OSA MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency ST. ANASTASIA MASTER PL AN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES M A Y 2 7, 2 0 2 6 PREPARED BY:

LAND PLANNING + L ANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

To the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency , Welcome to the Design Guidelines and Master Planning Booklet for the Historic St. Anastasia site. This document has been prepared by Cotleur & Hearing in collaboration with the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency and project partners. It is intended to guide the future vision, outdoor use, and long-term stewardship of this important historic property.

Located at 910 Orange Avenue, the St. Anastasia Catholic School is one of Fort Pierce’s notable historic landmarks. Completed in 1914, the building played an important role in the city’s early civic and cultural history. Its listing on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places in 2000 further recognizes its historic and architectural significance.

Recent restoration efforts have helped preserve the building’s exterior. These improvements also create a new opportunity for adaptive reuse, public activation, and reinvestment in the surrounding site.

The purpose of this booklet is to provide a clear planning and design framework for the outdoor spaces around the historic building. Through site analysis, historical research, and conceptual planning, this document identifies opportunities to improve access, strengthen the property’s public presence, support future programming, and create flexible outdoor spaces that complement the building’s reuse.

The Historic St. Anastasia site holds a unique position within the surrounding neighborhood.

The property fronts Orange Avenue and N. 10th Street and includes the restored historic building, open site areas, existing hardscape remnants, and opportunities for improved pedestrian circulation, landscape, gathering space, and placemaking.

The next chapter of this site should respect the building’s historic character while creating a more welcoming and usable civic space. The recommendations in this booklet are not intended to prescribe one fixed outcome. They provide a flexible roadmap for design, programming, phasing, and implementation.

Cotleur & Hearing is honored to assist the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency in shaping this vision. With thoughtful planning and continued collaboration, the Historic St. Anastasia site can become a lasting community asset. It can be a place where history is preserved, public life is welcomed, and new use is carefully integrated into one of the city’s significant historic places.

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 3 II. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY ................................................. 5 III. COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENT ............................................................. 8 IV. MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 10 V. VISION AND FUTURE OUTLOOK .............................................................. 19 VI. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 25 VII. APPENDIX................................................................................................. 26 VIII. EXHIBIT A - HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT............................................ 27 IX. EXHIBIT B- MARKET RENT & FEASIBILITY STUDY........................................ 99 X. EXHIBIT C - SITE SURVEY............................................................................ 131

Warm regards,

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

OVERVIEW

Community Outreach Event

The Design Guidelines and Master Planning Booklet for the Historic St. Anastasia site provides a structured framework to guide the future planning of this important civic property. The intent of master planning is to document current conditions, evaluate opportunities, and establish clear strategies for long-term site investment and design.

The planning process focuses on the relationship between the historic building and the surrounding outdoor spaces.

The site presents an opportunity to support adaptive reuse, improve public access, and create a more active setting for community use. This document considers the historic character of the property while identifying practical ways to enhance the site for future programming, gathering, and civic engagement.

The chapters that follow summarize the findings of this study and introduce design guidelines that will serve as the foundation for future planning decisions. These guidelines establish consistent standards for improvements while allowing flexibility as the site evolves through future phases, partnerships, and funding opportunities.

The Community Survey Process An essential part of developing the Design Guidelines and Master Planning Booklet was gathering input directly from the Fort Pierce community. To support this effort, Cotleur & Hearing prepared a community survey to better understand how residents view the Historic St. Anastasia site and what priorities they have for its future use.

The survey was hosted on Survey Monkey. It was promoted through the City of Fort Pierce website, City social media channels, and an email blast from the City. This approach provided a convenient way for residents and stakeholders to participate and share feedback.

Survey questions were designed to gather both measurable results and written comments. Responses helped identify community preferences, desired improvements, and potential uses for the site. This input provided valuable insight into how the property could serve the community beyond the historic building itself.

This process reflects the value of community-based planning. Residents and local stakeholders often understand the day-to-day needs of a place in ways that technical analysis alone cannot capture. When paired with professional planning and design expertise, this input helps create recommendations that are practical, responsive, and grounded in the community’s vision for the site.

As part of the planning process, Cotleur & Hearing participated in a community outreach event at the River Walk Center with the project architects and the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency. The event was open to community members and stakeholders and provided an opportunity for direct input before the final master plan was prepared.

Three conceptual master plan options were presented in a pin-up style format. Each concept explored a different approach to site use, outdoor programming, and public activation. Participants were able to review each concept and identify the elements they liked or disliked. This format allowed feedback to focus on specific ideas rather than requiring participants to select one complete plan.

The project architects were also present to share the proposed use of the Historic St. Anastasia building. Their presentation included information on preservation efforts, the adaptive reuse of the existing structure, and the proposed building extension. This helped participants understand how the outdoor master plan would relate to the larger vision for the property.

The Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency attended the event to support the process and hear community feedback firsthand.

By combining visual master plan concepts with open conversation, the event helped clarify community priorities and informed the direction of the final plan.

