject property. 556. 24" laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) 2.0 5 A Comments: This tree has a large wound with decay 6' above grade on the west side of the trunk where the tree needs tension wood for support. The tree is essentially one-sided and leaning to the east and needs sound tension wood for support. The tree has little root flare and the adjacent building acts as a root barrier prohibiting adequate support. As this tree is a weak compartmentalizing species and as the decay is progressive and as this tree lacks response growth, I recommend removal. 557. 27" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 2.5 Comments: The trunk of this tree forms a codominant 7' above grade that is slightly included. The codominant scaffold branches are growing in a twisting fashion and as the tree is relatively young they will grow against each other and cause internal fracture. The tree is healthy but the live crown ratio is only 30%. Consequently, there is little structural pruning that can be performed to reduce the aspect ratio of the branches and mitigate the inclusion. The foundation of the building is located 5' from the trunk and acts as a root barrier; a factor that will contribute to instability as the tree grows larger. As this tree has poor structure and an inadequate rooting area, I recommend removal. 558. 30" laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) 2.0 Comments: This tree was topped when it was younger. The tree has several large wounds that lack woundwood development most likely due to low energy levels after the tree was topped. The laurel oak tree is a weak compartmentalizing species and the tree will not be able to solve the decay issue. In addition, the tree has a weak extended branch and is located in an island that is too small. Recommend removal. NOTE #1: The remaining trees are off-site trees and contain a quantity of the category one invasive exotic Woman's tongue trees (A/bizia lebbeck). If possible, the Woman's tongue trees should be removed as they are growing into the subject property and will continue to reproduce and produce seedlings that will cause maintenance issues in the existing landscape buffer. In addition, the existing trees will grow large and cause future maintenance problems as branches grow into the site and low over vehicular use areas and as the root systems uplift asphalt. I recommend contacting the adjacent property owner and informing them of the situation and requesting that they remove the trees before the branches and root systems cause damage to the site. 559. 11" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 1.5 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 560. 10" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. � 561. 8, 8, 9" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 562. S" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 563. 24" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.5 Comments: Off-site tree. 564. 35" live oak (Quercus virginiana) 3.5 Comments: Off-site tree. 565. 5" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 566. 5" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 567. 7" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 568. 5" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 569. 8" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 570. 5" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 571. 7" woman's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) 2.0 Comments: Off-site tree. See note #1 above. 7 572. 14' C,T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Off-site tree. 573. 20' C.T. Queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.0 Comments: This palm has a small anemic crown and a trunk restriction. The queen palm has very low wind resistance and is subject to failure during hurricane events as it is weakly rooted. Recommend removal due to condition and species characteristics; however, if aesthetic contribution to the site is desired, this palm could be preserved as it has a small crown and the wind sail effect is minimal. 574. 25' C.T. Queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.0 Comments: This palm has also has a small anemic crown and a trunk restriction. Recommend removal due to condition and species characteristics; however, if aesthetic contribution to the site is desired, this palm could be preserved as it has a small crown and the wind sail effect is minimal. This concludes the tree inventory Tree Inventory Data A tree inventory is a written record of a tree's condition at the time of inspection. It is a valuable tool to prioritize tree maintenance and remove trees with problems that could lead to failure and cause personal injury or property damage. The tree inventory lists four codes, tree#, trunk diameter, tree species, and overall condition rating. It also includes a comment section with specific supportive data for the rating. The following is an explanation of the data used in the inventory: Tree# - location - Each tree is assigned a number for reference in the inventory that corresponds with a number on the site plan or a number on a tree tag that identifies the location of the tree in the field. Size — Tree size is a measure of the tree's trunk diameter measured at 4.5' above grade. If the