FLD2011-02008; 1001 HOLT AVE; HOMELESS EMERGENCY PROJECT (WEST)FLD2011-02008
1001 Holt AVE
Date Received: 2/1/20111:55:33 PM
Homeless Emergency Project (West)
ZONING DISTRICT: Institutional
LAND USE:
ATLAS PAGE: 269B
PLANNER OF RECORD:
PLANNER: Kevin Nurnberger, Planner III
CD13 Meeting Date: May 17, 2011
Case Number: FLD2011-02008
Agenda Item: E.1.
Owners/Applicant: Homeless Emergency Project (HEP), Inc.
Representative: Micheal Palmer P.E., Synergy Civil Engineering, Inc.
Address: 1001, 1051, 1101, 1201 and 1231 Holt Avenue
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval for a 64-bed Residential Shelter and 14
attached dwelling units with a clubhouse in the Institutional (I) District
with a lot area of 125,017 square feet, lot widths of 109.6 feet (Palmetto
Street), 1,086.7 feet (Holt Avenue) and 124.73 feet (Engman Street),
front (south) setbacks of 25 feet (to building), front (west) setbacks of
25.01 feet (to building) and 10.3 feet (to pavement), front (north)
setbacks of 24.99 feet (to building) and side (east) setbacks of 25.4 feet
(to building), 19.96 feet (to pavement), and 10 feet (to dumpster
enclosure), a building height of 24 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof),
and 60 off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Infill project under the provisions of the Community
Development Code Section 2-1204.C.
ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial (C) District
FUTURE LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY: Commercial General (CG)
PROPERTY USE: Current: Vacant land
Proposed: Residential Shelter
EXISTING North: Institutional (1) District
SURROUNDING Child Day Care Center
ZONING AND USES: South: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
Detached dwellings
East: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District
Detached dwellings
West: Institutional (I) District
School
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The subject property is 2.87 acres in area and consists of two parcels of land. It is bounded by
Holt Avenue (west), Fairburn Avenue (east), Engman Street (north) and Palmetto Street (south).
The property is not completely vacant of a land use. The southern portion of the property
fronting onto Holt Avenue and Palmetto Street and the northern portion of the property fronting
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 -Page 1 of 10
onto Engman Street currently serves as an off-street parking lot for the public school directly
across Holt Avenue. The central portion of the property is fenced vacant land that consists of a
number of live oak trees.
The property is surrounded by a variety of uses. To the immediate north is a child day care
center. To the east and south are detached dwellings and community residential homes that abut
the property. These properties front onto Fairburn Avenue and are zoned Medium Density
Residential (MDR) District. To the west is Clearwater Intermediate School. The Homeless
Emergency Project (HEP) business office is located one city block to the east across Fairburn
Avenue.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to develop the site with a total of five buildings. Two buildings will temporarily
house male veterans and serve as a sixty-four bed/resident Residential Shelter. Another two
buildings will operate as temporary accommodations for woman veterans and their children in
fourteen attached dwelling units. The final proposed building will function as a club house for
residents to utilize as a social center. The proposed term of occupancy per resident/families is
twenty-four months. Furthermore, a total of sixty off-street parking spaces will be provided
amongst four shared parking lots between the buildings. All four parking lot driveways will
access Holt Avenue. The entire property will be fenced with a four to six foot gold colored
aluminum decorative fence and landscaped to soften the development on surrounding properties.
The two buildings designed to accommodate sixty-four single male veterans will be two-story
structures with 16,248 square feet of floor area (shown as VA Residential Shelters #3 and #4 on
site plan). The floor plan shows that each level will be divided into sixteen individual units for a
total of thirty-two units per building. Each unit will be approximately 500 square feet and will
consist of one bedroom, a bathroom, and a living room, but each unit will not have cooking
facilities. Also, there will be a total of eight handicap units, four units provided on the first floor
of each building. Each unit will be compliant with ADA regulations. The male residents will
utilize an existing off-site shared dining hall currently being used by other HEP tenants. The
buildings will be located on the southern portion of the site oriented toward Holt Avenue. These
two buildings will be identical in design. As mentioned above, each building will be two-stories
with the top of the highest point being 26.11 feet or 24 feet at midpoint of pitched roof from
existing grade, which is below the maximum height of 30 feet. These buildings are basically
rectangular in shape and will feature architectural elements similar to approved HEP properties
in the immediate area.
Residential Shelter #2 will consist of ten attached dwelling units designed to accommodate
women veterans and their dependents. It will be a two-story building with 10,284 square feet of
floor area. Two types of residential units are proposed in this building. Unit A will consist of
three bedrooms while Unit B will consist of two bedrooms. Unit A will have a floor area of
1,200 square feet per unit and Unit B will have a floor area of 914 square feet per unit. There
will be four A Units and six B Units per building for a total of ten dwelling units. No ADA
dwelling units are included in this building. The building will be two-stories with the top of the
highest point being 26.11 feet or 24 feet at midpoint of pitched roof from existing grade, which is
below the maximum height of 30 feet. These buildings will be less rectangular in shape by
projecting out to accommodate the different unit types. As with VA Residential Shelters 93 and
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 2 of 10
#4, Shelters #2 will feature architectural elements similar to approved HEP properties and will be
oriented towards Holt Avenue.
Residential Shelter #1 will be a single-story building to accommodate women veterans and their
dependents. It will consist of 5,142 square feet of floor area and comprise of four attached
dwelling units. The floor plan shows two A units and one Unit B, as described above. The fourth
unit type will be Unit C. This unit consists of four bedrooms, two bathrooms, and all other
necessary facilities. The height of this building will be 13.9 feet to the highest point above
existing grade, which is also below the maximum height of 30 feet. Lastly, the club house is
2,336 square foot single story building. It will consist of an exercise room, activity room,
computer room, sitting room, and an office space. The club house will be 15.1 feet at the highest
point above existing grade, which is also below the maximum height of 30 feet.
As previously mentioned, a variety of land uses surround the proposed site which is zoned for
institutional uses yet abuts a single family residential neighborhood to the east. However, the
mix of proposed building types, size and architectural designs although not typically associated
with single-family neighborhoods attempts to incorporate residential features similar to single
family residences, while trying to provide the character of a residential street.
Density: Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 1201.1, the maximum
allowable density is 12.5 dwelling units per acre. The property has a lot area of 125,017 square
feet which allows for a maximum of thirty-five dwelling units. According to the Countywide
Plan Rules Section 2.3.3.7.3, residential shelters may be considered a residential equivalent use if
the residential shelter units do not qualify as dwelling units. Basically, this means that the
residential shelter may not have cooking facilities in, each individual unit, where attached
dwelling units have such facilities. If the individual residential shelter units do not qualify as
dwelling units then regulations allow for three beds to qualify as one dwelling unit. The
proposed sixty-four individual residential shelter units do not have cooking facilities; therefore,
they meet the criteria and qualify as twenty-one dwelling units. The remaining two residential
buildings will have a combined fourteen attached dwelling units. As previously stated, the
property has a lot area of 125,017 square feet which allows for a maximum of thirty-five
dwelling units. The proposal is for a total of thirty-five dwelling units which is the maximum
development potential for the subject property.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-
1201.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.85. The overall proposed ISR is 0.59, which is
consistent with the Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1204, 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 Section 2-1203, the minimum lot area for residential
shelter/attached dwelling units is 10,000 square feet. The subject property is 125,017 square feet
in area. Pursuant to the same Tables, the minimum lot width for residential shelters is 100 feet.
The lot width of this site is 109.60 feet along Palmetto Street, a lot width of 1,086.7 feet along
Holt Ave., and a lot width of 124.73 feet along Engman Street. The proposal is consistent with
these Code provisions.
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 -Page 3 of 10
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1204, there are no minimum required setbacks for
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to
CDC Section 2-1203, the minimum setbacks for residential shelters/attached dwelling units in
the I District may be within 15 - 25 feet (front) and 10 feet (side). The proposal has a front
(west) setback of 10.3 feet (to proposed pavement) and 25.01 feet (to proposed building) along
Holt Avenue, front (north) setback of 24.99 feet (to proposed building) along Engman Street, and a
front (south) setback of 25 feet (to proposed building). The setbacks will allow for off-street
parking lots that meet the required number of off-street parking spaces for the intended land use.
The requested setbacks will not impact the required perimeter buffer along Holt Avenue. A ten
foot landscape perimeter buffer will be planted to soften the view of the parking lots pavement
from the street and adjacent properties. Also, each proposed building will meet the standard
front setback of 25 feet along Holt Avenue; therefore, the front setbacks to pavement will not
have a negative impact on the visual appearance along this side of the property.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1204, there is no maximum required
height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison,
pursuant to CDC Section 2-1203, the maximum allowable height for a residential
shelter/attached dwelling units is 30 feet. The highest of the proposed two-story structures, from
existing grade to the midpoint of the pitched roof is 24 feet, which is below the maximum height
of 30 feet. The proposed buildings will each display consistent architectural elements and colors,
as well as those of surrounding HEP properties. This development should enhance the character
of this area.
Minimum Off-Street Parkin: Pursuant to CDC Sections 2-1203 and 2-1204, the minimum
required number of required off-street parking spaces for a residential shelter is one space per
two residents, and the minimum number of required off-street parking spaces for attached
dwellings is two spaces per dwelling unit. A total of sixty off-street parking spaces are required
by code for this development. The site plan shows that a total of sixty parking spaces will be
provided on site; therefore, the number of parking spaces is compliant with these Code
provisions. Although there will be four parking lots serving the residents parking needs, the
number of parking spaces is evenly distributed to provide adequate parking spaces for each
building. In addition, ADA accessible walkways will be constructed connecting the parking lots
and buildings entrances to the existing sidewalk along Holt Avenue.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment
must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Based
upon the plans submitted, the mechanical equipment will be located to the immediate side or rear
of the individual buildings. The location and screening of such mechanical equipment will be
reviewed at time of building permit submission, should this application be approved by the CDB.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
intersections of Palmetto Street and Holt Avenue, and Holt Avenue and Engman Street; as well
as at each parking lot entrance, 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 twenty-foot
sight visibility triangles. There is a proposed four to six foot decorative fence to enclose the
entire property shown on the site and landscape plans. Both plans show the fence encroaching
within the sight triangles along Holt Avenue. For this fence to be located as proposed, it shall
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 4 of 10
need to be revised to be compliant with the above referenced section of the CDC. The
groundcover and shrubs shown to be planted within the sight triangle meet the criteria.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, all utilities including individual distribution lines must
be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Should this application
be approved by the CDB, all utilities serving this development must be relocated underground
on-site in compliance with this requirement.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D.1, the location of this development plan
requires a ten foot wide landscape buffer along Palmetto Street, Holt Avenue, and Engman
Street, and a ten foot wide landscape buffer along the side yard. The proposal does not include
any reduction to any required landscape buffer. The landscape plan shows that all required
perimeter landscape buffers are compliant with Code standards. The applicant proposes a variety
of plantings within the perimeter buffer including such trees as muskogee crape myrtles, winged
elms, and southern magnolias. Shrubs and ground cover will include dwarf firebrush, dwarf
Indian hawthorn, jasmine, and big blue lily turf. In addition, the applicant proposes a wider
landscape perimeter buffer along the side (east) property line. Rather than providing the required
ten foot buffer, the landscape plan shows a twelve foot buffer that will consist of dwarf firebrush
shrubs, southern magnolias and slash pine trees between the subject property and the adjacent
single family residences. The landscape plan also shows that a number of existing mature live
oak trees will be preserved and provide shade over two of the parking lots. Each required
landscape perimeter buffer includes the required number of shrubbery, groundcover and trees to
soften the development adequately from the surrounding properties. The interior of the new
parking lots will also be landscaped to meet Code requirements. A sufficient number dwarf
Indian hawthorn shrubs and weeping yaupon holly trees will be planted within this landscaped
area. Also, adequate landscaping is provided between the decorative fence and public right-of-
ways.