St. Anastasia Master Plan Design The design team at Cotleur & Hearing used feedback from the community survey and outreach event as the foundation for the St. Anastasia Master Plan. Input from residents and stakeholders helped identify preferred site uses, outdoor programming priorities, and the types of improvements that would best support the future of the property.

This input was considered alongside the architectural vision for the historic building. The proposed adaptive reuse, preservation efforts, and building extension helped shape how the surrounding site should function. The master plan is intended to support these improvements while creating outdoor spaces that are useful, welcoming, and connected to the community.

Three conceptual master plan options were studied during the planning process. Each concept explored different approaches to site layout, programming, circulation, and gathering spaces. Community feedback on these concepts helped identify which elements should be carried forward into the final plan.

As a result, the St. Anastasia Master Plan balances historic preservation, public use, and long-term flexibility. The final plan provides a guide for future improvements while allowing the site to evolve through future design phases, funding opportunities, and community partnerships.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

3

RESIDENT INPUT IN ACTION

The following are examples of community engagement materials collected throughout the St. Anastasia Master Planning process. These materials illustrate the methods used to involve residents and stakeholders, including the community survey, public outreach through City communication channels, and the in-person concept review event held at the River Walk Center.

Together, these efforts provided multiple ways for the community to participate. Residents could respond to the online survey, attend the outreach event, review conceptual master plan options, and share feedback directly with the design team, project architects, and the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency.

The three master plan concepts presented at the outreach event allowed participants to respond to a range of site uses and programming ideas. Rather than selecting one complete concept, participants were able to identify specific elements they liked or disliked. This feedback helped clarify community priorities and informed the development of the final master plan.

These engagement efforts demonstrate the City’s commitment to ensuring that the St. Anastasia Master Plan reflects both professional analysis and authentic community input.

Community Engagement Strategic Timeline A strategic timeline was established to guide community engagement throughout the planning process. By organizing engagement in phases, the city and design team were able to capture feedback at key points, analyze it efficiently, and use it to shape recommendations in real time. This structured timeline ensured that input was not collected as a one-time effort but as a continuous dialogue, strengthening the accuracy and relevance of the final Master Plan.

Step 1:

Step 2:

Step 3:

Step 4:

Initial Survey Launch & Outreach (October 2025)

Feedback Review & Conceptual Designs (December 2025)

Community Outreach Event (February 2026)

Final Feedback & Master Plan (August 2025)

The process began with the launch of a community survey hosted on Survey Monkey. The survey introduced the planning effort and invited residents and stakeholders to share their priorities for the future of the site.

Survey responses were compiled and analyzed to identify key themes and priorities. Cotleur & Hearing presented the findings to the Redevelopment Agency (RA), providing a clear snapshot of resident input. These insights directly informed the design team’s development of the first round of conceptual park designs.

Building on the initial feedback, the design team prepared three conceptual master plan alternatives.

These concepts were shared at the Community Outreach Event, held at the River Walk Center in February 2025. This campaign gathered detailed feedback.

Residents were asked to compare design alternatives and express their preferences for amenities and layouts, strengthening the accuracy and relevance of the final Master Plan.

The results from the Community Outreach Event were reviewed to refine and finalize the design direction.

Cotleur & Hearing used this feedback to prepare the final St. Anastasia Master Plan and Design Guidelines booklet, ensuring that the recommendations accurately reflect the community’s needs, aspirations, and priorities for the future of the Historic St. Anastasia site and its adjacent site.

The City of Fort Pierce promoted the survey through its website, social media, and email outreach, making it easy for community members to participate early in the planning process.

Survey questions and results helped the design team understand community preferences, potential site uses, and priorities for future improvements. This early input established a foundation for the conceptual master plan options that followed.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

4

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK SUMMARY Community feedback directly shaped the St. Anastasia Master Plan and Design Guidelines. The online survey and community outreach event provided insight into how residents and stakeholders view the site today and what role they hope it will serve in the future.

The feedback helped identify preferred uses, programming ideas, and priorities for the outdoor spaces surrounding the historic building. It also provided direction on which elements from the three conceptual master plan options should be carried forward into the final plan.

The following summary highlights key findings from this community input, which served as the foundation for the final recommendations.

59 %

415 +

Of respondents report frequent visitation to the Peacock Design District.

Total responses on the community wide survey.

63 % 36 % Of respondents report working in the area.

96 % 38 % Report coming to the area for social outings or gatherings.

Of visitors report traveling to the district by car.

Visitation to the Peacock Arts District

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

Support pop-up shops, green markets and casual dining.

77% Of respondents were residents, making participation overwhelmingly driven by community members who live within the city limits.

49 %

59 %

Preference having public art, sculpture pieces and botanical areas as an important site feature.

Support gathering space for community events, festivals, and performing arts.

St. Anastasia Site Features Preferred by Respondents

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

5

STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS Stakeholders are individuals and groups with a direct connection to the Historic St. Anastasia site, the surrounding district, or the future success of the project. This includes City leadership, the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency, nearby property owners, local business owners, cultural partners, and community representatives.