trunk forks at 4.5' above grade the diameter is measured at the narrowest trunk diameter below the fork. Palm species are measured in feet of clear trunk (C.T.). S ecies — Each tree is listed by its common and botanical name the first time it is listed in the inventory. For simplicity, the tree is listed by its common name thereafter. Condition Ratin� — The condition rating is an assessment of the tree's overall structural strength and systemic health. Elements of structure include: 1) the presence of cavities, � J decayed wood, split, cracked, rubbing branches etc., 2) branch arrangements and attachments, i.e., well-spaced vs. several branches emanating from the same area on the trunk, codominant stems vs. single leader trunk, presence of branch collars vs. included bark. Elements of systemic health relate to the tree's overall energy system measured by net photosynthesis (food made) vs. respiration (food used). A tree with good systemic health will have a vascular system that moves water, nutrients and photosynthate around the tree as needed. Indicators of a healthy systemic system used in the overall condition rating include: 1) live crown ratio (the percentage live crown a tree has relative to its height, 2) crown density (density of the foliage), 3) tip growth (foliated branch tips and shoot elongation) The overall condition rating also takes into consideration the species, appearance and any unique features. The rating scale is 0-6 with 0 being a dead tree and 6 a specimen. Increments of 0.5 are used to increase accuracy. Examples of the tree rating system are as follows: 0- A dead tree 1- A tree that is dying, severely declining, hazardous, harboring a communicable disease or a tree designated by the State of Florida's Exotic Pest Plant Council as a category #1 ecological pest i.e., Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus terebinthifolius). A tree with a rating of 1 should be removed as it is beyond treatment and is a threat to cause personal injury or property damage. 2— A tree exhibiting serious structural defects such as codominant stems with included bark at or near the base, large cavities, large areas of decayed wood, crown dieback, cracked/split scaffold branches etc. In addition, a tree with health issues such as low energy, low live crown ratio, serious disease or insect problems, nutritional deficiencies or soil pH problems. A tree with a rating of #2 should be removed unless the problem(s) can be treated. A tree with a#2 condition rating will typically require a considerable amount of maintenance to qualify for an upgrade of the condition rating. 3- A tree with average structure and systemic health and with problems that can be corrected with moderate maintenance. A tree with a codominant stem not in the basal area that will be subordinated or cabled and braced or a codominant stem that will soon have included bark can be included as a#3. A tree with a rating of #3 has average appearance, crown density and live crown ratio and should be preserved if possible. 4- A tree with a rating of 4 has good structure and systemic health with minor problems that can be easily corrected. The tree should have an attractive appearance and be essentially free of any debilitating disease or insect problem. The tree should also have above average crown density and live crown ratio. Mature trees exhibiting scars, old wounds, small cavities or other problems that are not debilitating can be included in this group particularly if they possess unique form or other aesthetic amenities relating to their age. A tree with a rating of 4 is valuable to the property and should be preserved. 7 5— A tree with live crown ratio of at least 60%, very good crown density, exceptional structure and systemic health and virtually free of insect or disease problems or nutritional deficiencies. A tree in this category should have a balanced crown with exceptional aesthetic amenities. A tree in this category should be of a species that possesses characteristics inherent to longevity and withstanding construction impacts. A tree with a#5 rating lends considerable value to the site and should be incorporated into the site design. A tree with a#5 rating is worthy of significant site plan modification to ensure its preservation. 6— A specimen tree. A specimen tree is a tree that possesses a combination of superior qualities in regards to systemic health, structural strength, crown density, live crown ratio, form (balanced crown), overall aesthetic appeal, size, species, age and uniqueness. A great effort should be made to preserve a specimen tree including shifting structures that would adversely impact the tree. In addition, a specimen tree should have an undisturbed rooting area equal to its dripline (equal to the branch spread) to grow in. Only an experienced and competent International Society of Arboriculture (I.S.A.) Certified Arborist should be allowed to perform maintenance on a specimen tree. Comments: The comment section serves to note observations relative to the tree but not covered in the inventory data or expands on information in the inventory data. It may include maintenance recommendations to improve the tree's overall condition rating. It may also have recommendations on whether to remove or preserve a tree. 10