The submitted landscape plan complies with Section 3-1202 for perimeter, fencing, foundation,
and interior parking lot landscaping and should provide adequate visual relief from the scale of
the parking lots and structures.
Solid Waste: The proposal includes the provision of adequate solid waste enclosures and trash
receptacles located within each parking lot. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the
City's Solid Waste Department.
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated
with the subject property.
Community Development Board -May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 5 of 10
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-1201.1 and
Tah1P')_1')na-
y µv Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
FAR 0.65 0.40 X
ISR 0.85 0.59 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 125,017 square feet (2.87 acres) X
Minimum Lot Width N/A North: 124.73 feet X
West: 1,086.7 feet X
South: 109.60 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 24.99 feet (to building) X
West: 10.3 feet (to pavement) X
15.3 feet (to pavement)
25 feet (to building)
South: 25 feet (to building) X
Side: N/A East: 10 feet (to dumpster enclosure) X
12.88 feet (to dumpster
enclosure)
Maximum Height N/A 26.11 feet (to midpoint of existing roof) X
Minimum Determined by the 60 parking spaces X
Off-Street Parking Community Development (Res. Shelter 1 space per 2 residents)
Coordinator based on the (Attached Dwelling 2 spaces per unit)
specific use and/or ITE
Manual standards
Community Development Board -May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 6 of 10
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-
1204.A (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
I. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or
preservation of a working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 7 of 10
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of March 3, 2011, and recommended modifications to the development such as a
reduction in maximum development potential and removal of cooking facilities to qualify as a
residential shelter. The plans now reflect the necessary adjustments allowing the proposal to be
deemed legally sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based
upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. The 2.87 acres is located between Holt Avenue (west) and Fairburn Avenue (east) and between
Engman Street (north) and Palmetto Street (south);
2. That the subject property is located within the Institutional (I) District and the Institutional (I)
Future Land Use Plan category
3. Residential shelters and attached dwelling units are permitted uses in the Institutional
District;
4. The proposal is to redevelop the site with two new, two-story, 16,284 square foot residential
shelters with a total of 64 beds, 1 two-story 10,284 square foot residential building with ten
attached dwelling units, one single-story residential building with four attached dwelling units,
and a one-story 2,336 square foot club house for the Homeless Emergency Project (HEP);
5. Sixty off-street parking spaces will be provided which equals the number of required parking
for the combined uses of a 64 bed residential shelter and fourteen attached dwelling units;
6. Based on the maximum development potential, the subject property has a lot area of 125,017
that allows for a combined residential shelter and attached dwelling unit development of 35
dwelling units, as proposed;
7. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.59, which is consistent with the Code provisions;
8. The proposed gross floor area for all proposed buildings is 0.40 which is below the allowable
FAR;
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 -Page 8 of 10
9. The proposal includes flexibility to the front (west along Holt Avenue) setbacks of 10.3 feet
and 15.3 feet and a front (north along Engman Street) setback of 24.99 feet;
10. The highest proposed building from existing grade to the midpoint of the roofline to be 26.11
feet, which is below the maximum height of 30 feet;
11. The landscape plan complies with the landscape code requirements for perimeter, foundation,
and interior parking lot standards of the CDC;
12. The proposal is compatible with the adjacent properties; and
13. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with 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 proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Community Development Code
Sections 2-1201.1 and 2-1204 of the Community Development Code;
2. That the proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2.3.3.7 of the Countywide
Plan Rules;
3. That the proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project as per Community Development Code Section 2-1204.A; and
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-914.A. of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
Flexible Development approval for a 64-bed Residential Shelter and 14 attached dwelling units
with a clubhouse in the Institutional (I) District with a lot area of 125,017 square feet, lot widths
of 109.6 feet (Palmetto Street), 1,086.7 feet (Holt Avenue) and 124.73 feet (Engman Street),
front (south) setbacks of 25 feet (to building), front (west) setbacks of 25.01 feet (to building)
and 10.3 feet (to pavement), front (north) setbacks of 24.99 feet (to building) and side (east)
setbacks of 25.4 feet (to building), 19.96 feet (to pavement), and 10 feet (to dumpster enclosure),
a building height of 24 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof), and 60 off-street parking spaces as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Infill project under the provisions of the Community
Development Code Section 2-1204.C., subject to the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That the final design, color, and elevations of the proposed residential shelter and attached
dwelling unit buildings be consistent with the conceptual design, color, and elevations
submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB;
2. That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all utilities including individual
distribution lines must be installed underground, as set forth in CDC Section 3-912;
3. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, a Tree Preservation Plan prepared by a certified
arborist, consulting arborist, landscape architect or other specialist in the field of
arboriculture be submitted;
4. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plan must show that all outdoor
mechanical equipment shall be completely screened on four sides by a fence, gate, wall,
mounds of earth, or vegetation from view from public streets and abutting properties. If such
screening is provided by means of a fence, gate, or wall, materials shall be consistent with
those used in the construction of and the architectural style of the principal building as set
forth in CDC Section 3-201.D;
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 -Page 9 of 10
5. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the proposed fencing shall be approved as set
forth in CDC Section 3-904.A.;
6. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall comply with all requirements of
the Engineering Department;
7. That, prior to the issuance of building permits, applicant shall comply with the current
Transportation Impact fee Ordinance and fee schedule and pa' ._. prier-tq a Certificate of
Occupancy.
Prepared by Planning & Development Dept. Staff-
K .n' V. Nurnberger, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map-, Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
S: (Planning Department) C l) BTLEX (FLD) (Pending cases)Up for the next CDBWolt 1001 Homeless Emergency Project West (1) 2011.xx -
KWAWolt 1001 (HEP) Staff Report.docx
Community Development Board - May 17, 2011
FLD2011-02008 - Page 10 of 10
Kevin Nurnberger
100 S Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
727-562-
kevin.nurnbergergmyclearwater. com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Planner III March 2011 to present
Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida October 2010 to March 2011
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. Assist public customers at the Zoning Counter. Review Building
permits Business tax receipts and Landscape plans.
Planner I
County of York, Yorktown, Virginia 2007 to 2009
Reviewed residential, commercial and mixed use development plans to ensure compliance with
planning, zoning, subdivision and environmental standards as well as design criteria,
specifications, regulations, codes and ordinances. Manage case load of planning applications and
conduct site visits. I met with residents and neighborhood organizations regarding new existing
residential development projects as directed. I led pre-application meetings with residents,
contractors and developers regarding future projects which included state and local government
agencies.
Site Assistant
Gahan and Long Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland 2006 to 2007
I helped to enforce Article 3 of the Planning Order (NI) with land owners, developers and district
councils on procedures relating to archaeological and built heritage remains on proposed
development sites. I assisted on site during the archeological process though out the pre-
development stage.
Development Planner
Versar Inc, Fort Story/Fort Eustis, Virginia 2005 to 2006
Assisted the Cultural Resources Manager in the predevelopment stages of new development and
building expansion projects. Reviewed site plans to ensure protection of historic properties.
Supervised and participated in historical surveys and research in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan, the secretary of the Interior's Standards for Preservation planning and the
Federal installations and the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. I developed survey
strategies for the Cultural Resource Manager by reviewing local and state planning documents,
comprehensive plans. The Virginia Department of Transportation plan and Virginia Power's
public utility plan. I acted as a resource to the community to educate them on the matter of
historic preservation.
City Planner
City Planning Commission, New Orleans, LA 2000 to 2005
Primary subdivision planner assisting applicants throughout the subdivision process in
accordance with the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City of New Orleans. Evaluated
zoning and subdivision applications prepared and presented preliminary staff reports to the City
Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Adjustments. I participated in the community and
neighbourhood workshops that focused on remapping and rezoning portions of the city in
support of the proposed new Comprehensive zoning ordinance.
EDUCATION
University of New Orleans, LA
MA Urban and Regional Planning (2004)
State University of New York at Buffalo, NY
BA Anthropology (1999)
O
Q
/p BECKETT
J
z
C7
ST
1 .` .I TERRACE RD
O D
s*-e t V_T ST IftJ='CIP.?:F
?.•1
ST
Z . c . LU }
t
E
?
FAIRN
w
_¢ PARKWOOD
4
o BECKETT ST
ST S?ZT ?,
a P _
•
00niT1t z ST =
0
¢
OODBINE
GRANT C U
SPRING
a ¢ a 6R j?A) E, f.? ST 4 SPRINGDALE
C r
ARLTO N Y ST o
co
w
_ RUSSELL
r:=
? ST OVERLEA
ST
O TANGERINE ST w \
ENGNIIAN ? C
ST g ENGMAN ST DR
g
LA SALLE
ST O
Q
¢ O
O
O PINEBROOK
PALM BLUFF ST ts C Greer
ADMIRAL WOODS
ON LN
ST >
ST Z Q
p O
CEDAR _ N Hi RI SO !S
HIBISCUS ST Y
UJ
n METTO
?