As part of the planning process, stakeholder interviews were conducted to gather focused input from people with knowledge of the site and its surrounding context. These conversations helped identify opportunities, concerns, and priorities that may not be fully captured through a community-wide survey alone. Topics included cultural identity, public safety, parking, outdoor gathering, arts programming, economic sustainability, and the site’s relationship to Orange Avenue, the Peacock Arts District, and the Lincoln community.

Stakeholder involvement is important because these participants understand how the area functions today and what barriers may affect future success. Their input helped clarify the need for a site that is active, safe, flexible, and connected to the larger community. Several comments emphasized the opportunity for the St. Anastasia site to serve as a catalyst for improvements along Orange Avenue and the surrounding area.

The feedback gathered through these interviews helped shape the vision for the site. It reinforced the importance of honoring the building’s history while creating outdoor spaces that support community use, public art, walkability, gathering, and long-term revitalization.

5

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

1

SHARED VISION

3

CORE PRIORITIES

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

6

COMMUNITY-BASED STRATEGIC THEMES The community-based strategic themes were developed by reviewing input gathered through the online survey, stakeholder interviews, and the community outreach event. Together, these sources provided insight into how residents and stakeholders view the Historic St. Anastasia site today and what they hope it can become in the future. ,Cotleur & Hearing evaluated recurring comments, preferred uses, design priorities, and concerns shared throughout the engagement process. Common themes included historic preservation, arts and culture, outdoor gathering, safety, comfort, connectivity, activation, and youth engagement. These themes organize the community’s feedback into clear planning priorities. They help translate public input into design direction and provide a foundation for the final master plan recommendations.

HISTORIC IDENTITY & PRESERVATION

ACTIVATION & ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

Honor the history of St. Anastasia while giving the building and site a renewed civic purpose. Future improvements should protect the character of the historic structure and allow its story to remain central to the visitor experience.

Support uses that bring consistent activity to the site and help sustain it over time.

Food, small retail, events, cultural programming, and building-related uses should work together to create energy and long-term value.

COMMUNITY LEARNING & YOUTH ENGAGEMENT

ARTS & CULTURE

Create opportunities for learning, creativity, and youth participation. The site should support educational programming, hands-on activities, and intergenerational experiences that make the property meaningful to a wide range of users.

Celebrate Fort Pierce’s creative identity through art, culture, and local history. The site should create opportunities for public art, cultural interpretation, local artists, and storytelling connected to the Peacock Arts District, the Highwaymen, Zora Neale Hurston, and the broader history of the community.

OUTDOOR GATHERING & FLEXIBLE EVENTS

SAFETY & VISIBILITY

Create flexible outdoor spaces that can support a range of community uses. The plan should allow the site to host gatherings, seasonal events, performances, informal activities, and day-to-day public use without being limited to one single program.

Improve the sense of safety through thoughtful design. Lighting, visibility, clear circulation, active uses, and well-maintained landscape areas should work together to make the site feel welcoming and secure.

CONNECTIVITY & WALKABILITY

COMFORT & EVERYDAY USE

Strengthen the site’s role as a connector between Orange Avenue, the Peacock Arts District, the Lincoln community, and nearby civic destinations. Walkable routes, clear entries, and inviting edges should help the property feel integrated into the surrounding area.

Design the site as a comfortable place to visit throughout the day. Shade, seating, landscape, and pedestrian-friendly spaces should support both planned events and casual everyday use.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

7

CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLANNING

N 10TH ST

REET

T PARKING LO TASIA OLD ST. ANASILDING CHURCH BU

Three conceptual master plan options were developed to explore different ways the Historic St. Anastasia site could be organized, programmed, and activated. Each concept tested a different balance of open space, gathering areas, landscape, circulation, parking, and future use of the adjacent property.

EX TENSION

The three conceptual master plans were presented during the community outreach event at the River Walk Center. Each concept was displayed in a pin-up format so attendees could review the plans, compare different site ideas, and respond directly to specific design elements.

ST.

DUNDAS N 10TH STR

EET

LABEL 3

ORANGE AVE.

LDIN

EXTENSION

SHOPFRONT/CE GALLERY SPA ART WALK

ORANGE AVE.

SOD ACCESSS

ART / CORNER PLAZ A

LABEL 2

OSE MULTIPURP CE LAWN SPA

VENDOR AR SOD ACCESSS

A VENDOR ARE R D O T SMOSAIC PAVERS U A D D Y ON 9TH STREET DI SL IK E

A D D YO U LIKE

EXISTING ES

RESIDENC

SOD ACCESSS VENDOR AR

INTERAC TIVE ART FEATURE

1 SHADE LABEL CANOPY

LIKE

E INTER AC TIV ART FEATURE

BUFFER & BERM

LABEL 4

SHOPFRONT/ CE GALLERY SPA

OSE MULTIPURP CE LAWN SPA

DUNDAS ST.

SHAD L 1E LABE CANOPY STAGE/ ER AMPHITHEAT

LABEL 3

LABEL 2

SOD ACCESSS

OUTDOOR EVENT SPACE LABEL 4

ART, TYP.

ART / CORNER PLA ZA

STAGE/ TER AMPHITHEA

PARKING LOT

ART, P.ST. ANASTASIA TY OLD G

ENTRY ARCH

BUFFER & BERM

ART WALK

ENTRY ARCH

CHURCH BUI

The concepts were not intended to represent final plans. Instead, they were used as planning tools to compare ideas and gather feedback from residents, stakeholders, the design team, and project partners. Participants were able to review each option and identify specific elements they supported or did not support.

OUTDOOR EVENT SPACE

EA

EXISTING

EA

RS

RESIDENCES

N 9TH STRE

MOSAIC PAVE

ET

VENDOR ARE

CO N C E P

T1

NORTH

A

C O N C EP T

1

NORTH

R D O TS

DISLIKE

Participants were invited to place physical dots on the boards to indicate their preferences. Green dots were used to identify elements they liked or supported. Orange dots were used to identify elements they disliked or had concerns about.

This interactive format allowed the design team to gather clear visual feedback in real time. Rather than asking attendees to choose one complete concept, the exercise helped identify which individual ideas should be refined, combined, or reconsidered as the final master plan was developed.

Feedback from the three concepts helped guide the final master plan direction. Preferred elements were refined and carried forward, while less-supported ideas were reconsidered or removed. This process allowed the final plan to reflect both community input and practical site planning considerations.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

8

COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENT FINDINGS OVERVIEW OF EVENT FINDINGS Community input from the River Walk Center event was reviewed by comparing support levels across the three conceptual master plan options and their individual design elements. Attendees used green dots to identify ideas they supported and orange dots to identify elements they felt should be reconsidered. This allowed the design team to evaluate both overall concept preference and specific site features.

Rather than selecting one concept as the final plan, Cotleur & Hearing used the results as a synthesis tool. Elements with strong support were identified as ideas to carry forward. Elements with mixed feedback were marked for refinement. Elements with stronger opposition were reconsidered or removed from the final direction.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency - St. Anastasia Master Plan - Community Outreach Event Results

The findings showed the strongest overall support for Concept 3, while also highlighting specific features from all three concepts that resonated with the community. Highly supported ideas included flexible event lawn space, covered outdoor gathering, Orange Avenue activation, rooftop gathering, vendor opportunities, and small-scale event programming. These findings helped shape the final master plan into a balanced approach that reflects community preferences while remaining flexible for future design and implementation.

WHY COMMUNITY SCIENCE IS IMPORTANT Community science recognizes that residents, stakeholders, and daily users of a place provide valuable information that cannot be captured through technical analysis alone. Their observations help reveal how a site is perceived, what barriers may exist, and what opportunities feel most meaningful to the people it is intended to serve.

This approach matters because successful public spaces are shaped by both professional expertise and lived experience. By combining community feedback with site analysis and design judgment, the final master plan is better positioned to reflect local priorities, support long-term use, and create a place that feels connected to Fort Pierce.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

9

MASTER PLAN & DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The Master Plan and Design Recommendations represent the culmination of the full community planning process. They build on the original community survey, stakeholder interviews, community-based strategic themes, and findings from the River Walk Center outreach event.

Each step in the process helped shape the final direction for the Historic St. Anastasia site;

1

THE SURVEY identified broad community priorities.

2

THE STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS added focused insight from City leadership, local business owners, property owners, and community representatives.

3

THE EIGHT STRATEGIC THEMES organized this input into clear planning goals.

4

THE OUTREACH EVENT then allowed residents and stakeholders to respond directly to the three conceptual master plan options.

This section translates that input into physical design recommendations for the site. The recommendations address the adaptive reuse of the historic building, the surrounding outdoor spaces, the adjacent property, and the site’s relationship to the larger Fort Pierce community.

The final direction focuses on the ideas that received the strongest support throughout the process. These include historic preservation, arts and culture, flexible event space, Orange Avenue activation, shaded gathering areas, safety, connectivity, and long-term adaptability.

Together, these strategies establish a cohesive vision for the Historic St. Anastasia property. The master plan creates a framework for future implementation while allowing the site to evolve through design development, funding opportunities, partnerships, and community needs.

10

ST. ANASTASIA MASTER PLAN

N. 10TH ST

N. 9TH ST

Envisioning Park Spaces and Inspirational Places

PEACOCK ART DISTRICT VENDOR HALL

ST. ANASTASIA BUILDING

ORANGE AVE

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

North

NOT TO SCALE

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

11

ST. ANASTASIA Old School Building and Proposed Extension REG Architects prepared the architectural and historic preservation work for the St. Anastasia building. Their Historic Structure Report provides an important foundation for the site master plan. The Report documents the building’s historic significance, existing architectural conditions, preservation needs, proposed improvements, and ADA accessibility considerations. The site design recommendations build from this architectural work to ensure that future outdoor improvements support the building’s preservation, adaptive reuse, and long-term civic value.

Isometric views of the St. Anastasia Building and its proposed addition.