O V) U)
Ld
PALMETTO S
Ll ST HIBISCUS P
Q
UJ
Q 5
T
ST
NI CH OLSON
J
PROJECT ?J
SITE
ELDRIDGE ST
Ma
IE
p
St
LEE ST
O
ST
O
LL1
¢
¢
Q
¢
¢
¢
F
m
o
w
Q
ST JAC KS ON RD FORE ST RD
O P [] P 11 5 n I
LOCATION
Owner: Homeless Emergency Project (West) Case: FLD201 1-02008
Site: 1001 Holt Avenue Property Size: 2.87
PIN: 10-29-15-00000-130-0500
10-29-15-00000-130-0400 Atlas Page: 2698
C4 3 Q0
1235 N N N N N
5, 24
L:::__ 01 u
ENGMAN ST y
"PVC FM (Plumed) 1215 a
13/03
V)
1
22
1
217 2/208
1210 213 3 1214
209 b
4
13/04 3
5 1204
m
205
6
201
1223
1 1222
12
1221 1220
219 111218
1217 2
1215
1213 3 1212
10
1211
1209 4
1
9
1201 5 8
N
N
6 "
1200
0
?
z
16
13
JZ _
1211
15
1209
1207
14
1205
1201 13
2
129 8" F M. Slipline in 24"56 1117
125 1 1124
2
121
3116
117
4 1114
113 1112
109 5 1108
105 104
1102 W
101 1100
1127
1125 -
1 -
141126
1121 2 .N. 131124
1122
1117 3 11118
193
4 116
5 10
1101 6 9
L
11
1115
10
Z
J
9
1109
W 8
m
1101
7
1024 Q
2 CEDAR ST 6
1022
0
N
1020
016
Q
~
J 1012
Q 1010
_ }008
1000
13/05 006
004
0 1002
h
.N.
000
1021 h
y
12 1020
N
2" 11 1016
1015 3 10 1012
1013
1008
4 9
1005 5 8
6N N 7
8.
Mae
1015
5
100
1007
1005 g• 4
3 2 1
O O N
r eM, q
r
PALMETTO ST
18"
N h7 M 7 10
m D h O! M h
.' „ r r N N ,N,. r N N co
N 910
n r
.908 F
EXISTING USE
Owner: Homeless Emergency Project (West) Case: FLD201 1-02008
Site: 1001 Holt Avenue Property Size: 2.87
PIN: 10-29-15-00000-130-0500 Atlas Page: 2696
10-29-15-00000-130-0400
9^
1
5
2 b
0 b
2
- R
I
-
n
23
N L
.
N
-
-
N 7
O
0 fi^ 20„ u
j ?
PVC F
M
Plu ed c
1215 a
221 .
.
z
16 a
217 21208 2 1 1 1216
1213
13/03 1210 213
09
3 1214
a
1213 3
10 1211
15
1209
13/04 4 1209 4 9 1207
14
5 1204 1205
05
01
6
?
1201 13
129
'p 12
1117
125 1 1124 5 14 11
2 1123 1115
10
121
I
17 31116
Z
4 1114
1112 111116 1109 9
113
109 5 1 m 8
61104 1101
05 ign
01 71102
1100 W 7
1024 Q
1022 6
1015
1b20 1021 12 1020
Liu Mid 5
016 1009 1007
J 1012 1013 1005
1 4
1010
4008
4 1008
9 9
1000
13/05 ]006
b1004
3
2
1
0
N
,002
6
r
L
000
N h N 910
O
/R
r N N N N
906
ZONING
Owner: Homeless Emergency Project (West) Case: FLD201 1-02008
Site: 1001 Holt Avenue Property Size: 2.87
PIN: 10-29-15-00000-130-0500 Atlas Page: 269B
10-29-15-00000-130-0400
1223
1221 1 1222
12 1220
X219
5 1212
1211
1201 5 8
1200
112
1
1125 141126
1
124
1121 2 13
1122
1117 3 12
118
113 4
5 10
1101
6 9
? 8
?i
M
2^ 11 1016
1015 3 1012
10
1005 5 $
6 ? m ?
N
? 1007
8'
u : VP 4711
?T
r.
AERIAL
Owner: Homeless Emergency Project (West) Case: FLD2011-02008
Site: 1001 Holt Avenue Property Size: 2.87
PIN: 10-29-15-00000-130-0500 Atlas Page: 2696
10-29-15-00000-130-0400
t
e?
Looking N across Engman Street from subject property
1001 Holt Avenue
FLD2011-02008
Looking N from subject property along Holt Avenue at
vacant parcel and Clearwater Intermediate School
Looking E from subject property along Palmetto Street
Looking S along Fairburn Ave at abutting residential
properties
Looking S on Holt Avenue at subject property
LfJ?Looking W along Palmetto Street from subject property
PINELLAS COUNT 5CHOOtS
May 11, 2011
Mr. Kevin W. Numberger
Planner Ili
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
Re: Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
1001 Holt Avenue, Clearwater, FL
Residential Shelter and Attached Dwellings
Dear Mr. Numberger,
SOWL BIARstF
?i:ai?xer<o?t
Sent via email
The school district is in receipt of your public hearing notice for the above referenced project.
During our discussions with Barbara Green and Bruce Fyfe prior to the sale of this property to
HEP, school district staff was assured that background checks would be done on all residents
who stay at the proposed shelterldwellings. We were also assured that health care and social
work staff would be on site twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.
While the school district is supportive of this project, our priority is to the safety and security of
the students at Clearwater intermediate School across the street from this project. We wouid
like to see a condition of approval that requires background checks on all residents staying at
the shelterldwellings, as well as health care and social work staff on site at all times.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact me at 547-7291.
SincerV. y,
T
Ginny Pan')Real Estate Analyst
Real EstatConcurrency Services
cc: Jim Robinson, General Counsel
Michael Bessette, Associate Superintendent, Facilities, Operations, Safety and Security
Barbara Green, President, Homeless Emergency Project
St vu-"en snt
HoItAw Dev.Re%ie Lx.
Cleamater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
? SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
? SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
? SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ 1405.00
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
(Revised 07/11/2008)
-PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT-
A. APPLICANT, P
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
Homeless emergency Project, Inc. (Barbara Green)
1120 Betty Lane Clearwater, FL 33755
727-442-9041 Ext: 101 FAX NUMBER: I
727-446-1516 EMAIL: barbgreen@ethep_org
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc
Synergy Civil Engineering, Inc. (Michael J. Palmer, P.E.)
3000 Gulf to Bay Blvd_ Suite 201 Clearwater, FL 33759
727-796-1926 FAX NUMBER:
727-470-1344 EMAIL: Mnalmer@svnergvcivileng.com
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
PROJECT NAME: Homeless Emergency Project (west) PROJECT VALUATION: $6,750,000.00
STREET ADDRESS 1101, 1051, 1001, 1201, 1231 Holt Avenue
PARCEL NUMBER(S): 10/29/15/00000/130/0500;10/29/15/00000/130/0400
PARCEL SIZE (acres): 2.$7 PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 125,017
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attachment A
PROPOSED USE(S): Institutional Housing (Residential Shelters for a combined 112 beds / residents & accessory building / club house)
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Reduction in front setback from 25' to 1.0.3' (at the closest point) to allow for the proposed parking lots to
Specifically identify the request extend into the front setback line.
(include number of units or square A total of 4 parking lots are being proposed, all will require a reduction in the setback line.
footage of non-residential use and all
requested code deviations; e.g.
reduction in required number of
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-1 1\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 1 of 8
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI7
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES - No x (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
? SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A)
? Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail:
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 project will be similar to the Homeless Emergency Project shelter building located adjacent to and along
the east property line of the proposed residential shelter buildings. The project meets all of the bulk regulations
and density requirements. (With the exception of the front setback reduction)
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof.
The proposed use (Residential Shelter) is allowed within the Institutional District and is an appropriate
use that will complement the existing buildings located adjacent to the proposed project. The proposed
buildings and landscaping will be an attracted addition to the neighborhood.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed project should improve the safety of the neighborhood by redeveloping an existing vacant lot
which currency maybe an attractive area for crime. The project will now buffer the rear property line of
the residential units located on Fairbum Ave, and creating a safe neighborhood environment.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The project is designed to meet the parking requirements of the City of Clearwater. The project is not located
in an area currently experiencing traffic congestion. Also, the City of Clearwater traffic engineering dept.
determined the traffic impact due to this development will be minimal and will not require a traffic study.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The Homeless Emergency Project, Inc. currently has a Main Corporate Office located one block from the
proposed development and existing shelter buildings located along the east property of the proposed project.
the residential shelter use, is allowed within the Intuitional District and is consistent with the community
character.
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 residential shelter buildings will be monitored by (HEP) staff on a daily basis. The proposed
landscaping and architectural style of the buildings will enhance the neighborhood visually. HEP currently
operates a similar facility located on Fairburn Ave. in harmony with the local community.
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-1 1\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
? Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA- Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this
zoning
The request for a front setback reduction is for the parking lots only and not for the proposed buildings. The
reduction in the set back distance is necessary in order to meet the required number of parking stalls.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general
intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and .4 h the intent and purpos Of this Zoning distr...
purpose, The future land use map indicates that the entire area adjacent to the project site is designated as institutional.
The proposed use is consistent with the existing zoning district and is an allowed use.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
The proposed residential shelters will complement the surrounding land uses and should increase the
development prospects of the surrounding area.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
The proposed plan will create a safe buffer for the existing homes located on Fairburn Ave., where currently
the rear yards of these properties are adjacent to an unsecured vacant parcel of land.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not
substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following
objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating
jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a
land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use.
The use is consistent with the future land use map and the existing zoning district.
Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of
the following design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of
the following design elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
The proposed development will provide a visually appealing architectural style along with landscape buffers.
The proposed plan will create a safe buffer for the existing homes located on Fairburn Ave., where currently
the rear yards of these properties are adjacent to an unsecured vacant parcel of land.
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-1 1 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 3 of 8
E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria
Manual and 4-202.A.21)
? A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition
or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual- A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement.
? If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt.
? At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following;
? Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
iuNuacu yrauu,y un.wuuiy muancu iwu, clc vatiuna ol all -structures-,
? All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
? Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
? A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with
the City manual.
? Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
? Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations.
? COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT
SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable
? ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following):
MP Stormwater plan as noted above is included
Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor
elevations shall be provided.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN
AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY
MAY OCCUR.
If you have q::e?tioncr@ding thes°c rroqulre.^„e,^,t? tc, tent th ee .. C`'ty Pu'bli-c .11:vr ks- Adrnini.L,a*ion. Engineering Department at ;'2T, 562=47 50.
you ,,,,? ^y ar,,, . ,? ?0^t? .,..a, ;.y
F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
? SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies;
? TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location,
including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - please design around the existing trees;
? TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of
such trees;
? LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
? PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces).
Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and
shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not
deviations to the parking standards are approved;
? GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
? PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided);
? COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable;
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-1 1 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 4 of 8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A)
SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24' x 36"):
X Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
X North arrow;
X Enq_ineerin.q_ bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
X All dimensions;
X Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures;
X Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures;
X All required setbacks;
X All existing and proposed points of access;
X All required sight triangles;
X Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including
description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements;
X Location of ail street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site;
X Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas
and water lines;
X All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
X Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas;
X Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening
{per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #7011;
X Location of all landscape material;
X Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities;
- Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
X Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
X Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a
Level Two approval.
SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in writtenitabular form:
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
X Land area in square feet and acres; 125,017 12.87 10,000 / 0.23 125,017 / 2.87
X Number of EXISTING dwelling units; 0 NIA N/A
X Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; 0 105 Allowed 105
Residential
X Gross floor area devoted to each use; 0 Shelter 53,064
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the 40 56 59
X number of required spaces;
X Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, 32,670 /100% Max. 106,265185% 57,950 / 35.3%
expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility N /A NIA N/A
X easement;
X Building and structure heights, u su 26-1 i
X Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and 0.26 0.85 0.46
X Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. 0 0.65 0.27
? REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'/2 X 11);
? FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan:
X One-foot contours or spot elevations on site;
X Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel;
X All open space areas;
X Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms;
X Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned);
X Streets and drives (dimensioned);
X Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned);.
X Structural overhangs;
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-11 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 5 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)
? LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
X All existing and proposed structures;
X Names of abutting streets;
X Draiii'n' a ,-,d areass nniudlnn swales, '.de clnncc and by tom elevations",
X Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
X Sight visibility triangles;
X Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
X Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
tree survey);
X Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
schedule;
X Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
X Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
protective measures;
X Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
percentage covered;
X Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
X Irrigation notes.
? REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'h X 11);
? COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met.
1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
? BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information:
X All sides of all buildings
X Dimensioned
X Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
X Materials
? REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 8 Y X 11.
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3-1806)
? All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photoqraphs and dimensions (area, heiqht, etc.), indicate whether thev will be
removed or to remain.
? All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing;
freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals)
? Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required).
? Reduced signage proposal (8 % X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Submittals\City of Clearwater\2-7-1 1\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 6 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)
? LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
X All existing and proposed structures;
X Names of abutting streets;
X Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations;
X Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
X Sight visibility triangles;
X Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
X Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
tree survey);
X Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
schedule;
X Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
X Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
protective measures;
X Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
percentage covered;
X Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
X Irrigation notes.
? REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/z X 11);
? COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met.
1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
? BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information:
X All sides of all buildings
X Dimensioned
X Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
X Materials
? REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 8'/z X 11
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3-1806)
? All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
? All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing;
freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals)
? Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required).
? Reduced signage proposal (8'/z X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
C:\Documents and Settings\timk\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\HD24HDTQ\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-
WEST.doc
Page 7 of 8
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C)
Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development:
Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day.
Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or
that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections.
13
Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual.
The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the
Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750)
Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement.
Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all
roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting.
MP Traffic Impact Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT
STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND
SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-
4750.
L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY:
Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if
any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire
sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with
the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required.
? Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included.
MP Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW
CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE
RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334.
M. SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made
in this application are true and accurate to the best-pf my
knowledge and authorize Ci't?(representativesPwisit and
photographrthe propertydtlescri?d in this'a?/ptcation.
F Michael J Palmer, P/.E ?
Signature of property owner or representative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINF?LLAS
Sworn to and subscribed before me this tt? day of
A.D. 20 to me and/or by
CS.'• .car , who is?S re song Tcnov has
produced
as i tification. > 4 D
t • ? ;: TH9990A HAS
.1-1, Cc. _ t Y_ - f J: A -*-':MY
My 4ommission expires: I (407),34s-0153
EXPIRES March 18, 2(113
39
C:\Documents and Settings\timk\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\HD24HDTQ\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-
WEST.doc
Page 8 of 8
14. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
i. Provide names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names:
Homeless emergency Project, Inc.
(Bruce Ebb--- _ ....? - - _ . -_.
2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location):
East side of Holt Ave. between Palmetto Street on the south and Engman Street on the north.
3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request)
Four residential shelter buildings, providing temporary housing for 112 individuals and an accessory
building-to be used as a club house.
A. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
Michael J. Palmer, P.E.
as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition;
5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City
representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application;
7. Th we), the undersign a. t city, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
P perty Owner Property Owner
Property Owner Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this /4- YJ day of
personally appeared CJ VG e /-- . who having been first duly sworn
deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed.
fcti'nt';r - DOt µEAD
IEA
MY COMMISSION EE 38645
: ro*= EXPIRES: January 12, 2015
Bonded T1xu Pcftard kmmnoe ArrTY ---- - -
Notary Public Signature
Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires: -;?4f fell -__.
\\Synergy2\synergy\Projects\12-020-70 HEP\Agency\City of City of Clearwater\Planning\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) HEP-WEST.doc
Page 8 of 8
I SYNERGY
Civil Engineering, Inc.
March 11, 2011
City of Clearwater
Kevin Nurnberger, Planner II
Municipal Services Building
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
3000 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, Suite 201
Clearwater, FL 33759
(727) 796-1926
www.syne rgycivilen g.com
Certificate of Authorization No. 27692
RE: Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
FLD2011-02008 (Additional Items Requested to Complete Submittal)
The following items have been included or revised on the plans and or application
submitted to the City of Clearwater for the above referenced project:
Engineering Review
1. Tapping sleeves and valves are installed by the City at the applicant's expense.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
2. Sewer laterals to be installed beneath ponds shall be constructed of ductile iron pipe.
RESPONSE: Ductile Iron pipe noted on the utility plan.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy:
1. Prior to Engineering Sanitary Sewer, Engineering Storm Water and
Engineering Final inspections, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of asbuilt
drawings that are signed and sealed by a State of Florida Registered
Professional Engineer. The Construction Services Inspector will field inspect as-
built drawings for accuracy.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Environmental Review
DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be
forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
FLD2011-02008 Page 1
Fire Review
Note: Things to be addressed at building stage
1) Must meet the requirement of FAC 69A60 Florida Fire Prevention code to
install signage at entry doors to identify if this building has been constructed
with lightweight truss floor and roof system. You may contact this office for a
copy of details at 7275624327 X 3062.
RESPONSE. Acknowledged.
2) Fire Alarm
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Land Resource Review
1. This proposed plan is extremely intense. There are 110 existing trees on
site with only14 trees proposed to be preserved. The 14 remaining trees have
some intense work going on around them which could impact their health and
survivability. Please be aware that since the site was previously developed
that tree replacement will be inch for inch. The plan proposes the removal of
872 inches and proposes 295 inches, therefore creating a deficit of 577 inches
which equates to $27,696.00.
RESPONSE. Acknowledged.
2. Trees shown to be removed are not consistent between plans. The demo
plans shows trees to be removed but are shown to be preserved on other plan sheets.
RESPONSE: Sheets have been revised to match.
3. The tree canopy sizes are incorrect. The general rule for hardwoods is one
foot RADIUS, not diameter, for each diameter inch (DBH).
RESPONSE: Canopy sizes have been revised.
4. Tree #328, remove the proposed landscaping from the island as digging
205 holes will impact this tree, show to remove the curb and asphalt under the
canopy by hand, suggest structural soil, placed "On Grade" as the base
material for the pavers.
RESPONSE. Noted on Demo plan & landscaping removed.
5. Tree #331, suggest structural soil, placed "On Grade" as the base material
for the pavers, the club house may be too close as it encroaches to root plate
of the tree, relocate the water and fire lines away from this tree.
RESPONSE. Water and fire lines have been relocated.
6. Show the proposed electric and cable locations.
RESPONSE. Electric / cable locations are shown on the utility plan.
FLD2011-02008 Page 2
7. Revise the proposed irrigation main line as it goes through some of the trees.
RESPONSE: Irrigation line has been revised.
8. Revise the proposed sanitary main line as it affects trees on adjacent properties.
Land Resource Review
RESPONSE: The proposed sanitary sewer is to be installed in the same location as the
existing sanitary sewer.
9. Provide a Tree Preservation Plan prepared by a certified arborist, consulting arborist,
landscape architect or other specialist in the field of arboriculture. This plan must show how
the proposed building, parking, storm water and utilities impact the critical root zones (drip
lines) of trees to be preserved and how you propose to address these impacts i.e.; crown
elevating, root pruning and/or root aeration systems. Other data required on this plan must
show the trees canopy line, actual tree barricade limits (2/3 of the drip line and/or in the
root prune lines if required), and the tree barricade detail. And any other pertinent
information relating to tree preservation. Provide prior to building permit.
Parks and Recreation Review
open space/recreation impact fees are due prior to issuance of building permits or final plat
(if applicable) whichever occurs first. These fees could be substantial and it is recommended
that you contact Debbie Reid at 727-562- 4818 to calculate the assessment. NOTE: Site
data table needs to be corrected to add the total number of units being built in project
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Planning Review
On Sheet 4 under the Site Data table, revise the maximum number of allowable beds based
upon the 125,017 square foot lot area provided in the table. 125,017 square feet/2.87 acres
x 12.5 = 35 permitted dwelling units x 3 beds per unit = 105 maximum resident/beds
permitted for a residential shelter at this location.
RESPONSE: Site Data Table has been revised.
Planning Review
On page 2 of the Flexible Development application, Section D Written Submittal
requirements, provide additional information on how criteria 1 and 5 are met by this
development. Address how this development of 84 dwelling units/112 residents is
consistent with the overall character and density of the abutting Medium Density
Residential and adjacent Low Medium Density Residential neighborhoods which consists
FLD2011-02008 Page 3
primarily of detached dwellings. Do not just focus on how this development is in keeping
with existing characteristics of the other nearby HEP West properties.
RESPONSE. The new buildings are proportioned and their massing is broken up to be
consistent with the residential scale of the existing neighborhood. The siting of each
building helps create the feel of openness reminiscent of single family homes. The
clubhouse is easily recognizable as that of the arts and crafts/bungalow style. Its
architectural style with deep and broad roof lines and overhangs is not only meant to be
attractive, but shade the building to cut down on energy costs.
Planning Review
In regards to the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment project Criteria written submittal
requirements on page 3 of the application, further address questions 3 and 6. For question
number 3, explain how the residential shelter will complement the surrounding land uses
and increase the development prospects in the area. Regarding question 6, explain how the
design, scale, and intensity supports the established or emerging character of the area and
discuss how the proposed architectural style incorporates the design element criteria listed
for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment projects.
RESPONSE. Although many of the homes to the rear are nice, the majority are older and
nondescript or void of any real artistic character. There is no residential character across
the street from us, because it's a school, and we have very little rapport with the adjacent
properties to our north or south. Our goal was to within our budget establish an arts and
crafts/bungalow look reminiscent of the past of old Clearwater residential neighborhoods.
The scale and density are within the guidelines of what could've been designed for this
site if it were all single family.
Planning Review
The Site Data table on sheet 4 shows a proposed building height of 42 feet. The building
elevations on the architectural drawings show a maximum building height for the overall
development to be buildings 3 & 4 to be 26' 11". If this is so, correct the proposed height in
the table from 42 feet to 26'11".
RESPONSE. Changed to 26'-11"
Planning Review Sheet 4 shows a proposed fence and wall, and reads to see architectural
drawings for details. There are no details indicating the type of fence and/or wall, their
materials and height on the architectural drawings. Please provide a detail showing the
fencing/wall materials and indicate their height to ensure the height/material are compliant
with Section 3-802, 3-803, and 3-804.