Isometric View !: North West Corner

N. 10TH ST.

N. 9TH ST

OPEN LAWN

PEACOCK ART DISTRICT VENDOR HALL

Isometric View 2: South West Corner

ST. ANASTASIA BUILDING

OPEN LAWN

Isometric View 3: South East Corner ORANGE AVE

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

North

NOT TO SCALE

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

12

ST. ANASTASIA SCHOOL BUILDING STRATEGIC VISION Brick Entry Plaza and Gateway Signage PUBLIC SIDEWALK ABSTRACT LOUNGERS & ARTIFICIAL TURF AREA LOADING ZONE

ST. ANASTASIA BUILDING

N. 10TH ST

PROPOSED EXTENSION WATER FEATURE

LOBBY ENTRY

ST. ANASTASIA ENTRY

ENHANCED STREET CROSSINGS

EXISTING PARALLEL PARKING

ORANGE AVE

Plaza Water Feature

CAMPUS COURTYARD

BRICK ENTRY PLAZA

Campus Courtyard North

NOT TO SCALE

MASTER PLAN SNAPSHOT The St. Anastasia Entry is designed to create a clear and welcoming arrival experience from Orange Avenue. The plan reinforces the historic building as the primary visual focus while improving access, circulation, and the transition into the site. Outdoor spaces around the entry support both daily use and special events. The design balances historic character with new gathering areas, shade, seating, and landscape improvements.

Together, these improvements establish the St. Anastasia Entry as a civic threshold. The design strengthens the relationship between the restored building, Orange Avenue, and the adjacent outdoor spaces while creating a more functional and inviting arrival experience.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

13

STREET-FRONT ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIC VISION SERVICE ENTRY

Rooftop Beer Garden

BACK ENTRY PLAZA

ROOFTOP BEER GARDEN & ART SHADE SAILS

PEACOCK ART DISTRICT VENDOR HALL

N. 9TH ST.

ARCADE FOR COVERED SEATING AND ROLL UP DOORS

Coffee Pavilion/ Flexible Bar Vendor

BRICK PROMENADE TO VENDOR HALL ENTRY COFFEE PAVILION/ FLEXIBLE BAR VENDOR LANDSCAPE LOUNGE & HIGH TOP SEATING PARALLEL PARKING

OPEN LAWN ENHANCED STREET CROSSING

ORANGE AVE

MASTER PLAN SNAPSHOT

Pedestrian Crossing Improvements

North

NOT TO SCALE

The street-front engagement area is designed to bring activity closer to Orange Avenue and create a stronger public presence for the site. The plan uses the vendor hall, outdoor seating, lawn space, and enhanced pedestrian connections to make the frontage feel more active, visible, and welcoming.

This area supports the community’s interest in flexible programming, arts-related uses, outdoor dining, and everyday gathering. The design also improves the relationship between the building, the street, and the surrounding district.

Together, these improvements help transform the Orange Avenue frontage into an active civic edge. The design supports public use, strengthens the identity of the Peacock Arts District, and creates a more inviting connection between the Historic St. Anastasia site and the larger Fort Pierce community.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

14

PEDESTRIAN PROMENADE STRATEGIC VISION PARKING LOT

PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD

Vendor Plaza

GRAVEL PARKING AREA

PERMANENT AIRSTREAM VENDOR

PEDESTRIAN PROMENADE SAFETY BOLLARDS

Brick Plaza Entry

SEMI- PERMANENT VENDOR TRUCKS PARKING LOT ENTRY PLAZA

LANDSCAPE SHADED SEATING AREA

DECK & BAR TOP

CONCRETE PATHS

OPEN EVENT LAWN

ADA RAMP SEAT WALL

Landscape Buffer and Vegetation

OUTDOOR 2-STORY COVER & EVENT SPACE

BRICK PLAZA

BACK ENTRY TO ST. ANASTASIA

BACK OF HOUSE ENTRY

North

NOT TO SCALE

MASTER PLAN SNAPSHOT

Open Event Lawn and Pedestrian Promenade

The event area is designed as the primary flexible gathering space for the site. Its layout supports a range of uses, from daily informal seating to larger community events, while maintaining clear connections to the historic building, vendor areas, parking, and adjacent neighborhood. The open lawn, shaded seating, covered event space, and pedestrian promenade work together to create an active but adaptable public environment. These elements respond directly to community interest in outdoor gatherings. Together, these improvements establish the event area as a central civic space within the master plan. The design creates a flexible setting for public activity while supporting the long-term activation and reuse of the Historic St. Anastasia site.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

15

SITE PARKING STRATEGIC VISION

LAKE

North

North

NOT TO SCALE

NOT TO SCALE

PHASE 2

PHASE 1 The conceptual master plan currently provides ground-level parking to support daily site use, building access, vendor activity, and community events. Parking is distributed to maintain convenient access while preserving the site’s primary open spaces for gathering, landscape, and public activation. This approach supports near-term implementation and allows the Historic St. Anastasia property to function as an active civic destination while maintaining flexibility for future phases.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

Community science data and stakeholder feedback indicate that long-term parking demand may increase as the site becomes more active. As programming, events, vendor activity, and adaptive reuse of the building expand, ground-level parking may not fully support the site’s future needs. For this reason, the master plan reserves flexibility for a potential parking garage as part of the broader site strategy. *The spatial planning shown in this booklet is conceptual and intended to preserve flexibility for future design study. The current layout allows for the potential placement of an approximately 122’ x 158’ parking garage.

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

16

ST. ANASTASIA Preliminary School Building & Proposed Extension Floor Plans

5

5

A

A

B

B

C

C

D

D 5

5

5

STAIRWELL

5

A

A

B

AB

C

C

B

CD

D

5

5

1/4" / 12"

STAIRWELL 430 SF

A

D 5

5

B

C

D

5

5

1/4" / 12"

STAIRWELL STAIRWELL

430 SF

461 SF

STAIRWELL 425 SF 425 SF

RENTAL SPACE RENTAL (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT) SPACE

4

4

387 SF (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT)

4

4

387 SF

ADULT LEARNING ADULT LEARNING 182 SF

4

182 SF

4

ADULT LEARNING ADULT LEARNING 188 SF 188 SF

4

4

4

4

4

4

TECHNOLOGY/MEDIA CENTER TECHNOLOGY/MEDIA CENTER 784 SF 784 SF

2.1

189 SF

GALLERY SPACE 2

612 SF

614 SF

GALLERY SPACE 2

LOBBY

701 SF

701 SF

614 SF

STAIRS 218 SF

1.1 1

1

57 SF

ELEV.

2

57 SF

UP

218 SF UP

1.1

ELEV.

3439 SF

65 SF

1.1

E

H

1.132 SF

1.1

H

1

1

1

1

1

E

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

163 SF

189 SF

ELEV.

HISTORIC ST

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950 910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950

2

57 SF

57 SF

MECH./STORAGE STAIRS UP 65 SF STORAGE STAIRS UP 169 SF MECH./STORAGE 65 SF STORAGE 32 SF 169 SF

601 SF

1.1

MEN'S RESTROOM

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA

ELEV.

701 SF

701 SF

ADAPTIVE RE-USE ADAPTIVE (SUMMER RE-USE CAMP) (SUMMER 601 SF CAMP)

MECH./STORAGE

DN

1

LOBBY

2.1

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA

LOBBY

2

MECH./STORAGE65 SF

DN

E

2

2.1

AUDITORIUM FLEX SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM WOMEN'S RESTROOM 189 SF

161 SF

LOBBY

3

2.1

H

LOBBY

ELEV.

701 SF

57 SF

910 Ora Fort Pierce

4" / 12"

GALLERY SPACE 1 / GALLERY ART SPACE 1 / STUDIO ART STUDIO 612 SF

E

øA 5'-D 0A"

øA 5'-D 0A"

MEN'S RESTROOM MEN'S 161 SF RESTROOM

2.1

H

4" / 12"

4" / 12"

1

1173 SF

189 SF

STAIRS

1

A-4.05

2.1

1" / 12"

2

2

WOMEN'S RESTROOM WOMEN'S RESTROOM 189 SF

2.1

2.1

H

H

1" / 12"

161 SF

3 RENTAL MAIN HALL SPACE RENTAL MAIN HALL 672 SF (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT) SPACE 672 SF 1173 SF (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT) 4" / 12"

E

øA 5'-D 0A"

MEN'S RESTROOM 161 SF

3

E

E

" A'-0 AøD5

1

1

2.1

564 SF

3

" A'-0 AøD5

MEN'S RESTROOM

2.1

" A'-0 AøD5

" A'-0 AøD5

A-4.05 A-4.05

2.1

683 SF

INCUBATOR SPACE INCUBATOR 564 SF SPACE

H

H

" A'-0 AøD5

388 SF

E 2.1

øA 5'-D 0A"

3

3

E

øA 5'-D 0A"

MAIN HALL/ART MAIN GALLERY ADULT HALL/ART CLASSROOM WALK ADULT GALLERY 683 SF CLASSROOM 388 SF WALK

1.1

E

1.1 E

1

218 SF

1.1

1.1

H

H

MECH./STORAGE

STAIRS

65 SF

DN

1.1

1.1 E

H NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

1

H

1

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

B

C

C

D

2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN NORTH A-4.02 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

First Floor Proposed plan A-4.02

D A

NORTH

A

B

AB

C

C

B

1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN NORTH A-4.02 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: PROPOSED ROOF PLAN 1 GROUND FLOOR 2 PROPOSED PLAN

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

A-4.02

A-4.03

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

CIRCULATION RENTAL SPACE TECHNOLOGY SPACE CIRCULATION RENTAL SPACE TECHNOLOGY SPACE WOMEN'S RESTROOM ADAPTIVE RE-USE GALLERY SPACE WOMEN'S RESTROOM ADAPTIVE RE-USE GALLERY SPACE MEN'S RESTROOM INCUBATOR SPACE AUDITORIUM MEN'S RESTROOM INCUBATOR SPACE AUDITORIUM MECH./STORAGE ADULT LEARNING MECH./STORAGE ADULT LEARNING

EASEMENT

CD

D DATE NORTH

EASEMENT

BROAD LEAF TREE AND/OR LARGE SHRUB PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY PROPERTY LINE LINE - TOWN HOUSE

T.H.

P.L.TOWNHOUSE PROPERTY LINE

P.L.