RESPONSE. See Architectural Plans (Detail 5 /A6.0)
FLD2011-02008 Page 4
Planning Review
On Sheet L-2, the plant schedule shows 19 Walter's Viburnum trees to be 6 foot tall. All
trees need to be 8 to 10 feet in height. Revise.
RESPONSE. Landscape plan revised to indicate 8' to 10' height.
Planning Review
On Sheet 13, the 12 ft. minimum wide buffer along the east property line scales at 10 feet
wide. Revise to scale at 12 foot wide.
RESPONSE: Revised
Planning Review
The topographic survey needs to be signed and sealed by the surveyor in the surveyor's
certificate.
RESPONSE: This was done on the original plan.
Planning Review
On Sheet 4 in the Site Data Table, show how the 10% Vehicular Use Area of the proposed
parking area of 20,473 sq. ft. is being met. Provide the dimensions/area of the proposed
locations of the V.U.A. landscaping areas adjacent to the parking lots to show that it meets
the 2,047 square feet standard of Section 3-1202.E.
RESPONSE: This was shown on the original landscape plan data table and now on sheet 4.
Planning Review
Sheets 4 and 6 show AC units (mechanical equipment) located outside each proposed unit.
These AC units are not identified in the legend. Also, CDC Section3-201.D requires all
outside mechanical equipment to be screened on all four sides from public streets and
abutting properties.
RESPONSE: AC units are noted in the legend and screened.
Planning Review
As stated in Section 2-1201.1 of the Community Development Code (CDC), it is the intent of
the Institutional (1) District that development be consistent with the Countywide Future
Land Use Plan as required by state law. The uses and development potential of a parcel of
land within the I District shall be determined by the standards found in the Community
Development Code as well as the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property,
including any acreage or floor area restrictions set forth in the Rules Concerning the
Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan. Table 1201.1 shows the maximum
development potential allowed for the petitioned site under the Countywide Future Land
Use plan to be 12.5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development is a request to
construct four two- story buildings to be used as a residential shelter with a total of 84
residential units with a combined 112 residents/beds using the residential equivalent use
FLD2011-02008 Page 5
standards listed in the Countywide Plan Rules. According to Countywide Plan Rules Section
2.3.3.7, residential shelters may be considered to be a residential equivalent use and employ
the density standards of the residential equivalent use only if a residential shelter unit does
not qualify as a dwelling unit.
RESPONSE. The plans have been revised to indicate 35 dwelling units and 105 residents /
beds. Cooking appliances were removed from 70 units.
Planning Review
The Countywide Plan Rules define a dwelling unit as one or more rooms, designed, occupied
or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary
facilities provided within the dwelling unit for the exclusive use of a single family unit which
is consistent with the CDC definition. Based on the definitions above and review of the
submitted site plan, the proposed 84 units qualify as dwelling units and exceed the density
standards set forth in Section 2-1201.1. The density calculation for the subject property
which has a lot area of 125,017 square feet only allows a maximum of 35 dwelling units
based upon the 12.5 dwelling units per acre standard.
RESPONSE: Cooking appliances were removed from 70 units.
Planning Review
Therefore, forty-nine units will need to be eliminated from the plan for the development to
be compliant with the CDC and Countywide Plan Rules standards. An alternative option is to
remove the cooking facilities in the individual units and create interior spaces with shared
cooking facilities. If the interior spaces are modified to include shared facilities as described,
then the proposal would be eligible to utilize the density standards of the residential
equivalent use. The density criteria of residential equivalent use of 3 beds per unit would
allow a total of 105 residents/beds for this project.
RESPONSE: The plans have been revised to indicate 35 dwelling units and 105 residents/
beds. Cooking appliances were removed from 70 units.
Planning Review
In addition, attached dwelling units located in the I District require two parking spaces per
unit for a minimum number of 70 parking spaces for 35 attached dwelling units.
RESPONSE: Not applicable
Planning Review
The Planning Department and PPC believe that the proposed two year term of occupancy
cannot be classified as a temporary residence.
RESPONSE. Acknowledged.
FLD2011-02008 Page 6
Storm water Review
The following shall be addressed prior to Community Development Board (CDB):
The runoff coefficient calculations and the volume required calculations (page
19) shall be revised to reflect the following:
a) Phase II impervious area is not permitted to have 1/2 credit, as there is an
existing detention pond at this area.
RESPONSE: Phase it impervious was revised and calculated based on pre-development
conditions (Curve No. 0.20). No credit was taken for impervious area within the existing
SWFWMD permit area.
b) Postdevelopment runoff coefficient for pervious pavement areas shall not
be given half credit of the impervious pavement.
c) RESPONSE. Based on SWFWMD design criteria for pervious pavers, the curve number
is a function of the storage volume within the pervious paver. (See curve number graph
included within the Storm Water Report). Also the impaired water body requirements
exceed the city requirements for treatment volume (112" vs. 1.1") which will more
than offset the increase in curve number.
The following shall be addressed prior to issuance of the Building Permit:
1. Please submit soil tests to support the ponds design.
2. Page 8 of the drainage calculations showing stage and storage table for
pond 5, however, narrative on page 7 does not discuss about this pond.
3. Please provide guidelines for storm water water system maintenance.
4. Submit a copy of the approved SWFWMD ERP permit.
5. Show the roof collection system on the grading plan to ensure that all roof
runoff be routed to the pond for treatment and attenuation, and not impacting
adjacent homes. 6. Please show that phase I shall include construction of outfall for pond 3.
7. The finished floor elevation of the existing home located east of the
proposed club house is very low. Please provide a cross section at this
location and show that the proposed grading will not pose any impact to this
home and/or adjacent structures.
8. Provide a cross section for the pond 6 and the Engman Street rightofway
demonstrating that the proposed pond side slope toward the sidewalk is
meeting 4:1 maximum slope requirement.
9. Survey shall have 50' adjacent topography and finished floor elevation of
structures within this area.
10. Show on Grading plan the survey datum.
RESPONSE. Acknowledged.
FLD2011-02008 Page 7
General note:
1. All resubmittals shall be accompanied with a response letter addressing
how each department condition has been met.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
2. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional
comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Thank You,
Synergy Civil Engineering, Inc.
Michael J. Palm6, P.E.
Project Manager
FLD2011-02008 Page 8
dar and klar
erchhects inc.
AL
d
F-
}
Ul
ua
z
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC CLUB HOUSE PERSPECTIVE
.n
r,
R-1
/-TM HEP WEST 5GHEMATIG RESIDENTIAL SHELTER 344 2ND PLR. PLAN
HEP AF-5T SCHEMATIC RESIDENTIAL SHELTER 344 15T FLR. PLAN
AREAS
IT
N ??E
T- -4
YIDHt uGF
klar and klar
architects inc.
23]3 ua 1D n
cMVw?tx, D 33)81
w
11-
.J.^.
Vl
-1
I-
lzll W
Q u
Q Q
t- ?
W
X U
Y`
W
K
UL
to
r
? so . o z. rcia.
?v
o?
f??.0
0
klar and klar
MANF7
arcNtects inc.
28413 ew 1O rt
clwlw?tx, 11 39181
U(
t-
t?
1)
? lu
Q w
)W J
Oi
1-
tu
K
(L
to
ir
AA OOG2521
oP
? co,,a,?.?m? s..
A2.0
UNIT 'A'
W
HEP WE5T RESIDENTIAL 5HELTER 'B'
5GHEMATIG FLOOR PLAN
?I,•.Ib• o?,lab?
by
J CN?n?J ?c? o
171
O 1=AM 4' Y
r- kler and klar
1s•-a•' x 1a•?'
T- BED py, g$
9'-7' X I2'-4' I ?
_
0
0
= o
°• architects ina
BED #2 J `°" -
-73 . 12.
g•-a•'x1O•-1• KITCHEN ?w.?.E.. 33761
151_4" x 151-1.
J 1? tu'1,
BED #1
t--
q'-4"X 10'-O"
omit Ltl KITCHEN <C
1r-5^ X 1s-4'
FAMILY z ,
15'-11" X 19-4" d
Q Marc
llJ J
Z n, O ,u
lL J
HEP WE5T RE51MENTIAL SHELTER 'A'
1L 1
5GHEMATIG FLOOR PLAN K
W
omAoe..o I,.
AREAS
UAT B' (3 PERiW 91, `F
W4KVNr 1 5in125 ]D 5F
k PER H-oo2 Xb] SF
AL NL'FALE 10]M ?
5GHEMATIG RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2 IST/2NDFLR.
V
L
*oa ,L ____________
____ xor w,-e.
------------ _________ ___________
__________ _
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC, NORTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2 HEP WEST 5GHEMATIG SOUTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
---J swami. --
klar and klar
mA9v
architects inc.
wens ?.. ,o n
oi..rx•,w, n ss?e,
w
-1
W
t
to u n
Q >
lJl
O ,u
IL U
0-
tu
erc.Hmsmmi?xiaoeow®s?wmri swi w+i'.ss
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC WEST ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
HEP WEST 5GHEMATIG EAST ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
re I.-
klar and klar
architects inc.
28413 . 19 .
o1?YW?tr, 11 3-
w
lu
I?
Vl
I-I-y
L J
W
W IU
Q Q
? K
O J
X U
\Y
1,-n
V/
LU
IL
u Ao . o s. Kea.
®s
AA 0002321
AREAS ®o.. m e
oP
a?
oru uc vwe ?
1ar? uroea RooF slo ? ?.O '.
/ aw SCHEMATIC RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #I FIR5T FLOOR
0
F
s TYP. FENCE
----------- - -----------
----- ------ ---- - ------
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC NORTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #1 , HEP WEST SCHEMATIC SOUTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #1
ve-?rc
"lw
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC WEST ELEVATION RE51PENTIAL SHELTER #1
klar and klar
architects inc.
48473 u 19 n
c--,11 33]B1
W-
w
w
?n
s--
u u
p>?
1 4
lS1 - K
O w
lL v
y
w
w
.0
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC EAST ELEVATION RE5IDENTIAL SHELTER #1
REAR PORCH LDR
9
p B'-0"X40'_0'
12'-II'x0'-b"
- MENS
"H G
9
i
9 ?
-
CL05ET
OFFICE
- 12-IPxlo'-II"
---?
II'-0"x14'-10" ? ?
_ i- ______ ; I .
t
_ WOM. H.G.
u
U
EXERG ACTIVITY RM o
Y
6u.ss sr?x v
E
•. a? eocKS?avps
SITTING RM
4 ----- -----------
------ -----------
P. DESK
GOM
ENTRY
--------------------
HEP WEST 5CHEMATIC CLUB HOUSE PLAN
, -W..
Mar and klar
architects inc.
¢3A13 1. n
clwWt tw. tl 337M
W-
111
lU
Vl
z W LL
lU z
ll > Q
? a
1!-/ O J
W
K
0-
tu
I_-
BUILDING AREA: ..
iOiPL N4 w 23366:F
RY PLY+G! A? 192 VJ
B
n ? Roe.no s o.