PROPERTY MECHANICAL LINE MAILBOX MECHANICAL

EW

EGRESS WINDOW

EGRESS WINDOW

11/25/2025 MODELED

TW/RL

WALL ASSEMBLY WOOD FLOORING

WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE WALL TAG, SEE S36B G11 WALL TYPES WALL TAG, SEE DOOR TAG, SEE WALL TYPES 201B DOOR DOOR TAG,SCHEDULE SEE DOOR SCHEDULE X

X

RENTAL SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

S36B G11

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

TILE FLOORING 201B RAIN CONDUCTOR / DOWNSPOUT OR

MEN'S RESTROOM OR

RAIN CONDUCTOR / DOWNSPOUT SLOPE 1/4" / 12"

MECH./STORAGE SLOPE 1/4" / 12"

D

A-4.03

NORTH

DATE MODELED

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

CHECKED

25016

PROJECT©#REG 202525016

COLOR LEGEND

CIRCULATION

WOOD FLOORING TILE FLOORING

C

1 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN

Third Floor Proposed plan

MODELED CHECKEDTW/RL MA/REG

WALL ASSEMBLY

B

11/25/2025

CHECKED MA/REG PROJECT #

BROAD LEAF TREE AND/OR LARGE SHRUB

EW MAILBOX

DATE

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND FLOOR PLAN LEGEND

LINE - TOWN HOUSE T.H.PROPERTY TOWNHOUSE

A

NORTH

Second Floor Proposed plan

COLOR LEGEND COLOR LEGEND

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

D

INCUBATOR SPACE ADULT LEARNING

REQUIRED ADA ACCESS FLOOR SPACE REQUIRED ADA ACCESS FLOOR ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF CMU SPACE OR GWB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF CMU OR GWB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED

PROJECT #

© REG 2025 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND

DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND OWNERSHIP AND USEREMAIN OF THESE SHALL THE PROPERTY OF THE DOCUMENTS &ARCHITECT SPECIFICATIONS AS THE PROJECT WHETHER INSTRUMENTSTHEY OF SERVICE AREFOR ANDIS EXECUTED OR ARE MADE SHALL REMAINNOT. THE PROPERTY OF THEBE USED BY THE THEY SHALL NOT ARCHITECT WHETHER THEOTHERS PROJECT OWNER OR ON OTHER THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE

BY THE PROJECT BYUSED OTHERS, EXCEPT BY OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH PROJECTS ORAPPROPRIATE FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS COMPENSATION TO THE PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEPT BY ARCHITECT. AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE ARCHITECT.

EASEMENT

TECHNOLOGY SPACE GALLERY SPACE

BROAD LEAF TREE AND/OR LARGE SHRUB

AUDITORIUM PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE - TOWN HOUSE

PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS

A-4.02 A-4.02

T.H.

TOWNHOUSE

P.L.

PROPERTY LINE MECHANICAL MAILBOX

EW

EGRESS WINDOW

WALL ASSEMBLY WOOD FLOORING TILE FLOORING

OR

RAIN CONDUCTOR / DOWNSPOUT

© REG 2025 X

WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE

S36B G11

WALL TAG, SEE WALL TYPES

201B

DOOR TAG, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE

SLOPE 1/4" / 12" REQUIRED ADA ACCESS FLOOR SPACE ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO OUTSIDE FACE OF CMU OR GWB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

OWNERSHIP AND U DOCUMENTS & SPE INSTRUMENTS OF S SHALL REMAIN THE ARCHITECT WHETH THEY ARE MADE FO NOT. THEY SHALL N OWNER OR OTHERS PROJECTS OR FOR PROJECT BY OTHER AGREEMENT IN WR APPROPRIATE COM ARCHITECT.

AS-BUILT / CONCEPTUAL

B

AS-BUILT / CONCEPTUAL

A

AS-BUILT / CONCEPTUAL

A

NO. DATE D

17

PROPOSED F

A-4

ST. ANASTASIA Preliminary Retail Floor Plans

UP

SERVICE 570 SF

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

KITCHEN

RETAIL 6 1060 SF

UP UP UP

UP

RETAIL 6 1060 SF

RETAIL 6 KITCHEN RETAIL 6 1060 SF 1060 SF

BAR

BAR

PRELIMINARY ELEVATION & SECTION SKETCHES (PRODUCED BY COTLEUR & HEARING) PRELIMINARY ELEVATION & SECTION SKETCHES (PRODUCED BY COTLEUR & HEARING) PRELIMINARY ELEVATION & SECTION SKETCHES (PRODUCED

BY COTLEUR & HEARING) Preliminary Elevation & Section Sketches PRELIMINARY ELEVATION & SECTION SKETCHES (PRODUCED

BY COTLEUR & HEARING)

BAR BAR

ELEV.