? sr...? L-
?
A
PORGH 32565E
LiIRr7Rr S165F
N. 6R055 AREA 3000 Yf
AA OQ02321
®p m na
?p
?C
by
0
klar and klar
= 199m",
architects inc.
18-3 a iC n
,w tw, n 331st
W-
to
lU
r
l?
yt-
L J
,' 1 111 IL
Qd
wJ
?zW
tU
0-
tu
u
SGHEMATIG GLUE HOUSE !NEST ELEVATION
------ ----- -
----- ---
------ ----------------------
SGHEMATIG GLUE, HOUSE NORTH ELEVATION
o?
ooo„z,
-- -------------- -
oP
o?
? o
- --- ------------
SGHEMATIG GLUE, HOUSE SOUTH ELEVATION
----- ----- -- ] o aae. a ,a.
Fi
.0.st !IL
90 OF 2' VALLEY CURB
PER FOOT INDEX
SD11 L > EUI 'CEiJAIF
' EMlSII GI •C? i - IhIATCH EXISTNIGI H CI LT L V E N U C f iFDUNo 3t?
R Z
A/ Z
® 2I
5'S1DEN'AlX SLAiE 1? ? e! I
X11 EXISTIIIGf
I
n:
5YNERGY Clvll Engineerln6lnc
el?(s_e1s96 is+55s
v"wwlsy?leev e
_ I
neLOUteosleH'-
ICCnO
V.sID FENCE _ a 'rAOn ED WHHE It 5Tt (') n3y ITYr )
9p I5 EC MCHITECTUI:AL I STOP BAR M"') D14TCfi 5CSE _
I
FU IDrt-_
?vLe'iiF9SETJl r - - ? .! - rnnaalceum, ••.•,,.v
o - I-?' --/---1 AflCHITECT
-r s. KLAR&ICUIR ARCHITECTS,INC.
? ? .r S Ott t :. ? ?D } o a, sI
'l\ .«..' .`:. I s La .t I sass
I 2.ar 1
?? ?4, )L - '-U I I TvmEo• EuRe I SURVEYOR
IL 92' f - - - - 2s' SETE-1 - - - ) ZARA BOYO, INC. a
i- }} j I I -_. I I ?` Ir i r ieni,33 mei sae
Iw • }? ? ? 2 ! "? ?.- _ R'ITMP.1 Tr .:'GL ITI P.) -
_ ij ,S ITrP.i ?•m '1? CLUB ??F?-- 1Gd I y.:
VA R E N-HAL SHELTER S4 I fR
VA RESIDENTIAL SHELTER 4.3
I [,,
'
I .: F--L- zt cr ....., ??? -• ? HOUSE
c:+_ 1'rcRr) 2300s.f. I C
- N
=.?nc IAGJ I I.i Nm I59uF9 foH CO r9IPaCr1aN
S 3i a •?
A ?4
SH 'IPSTEN r
Appd. wre
w / I I --
I
NNW
I
I.
sI
i F, 19
N+I:
Z
?n
.
z<
'w
ex4 Dlem:
'
HOMELESS EMERGENCY
r
? PROJECT, INC.
, 1-9' 0N--V
Clearwater, florlda 33)55
i
COLOR UP EXHIBIT
?22 IF
T
-
1 (AV;T xale: wle:
r?olen-
?
11. p, 13916,0 ASNOTED 01-462811
OawiRg NO. SM1eet Aeidon MONO.
? 1 0l 1 ?
CLIiE
NL l
ICATFO DOMES 15-? a fbmltted: 01 Apd -
DOTINDEX D' ---_
3U LF IF 5ID1-WAIX ! : ni.
YHAStl a ,?. - w?u?F1133?sg?.a ers&. ml
lee YHAStL ?, / ceii o>vle v+aa
90 LF 2' V CORK EC
FU-
FCn a'J' PERFDOT FDOTINDEX mv?cm SYNERGY
Y
_P,_
(ILL GIEL EI -°°-°°?°°?°°?°°?°°?°°??? a°?°° °see®mm®mmmoo®mm®me®mm?+asm , ei. , e.
T. _,i EOD 1-E - F EW.11. :GALE: I" = J
LCD MES _- 6 ( CON ETE K
P 147 PC3 >_7 1 ICY L111 FE1fte:fN-] IfAiGll Ex STl:.1 T 2, 9 7i-..( - J M1 zi H 60 LF> S OEVJ 4l - Y361 1
J'. : ?E '.iGI rIr C 1 [%STII,GI F-1 E? LT V E N EJ E 61 PER FDJT INOI T- PYEN L
J ._-. _ _ - - ,_ •^•.•^?•'^^• •`°'^°'
a - _ __
'a I.... 3MD, Ew ATCItSEXIST? N03W \ .N30'ITYP-1 -_ -- I' I]
IA 19 PflOPOSED FENCE j 24-PAINTED V1 HIik T I GI / PUNOM DEMO -?_
n0 ? ?IS:EOAC4ITFCFUR.CL i STOPCZ11 ttP1- i _ ItinC
t
/l- --. - - I ,-.-
-- ARCHITECT
.\ -- '-- u - _ -- -'\ - _ I MAR n KIAR ARCHITECTS, INC.
I
F. (1171 .I 1 rn t 1 eR 1'1]x9l a'°n
CI' ,.I ?f zlf?ll.x 1 _ _ 1 TrcPPE; w CURE. I 161 T,2' ' SURVEYOR
'1 _ olez 5r r axe
ZARA @O YD, INC.
?I.
an* F
a ? ? z - _ La'Cr?al nAl..u i; rPJ tl
t a:; j[I ?I VA RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #4 1 is Ittv Im d? if CLUB -? _ f
1 ,I _I y y FF EL-21sT t I HOUSE { 1 VA RESIDENTIAL SHELTER -3 v.
I— S5 (1 STOMO I _ ±2800x.1.1
-----` i SINGLE DLAI-ER i - StNG1F OUAtPSiEi,
?_ _ _ ]O 5Ei-K a rLVSI RE _ Et C1O511riE
1 E 5DF6 I'115T- - - - ] t'F 31TE' 6RA76J - - - - - - - - - -
t I
L --I
--?.w. -..:.?: - _ _.o.e,e•?s+s'.os..vasw• 't?.?+,*?.i.'lw?x _ ?_
RR ? Ae.Vbm: eY APPd Dele
Z ANDRE GUTTER INUE NLET WRH PER FDttPEOT eV INDEX RELOCATEOTRAFFIC
N221 -
o CONTAOU-NG, ASPHALT
= ?co rz .sc o \\s
i® SPEED HUMP
ems e®mm®
e. ® ®°°®°° ®1°e??S? 9o LF PER FLDOT IN "'-CU-' - m°
N N R 3FODrnOT N[ )-X
o .r nag
_ P R Oi1110FX .. -_--
?(N:.T?H ES NG} T ..,cl
TNGTED DON Es
tO 30D ROPOSED WALL H L7 LT /V U E __
! I60
15EE ARCHET--L Hp?TTRANENLJE M3Di P) !AO'
LID ATEDS 15 N :'•.=:? ly PLANS FOR CETA (TY __ ?Sd - - --- _ - _ -j
1FRGl.iD ? _. __ 9 - _- _- - _ __ ____ _ _ _ ___
'- PUY - ¦ - - -- - - 3O LFS SDEI'lLLK- _ -- 30155510 VAtK • PA LF S' SIDEWALK ED >I ---
IM:.TTH<'05t1UG) (AI.1 LX1511NG) 2A"P ° IMATCH EXISTING)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
. -LI - 5'51 WALK 80 I HS - - - .?
( vl ) 158' DP_I? R 1 e t. _.?r.
:? 1-
? 33mP.l ?I SE'ITIP.1 '. I-_ LL
_ I m r
VA`+"{O'.7ENSAND CHILDREN VA WO`dENS AND CHILDREN
RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2 z' L RESIDENTIAL SHELTER#7 1 or
:.? - . rmleal/Hen
RS'
p) m.)
(1 -\ HOMELESS EMERGENCY
PROJECT, I
•? ;AC o ?? Z s 1..p' ?' PROM MeettNylane
"' .n 1 - ` 1 0ealwuter, Narlda 33)55
?__..___ - •-IL-- _ _- -____ __--_ --._ -- T _? Ran ,.? ? I. !,I illle
r. W
3
J ?_, - \ r COLOR UP EXHIBIT
22 LF
W - 1 ..s., -- j60'ass .'D ?91E UM PSTER".. - L L IA'A` ProIM Ib Sole Dale
ENCLOSURE Y ss'D n?re c .y3 i1d26]0 AS NOTED Ot- DID
b' L?.T 18.0' ?O ?? Y\L (SEE UT OETAl15) dl / pGlll^ Or?trSXO. sheet AMSIOn Na.
?F pE. Lo7 z ?' / _? / _ i Lor a Lo, s / ndo ]R/ ??-? 1 t or t B
.] FF. \PGIIP la H^L I I K? E 1 ? Z T T 6 ?,T 5 '
klar and klar
architects inc.
28473 u.s. 19n.
c I e a r w a t e r
flo rida 33761
ph. (727) 799-5420
fax (727) 799-9625
www.kiarklar.com
roberta s. klar aia
steven I. klar aia
Project Narrative: HEP West Veterans Transitional Housing
(Residential Shelter)
NEED:
The Pinellas County system of care, organized under the Pinellas County
Coalition for the Homeless, which is comprised of 118 members representing
74 agencies, has yet to develop an effective approach that specifically deals
with issues and needs of homeless veterans. There are few, if any, beds
available in Pinellas County to address the specific needs of homeless
veterans with special needs, transitioning into permanent housing.
To aid in determining the need for housing for homeless veterans, we used
2008 CHALENG Report data to determine bed accessibility and need in the
VISN 8 Bay Pines VAMC catchment area, which encompasses all of Pinellas
County from Naples to Dunedin. The report reveals there are approximately
2,500 homeless veterans in the area and only 94 transitional housing beds for
them. Bay Pines reports a need for 250 transitional and 500 permanent
housing beds.
We have also had strategic meetings with Bay Pines VA staff to solicit input in
our project design. According to our GPD Coordinator, Bay Pines maintains an
extensive waiting list for accommodating veterans needing access to VA Per
Diem transitional housing. The Women's Veteran's Coordinator at Bay Pines
VAMC also reports an increase in homeless OEF and OIF female veterans.
There are very few beds, if any, available to serve these women. The
proposed project will meet the unique needs of returning female war
veterans.
Proiect Description:
The Homeless Emergency Project, Inc. (HEP), one of Pinellas County, Florida's
largest providers of supportive housing for the homeless, proposes to create
112 additional transitional housing beds with supportive services for homeless
veterans. This project will create 112 beds specifically for male and female
OEF and OIF veterans, including the subpopulations of disabled veterans,
veterans with mental illness, chronically mentally ill veterans, and veterans
with PTSD diagnosis, veterans with substance abuse problems, and veterans
with dual diagnosis.
The project design involves developing a 3 acre parcel of vacant land adjacent
to the HEP campus in Clearwater, Florida. HEP has site control as well as cash
AA2321
on hand and applications for federal funding pending with the City of
Clearwater and Pinellas County Community Development .
Single family apartments offer both male and female veterans a traditional
home environment. Each unit has a private bath and fully equipped kitchen
comprised of a full oven, refrigerator, microwave oven, cooking utensils,
cutlery and crockery. Fully furnished living and dining area's also provide
greater freedom and space. The amenities also include a laundry room,
clubhouse, and courtyard.
The 2,848 sq. ft. clubhouse provides a comfortable, nurturing environment
enhanced by an individualized treatment regimen for the specific needs of
veterans with special needs. The clubhouse offers an environment that will
allow veterans to establish a peer-group structure that helps veterans acquire
life skills to cope with their illnesses and disabilities. The clubhouse allows
them to access computers, utilize neighborhood resources, and participate in
recreational and therapeutic activities.
The process for deciding in which units participants will live shall involve input
from current residents and staff. Participants will be responsible for all
housekeeping duties within their assigned units unless the person is disabled
and unable to do so.
HEP Responsibilities:
• Maintain and repair the premises to comply with housing codes and VA
regulations
• Maintain structural components of the dwelling
• Provide adequate locks and keys
• Maintain electrical, plumbing, heating, and other appliances in good
working order.
• Keep the premises in reasonably weather-tight condition
• Control infestations by insects, rodents, and other pests
• Provide garbage cans and arrange for garbage removal
• Keep common areas such as lobbies, stairways and, halls clean and free from
hazards
• Make repairs to keep the unit in the same condition as when the participant
moved in, except for normal wear/tear
• Provide smoke detectors, and ensure they work properly
• Provide adequate outdoor lighting
• Cost of utilities: electric (HVAC), water, sewage, and trash removal
The proposed supportive housing project will combine housing assistance (up
to 24 months) with outreach, direct treatment, and wrap around support
services. This is an expansion of an existing (20 bed) transitional housing GPD
project operated by HEP (Fairburn Apartments) targeting the above
referenced male veteran population. The project has been designed to
support the goals of the Veterans Administration, and our goal to offer a safe,
secure, and supportive environment in a structured program that fosters
respect, recovery and responsibility while increasing independence as these
veterans transition back into the community.
HEP is recognized as the largest and most comprehensive homeless
rehabilitation center in Pinellas County, with a housing continuum that
includes emergency shelter, transitional housing, and permanent supportive
housing for individuals and families with children (330 beds). HEP admitted
300 veterans in FY2009 of which 96% acknowledged having a drug or alcohol
problem and 98% acknowledged having a mental health problem. The
proposed project for this RFP will provide needed housing and on-site and
intensive individualized services to prevent recurring episodes of
homelessness, incarceration, and hospitalization for veterans experiencing
overlapping problems of poverty, mental health, and addiction disorders. The
program will utilize the integrated treatment model of combining case
management, mental health, substance abuse, and continuum of care
resources.
One of our key partners in providing clinical services to veterans is BayCare
Health System. Together we are partnering with the Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration provides on-site intensive
individualized support services to homeless veterans with serious psychiatric
conditions or with co-occurring mental and substance abuse disorders
through the Veterans and Inebriates Program (VIP).
The VIP is funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration from 9/1/2010 - 8/30/2015. This partnership will help increase
residential stability rates and result in greater self-determination among
program participants via a continuum of rehabilitation services, inclusive of
functional assessment, Wellness Recovery Action Planning (WRAP), intensive
case management, supported employment/housing services, daily living skills,
psychosocial rehabilitation, self help programs, transportation and parenting
skills. Treatment outcomes will be improved by offering on-site treatment for
mental health disorders, substance abuse disorders, and co-occurring
disorders; crisis counseling; medication management; motivational
interventions; parenting skills; and discharge planning. By reducing use of
alcohol and other drugs and persistent co-occurring behaviors, the evidence
based practices used in this program will help to prevent chronic
homelessness while improving quality of life. This will be accomplished by the
use of empirical evidence based practices currently supported by health and
human services and the US Government. We will utilize licensed mental
health clinicians and trained integrated model case managers toward this end,
inclusive of Seeking Safety and PTSD Trauma Interventions.
Supportive services offered at HEP are comprehensive and include intensive
case management, mental and medical health care, substance abuse
treatment, dental care, education, transportation, meals and nutrition, job
skills training, access to public benefits, legal aid, and employment assistance.
Moreover, with the establishment of the HEP Learning Center, a licensed child
care center providing free after school and summer enrichment services for
our youngest residents, HEP endeavors to break the cycle of poverty, illiteracy
and low self-esteem by serving children affected by homelessness.
Our program will be unique in that it will be comprised of individuals with
strong working knowledge of the VA system and war veterans; to include an
advisory group comprised of both male and female veteran representatives
for ongoing feedback on strengthening service delivery. Our collaborative
relationship with the VA will also strengthen reciprocal efforts in supporting
the integrative model of treatment.
The proposed project is consistent with the City of Clearwater Consolidated
Plan, the Pinellas County Continuum of Care Plan, and the 10-Year Plan to End
Homelessness in Pinellas County. The project supports the Continuum of
Care's highest priorities of providing supportive housing for homeless
individuals, especially persons who are chronically homeless.
Operational funds will be obtained from tenant rents, grant agreements and
contracts with the Veterans Administration and Bay Pines VA Medical Center.
Supportive Services:
Every veteran will be provided the services needed to help in the process of
rehabilitation and reintegration into civilian life as a fully functioning member
of society. Supportive services to be offered will address the needs of
homeless veterans and include:
(1) Outreach activities;
(2) Providing food, nutritional advice, and basic items of necessity;
(3) Providing intensive case management and supported employment, linking
veterans to the resources encompassed within the system of care;
(4) Providing culturally sensitive daily living skills training, psycho-education
and psychosocial rehabilitation;
(5) Offering clinical services matched to the assessed needs of veterans;
(6) Offering counseling, mental health treatment, alcohol and other substance
abuse services;
(7) Providing follow up for at least 90 days post-treatment;
(8) Providing comprehensive free dental care;
(9) Providing free child care services for dependents of homeless veterans;
(10) Providing assistance in obtaining other Federal, State and local assistance
available including mental health benefits, employment counseling and
assistance, veterans' benefits, medical assistance, and income support
assistance; and
(11) Providing legal assistance, advocacy, transportation, discharge planning,
parenting, and other services essential for achieving and maintaining
independent living.
Multidisciplinary integrated case management efforts focus on helping
veterans/families solve problems that may arise, and connecting them with
community services to meet long-term needs. Case management services will
vary depending on the needs and long-term goals of each participant.
Examples of case management support include: household management,
money management, public benefits advocacy, legal advocacy, family and
individual counseling, liaison with schools, parenting education,
health/nutrition counseling, child care, health care services, job training, job
placement and retention, literacy, GED and other education, substance abuse
intervention/treatment and mental health services. It is important to point
out that these services may be provided directly or by referral.
I#: 2010265565 BK: 17034 PG: 2322, 09/20/2010 at 04:24 PM, RECORDING 4 PAGES
$35.50 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $2555.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS
COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDMC6
. ?L aS?5,0o
-s01 po 3 S..SU
pz,?ty6[ 1 '?4-
Prepared by and Return to:
Katherine E. Cole, Esq.
Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Bums, LLP
P. O. Box 1368
Clearwater, Florida 33757-1368
Telephone: 727-461-1818
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
,
THIS INDENTURE is made on this day of JNyoust, 2010, between THE
SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS COUNTY,' \FLd[?IE$A, f k/a BOARD OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION OF PINELLAS COUNTY,-f,LnFtID9, ("Grantor"), whose post office.
address is 301 0 Street SW, Largo. fL ' 3377( ),,,and HOMELESS EMERGENCY
PROJECT, INC., a Florida not for plsofit corporation ("Grantee"), whose post office
address is 1120 N. Betty Lane, Cleatuva*F„ FL x$755.
WITNESSETH, that the salcL?;rdntor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten
Dollars ($10.00) and other goiod end valt]able consideration in hand paid, the receipt
whereof is hereby ackai6in edged, has granted, bargained, sold, aliened, remised,
released, conveyed arid, c rink,, and by these presents doth grant, bargain, sell,
alien, remise, release, %x iWi y and confirm unto the said Grantee, and its successors
and assigns forever, -alF,thjt,certain interest in land lying and being in the County of
Pinellas, State of Florida, \mosre particularly described as follows:
' See'-EkhitiVA" attached hereto and incorporated herein.
,,.,TQ4$ET`HEfT with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances, with
every,'priViloge, right, title, interest and estate, reversion, remainder and easement
,,thereto',?elonging or in anywise appertaining (all of the foregoing together with the
Eicltibit land are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Property").
The tax parcel numbers for the aforedescribed property are:
10/29/15/000001130/0400 and 10/29/15/00000/130/0500
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever.
Note -to min; st ratm; Ccrosideratim for this corrveymoe is .$365,000.00.
PINELIAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 17034 PG 2323
And the said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said Property, and;%kfll,
defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, through or' I de'r,'
the Grantor, but against none other.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has caused these pi-6sentOo be',
signed the day and year above written.
Signed, Sealed and Delivered
in our presence
Print:
THE SCHOOL BOARD QF
PINELLAS COUNTY FL ORIDA, f/k/a
BOARD OF PUBLIC- INSTRUCTION
OF PtNELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA
By1
Prme: ?w??3 - NSA
Print: ets
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
The oregoing i0istrurpent waj?acknowledged before me this I day of August,
2010 by ' ?s?'L>>JaC?t?of THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS
yet
COUNTY, FLOI?I{ A-,' f/"',BOAV OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF PINELLAS
COUNTY, FLOMDA. '\,He/8ke Y Is personally known to me or F] has produced
as identification.
- - '" No ry Public
KERRY L. MICHELOTTI Print name: ? rl
:;. ,'???e loth
c `c MY COMMISSION # DD936138
EXPIRES January 16, 2014
FWXX*NO?SeMCe.Q= My commission expires:
50435.119186
#536002 v1 - HEP/School Board-special Warranty Deed
2
PINELT?AS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 17034 PG 2324
EXHIBIT "A" -
Parcel I:
That part of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 10, Township 29,south;; -
range 15 East, Pinellas County, Florida, described as follows::
Beginning at the SW corner of Lot 6, Block H, Fair Burn Aoi ition, `ps recorded
in Plat Book 9, Page 97, Public Records of Pinellas County,`Floridcl;'as a Point
of Beginning; run North 150 feet along the West boundary of Bald Block H;
thence West to intersection with East boundary df-Holt Street; thence South
150 feet along said East boundary of Holt Street t6,North,boundary of
Palmetto Street; thence East along North bo`u lacy of P?rmetto Street to the
Point of Beginning.
Parcel II: =
That part of the Southwest Quartet; (,SW 1J4) of the Northeast Quarter (NE
1/4) of Section 10, Township, 29-So its,-R;?ge 15 East, lying East of the East
right of way line of Holt AMO`n6e, and. South of the South right of way line of
Engman Street, LESS AND t?5I-VPT the two parcels described as follows:
(a) The East Four Hjth drod,and;i?linety-five (495) feet of said tract.
(b) That part i*4i64irt4.at,a point in the West boundary of said East Four
hundred Nineq-five ('495YYeet, which is Nine Hundred and Thirty-one and
Eighty-nine. h4r dredth? (931.89) feet North, along said West boundary, from
the South bo'und:ary_-Qf said Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4); and from this Point
of EeginrriF?,'fun thence North along said West boundary Two Hundred Eight
(2G,&), feett;then a North Eighty-nine degrees Twenty-five minutes and
Thir(=fi(ve;seconds West (N 890 25'35" W), Three Hundred and Eighty and
;Ninety=tWo Hundredths (380.92) feet; thence South Zero degrees, Thirty-
f6ar minutes and Twenty-five seconds West (S 010 34' 25" W) Two Hundred
arid"Mj t (208) feet; thence South Eighty-nine degrees, Twenty-five
minutes and Thirty-five seconds East (S 8902535" E), Three Hundred and
Eighty-two and Thirty-nine Hundredths (382.39) feet, to the Point of
Beginning.
3
PINEL.LA.S COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 17034 PG 2325
-
Parcel III:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4) of,',//'
Section 10, Township 29 South, Range 15 East and proceed themes- istl rl?,
along the Quarter Section Line whose bearing is North 89 deg. 2T 59" wbst-'
a distance of approximately 834.36 feet to a point; proceed theftce Nor6 rly
along a line North 0 deg. 10' 05" East a distance of approxtMaatelV-§'3 :139
feet to a point, said point being the Point of Beginning; proceed tl ence
Northerly along a line North 0 deg. 10' 05" East a distance of approximately
208 feet to a point; proceed thence Westerly along a line 4ohh-A9 deg. 25'
35" West a distance of approximately 380.92 feet proceed thence Southerly
along a line South 0 deg. 34' 25" West a distance p'f,apprq*imately 208 feet
to a point; proceed thence easterly along a Iarte,Sou'tkr$9deg. 23' 35" East,.
a distance of approximately 382.39 feet to Pgint-Qf6egif n1 ing, excluding Holt
Avenue right-of-way, and LESS AND EXCEPT that'paft thereof lying West of
the West right of way line of Holt Avenue..;
LESS AND EXCEPT FROM SAID Pay' ' is II Jiid nII that part, if any, of the land
as conveyed to the City of ClearWat r fory'i6ht of way by Warranty Deed
recorded in Official Records,9ook\??4iO-,-P6ge 349, Public Records of Pinellas
County, Florida.
4
2010 NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT FILED
DOCUMENT# N16823 Secretary'of State
Entity Name: HOMELESS EMERGENCY PROJECT, INC.
Current Principal Place of Business:
1120 NORTH BETTY LANE
CLEARWATER, FL 33755
Current Mailing Address:
1120 NORTH BETTY LANE
CLEARWATER, FL 33755
FEI Number: 59-2729694 FEI Number Applied For ( )
Name and Address of Current Registered Agent:
FYFE, BRUCE
941 WEATHERSFIELD DR
DUNEDIN, FL 34698 US
New Principal Place of Business:
New Mailing Address:
FEI Number Not Applicable ( ) Certificate of Status Desired (X)
Name and Address of New Registered Agent:
The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both,
in the State of Florida.
SIGNATURE:
Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date
OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS:
Title: C
Name: FYFE, BRUCE E
Address: 941 WEATHERSFIELD
City-St-Zip: DUNEDIN, FL 34698
Title: VC
Name: ELKINS, RICK
Address: 722 CORDOVA GREENS
City-St-Zip: LARGO, FL 33777
Title: S
Name: NOBILE, ROSANNE
Address: 2661 WALNUT
City-St-Zip: PALM HARBOR, FL 34683
Title: T
Name: GREEN,BRENDA
Address: 12906 HICKORY LANE
City-St-Zip: LARGO, FL 33774
I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic
signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am an officer or director of the corporation or the receiver
or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 617, Florida Statutes; and that my name appears above, or
on an attachment with all other like empowered,
SIGNATURE: BRUCE FYFE C 0211512010
Electronic Signature of Signing Officer or Director Date
'J'25/2011 07:51 7275624961 PUBLIC UTILITIES PAGE 03
FLOW TEST
CITY OF CLEARWATER
WATIrR DEPARTMENT . "
LOCATION
DATE OF TEST
STATIC: v psi
RESIDUAL I PSI
PITOT 45 PSI
T0T. fps-( X69-6
FLOW //-30 C;PM__26 2-8
r.lDMt.T # T
Vp- ?;-
MISC: j I
S? IVE, &J CfVIL Aj) AIEQ A!1)
CUSTOMER RE UESTING TEST
f
HEP WE5T SCHEMATIC WEST ELEVATION BLDG. 334
klar and klar
arahitaota kw.
m+r+ w
d.uw.?.: ? sa?m
w
tLl
F--
111
x
111
-I
Q
Q ? K
d
}
N
IlJ
0-
W
2
00
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC CLUB HOUSE PERSPECTIVE
R-1
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC WEST ELEVATION 5LD6 132
- p' tQ ?l/ - - -
cl ID
0
? 0
- 0
i 0
L i r 0
J
? F-A 1 P
J
L? ]
C HEP AE5T SCHEMATIC RE5IDENTIAL SHELTER 544 2ND PLR. PLAN
HEP NF-5T 5CHEMATIC RESIDENTIAL 5HELTER 544 IST PLR. PLAN
AREAS
ioT/i NG PER FLOOR BI]a ?
?nLE IB]gB EF
0 ... -.
klar and klarr
architects inc.
n
-73 ua 19
clww?tw. 11 33]81
W-
to
t--
-1
lU
2
t-
Z
111 ?' ie
Q
QQ
V
II?-nr?
V1
!1--
111
0 re.W-
klar and Her
map,
architects inc.
2-3 u? 19 n
ol?xw?ix. II 93)81
rz
w
to
r
In
d
z
wz?
w `u
Q Q
O
X U
Y
n?
IL
w
r
sn..,,4L.O
O
W
M. BED
9'-1 X 12'-4'
BED #2
9•-f'• x ld-1^
17T
BED #1 [
9-4° X 10'-0"
FAMILY
15-11'X I5'-4"
FE:77
°
r C? Ol?> o
FAMILY °
Is-a° x la'-9• klar and klar
cl Mawr
V
O 0
O ° O0
°- architects inc.
=1z". 1V n
KITCN "'B1
Is'-4" x 13'-7"
O
=100J o ? - I t?,- HEP WEST RESIDENTIAL SHELTER 'A'
SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLAN
rz
W
lU
V/
d
1=-
Izil w
z
0 a
In
i ?
O Q
lL V
11-1
iL
111
ir
oRa.a a,
®s
AA 0002321
AREAS o
1019145E SHE 0 ?
HEP WEST RESIDENTIAL SHELTER 'B'
SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLAN
(o 5GHEMATIC RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2 15T/2NDFLR.
V
LM -H -----------------
-------------- ______ I
------------------
------------- a. {
I
rix. ruc rirv. rta. _.
HEP WEST SCHEMATIC NORTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2 HEP WEST SCHEMATIC SOUTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
HEP WEST 5GHEMATIG WEST ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
kler and kler
srctdtects ina
¢e?]3 u?. 1D n
cl?uW?iw. D 93]81
W-
11.1
F-
-A
W
V I
F-
Z 1
111 " D
Q z
> u
Q Q
t- K
1u
O
1 U
IL I
K
rL
UJ
X
.0
HEP WEST 50HEMATIG EAST ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #2
--i-
klar and klar
arcWtecte inc.
x003 u? 10 n
cl?vW?tK, 11 33]01
Iff
W
V I
Z 111 IL
)lU z K
Q
Qa
? K
O ul
IL U
ui
r
®s
®P..Ilmha..
AREAS o >. ?IBI.o s..
IMIT'G' 1030 :F
yyyKWPT 1 STnIRS 560 `F
TAL NG SPPGE 514] ?€ iKnE
TOT/?L UIDEft POOF 5'tl0'F ?,O
/ e SCHEMATIC RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #I FIRST FLOOR
V
o?n? ?E bA,E P?,??'
4
TYP. FENCE
-------------- -
---- - ------------------
HEP WE5T SCHEMATIC NORTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #I , HEP WEST SCHEMATIC SOUTH ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL 5HELTER #1
HEP WE5T 5CHEMATIC WEST ELEVATION RESIDENTIAL SHELTER #1
L --i-
klar and klar
IL
ar.Ntecte inc.
2-3 u 19 n
alwW W 1133]81
W-
II-
ttW
V I
II-
x I
W
o=?
(? O J
!\L? V
II,-n
W
W
I n --. L. em. I
.O
HEP WE5T 5CHEMATIC EA5T ELEVATION RE5IDENTIAL 5HELTER #1
U
5
BUILDING AREA:
o„? a sP E
3s,
RP? 6? A.A
4
HER WEST SCHEMATIC GLUE HOUSE PLAN
REAR PORCH LDR
4
q B'-o"X40'-g'
12'-II'XB'-b'
?
?
?
?
MENS II i
II
II /
lI`?
I
I\
1
? I --
I -
CLOSET
OFFICE
II'-8'X14'-10' ',?-,=°==-I r
?-_-__- _.,
WOM. H.G.
EXERG ACTIVITY RM ? o
9
sun m. sm E
SITTING RM
4 ?' ?- COMP. DESK
ENTRY ?J ?
9
MAW
.P_
klar and klar
architects inc.
290]3 19 n
cl?uw?ix, 11 93]81
U
w
J
uzi W
pew
J ?
O 111
i U
w
w
?v
sn..1A1.0
Q by
Q q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
klar and klar
107
NL
architects inc.
-73 19 1
.-.1 1 -7.
---------------
5GHEMATIG CLUB HOUSE WEST ELEVATION
F=l
5GHEMATI0 CLUB HOUSE NORTH ELEVATION
0!
W
W
X-
V I
II-
L J
Ill IL
Lll z rc
Q >
? a
lU
U
E--
?u
ua
-------------- ®P..,,m
oP
o?
--- A5.0
5GHEMATIG GLUE, HOUSE EAST ELEVATION
5GHEMATIG GLUE HOUSE SOUTH ELEVATION