KITCHEN

KITCHEN

UP UP

SERVICE UP SERVICE SERVICE 570 SF 570 SF KITCHEN 570 SF

NORTH

1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN NORTH 1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL SCALE: 1/16" =PLAN 1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN 1'-0" Ground Floor Proposed Retail Plan SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.05

KITCHEN

KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN WOMEN'S ELEV. STR KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN WOMEN'S RESTROOM KITCHEN5 KITCHEN KITCHEN3 KITCHEN2 KITCHEN1 WOMEN'S RETAIL RETAIL 4 RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL ELEV. UP MEN'S RESTROOM ELEV. 230 SF RESTROOM KITCHEN RESTROOM 230 SF 800 SF 810 SF 810 SF 810 SF 790 SF STR KITCHEN RETAIL 5 RETAIL 4 RETAIL 3 RETAIL 2 RETAIL 1 UP STR 230 MEN'S 230 SF SF STR RETAIL 5 RETAIL 4 RETAIL 3 RETAIL 2 RETAIL 1 UP MEN'S RESTROOM RETAIL 5 800 SFRETAIL 4 810 SFRETAIL 3 810 SF RETAIL 2 810 SF RETAIL 1 790 SF UP MEN'S RESTROOM 800 SF 810 SF 810 SF 810 SF 790 SF RESTROOM 230 SF 800 SF 810 SF 810 SF 810 SF 790 SF 230 SF MARKET 230 SF PLAZA 5800 SF MARKET RETAIL 7 UP OFFICE MARKET PLAZA ELEV. MARKET PLAZA 2730 SF ENTRY 5800 SF RETAIL 7 UP PLAZA OFFICE 5800 SF RETAIL 7 UP ELEV. ENTRY 5800 SF RETAIL 7 2730 SF UPOFFICE ELEV. OFFICE 2730 SF ENTRY ELEV. 2730 SF ENTRY

SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.05 A-4.05

KITCHEN

230 SF

1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN

A-4.05

KITCHEN

NORTH NORTH

SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

HISTORIC S DN

ROOF DN

DN

ELEV. DN DN

ROOFTOP BAR

STR

DN ELEV.

3480 SF ROOFTOP ROOFTOP BAR ROOFTOP BAR 3480 SF BAR 3480 SF 3480 SF

STR DN

ROOF

ELEV. ELEV.

DN

DN INTERIOR ROOF OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW

Preliminary Artist Rendition

PRELIMINARY ARTIST RENDITION (PRODUCED BY COTLEUR & HEARING)

INTERIOR ROOF INTERIOR ROOF

660 SF DN OFFICE OFFICE BALCONY OFFICE BALCONY BALCONY 660 SF DN 660 SF DN 660 SF DN ELEV.

ELEV.

OFFICE 3010 SF OFFICE 3010 SF

OFFICE OFFICE 3010 SF 3010 SF

ELEV. ELEV.

PRELIMINARY ARTIST RENDITION (PRODUCED BY COTLEUR & HEARING) PRELIMINARY ARTIST RENDITION (PRODUCED

BY COTLEUR & HEARING) PRELIMINARY ARTIST RENDITION (PRODUCED

BY COTLEUR & HEARING)

Second Floor Proposed Retail Plan

A-4.05

NORTH

2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN NORTH 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN A-4.05 1/16" = 1'-0" 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAILSCALE: PLAN A-4.05 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.05

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

NO. DATE

NO NO NO. DATE

ROOF ROOF

2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED RETAIL PLAN

910 Or Fort Pierc

OFFICE BALCONY

ROOF

ROOF

910 Or HISTORIC S Fort Pierc

ROOF ROOF

INTERIOR ROOF

STR STR DN

DN DN

NORTH NORTH

SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

DATE

MODELED DA DA CHECKED DATE MO MO PROJECTCH # MODELED CH © REG 2025 CHECKED PR PR OWNERSHIP AND#U PROJECT © DOCUMENTS & SP INSTRUMENTS © OF SHALL REMAIN TH © REG 2025 OW

18

ARCHITECT WHET DOC THEY ARE MADE F OW INS NOT. THEY SHALL DOC OWNERSHIP AND U

VISION & FUTURE OUTLOOK The Vision and Future Outlook section builds upon the master plan by showing how the Historic St. Anastasia site can evolve over time. While the previous section establishes the physical design recommendations, this section illustrates how those ideas come together as a cohesive site experience.

Through 3D renderings and visual studies, the plan begins to show the character and future potential of the site. These images help communicate how historic preservation, public access, arts and culture, flexible outdoor use, safety, connectivity, and long-term adaptability can work together within the overall vision.

The renderings are not intended to represent final construction details. They are intended to protect the integrity of the master plan as the project moves into future phases. By visualizing the design intent, this section helps guide future decisions related to design development, funding, partnerships, and implementation.

Together, these visuals serve as both inspiration and direction. They show how the Historic St. Anastasia site can continue to honor its past while becoming an active, welcoming, and enduring civic destination for Fort Pierce.

19

ST. ANASTASIA MASTER PLAN

Envisioning Spaces and Inspirational Places

The following pages present illustrative sketches that demonstrate the application of community themes identified through the planning process.

Each drawing highlights specific and achievable ideas for Memorial Park and Pine Tree Park, showing how these themes can be brought to life.

While the sketches focus on individual park perspectives, the underlying concepts are broadly applicable across Fort Pierce wherever opportunities arise. The numbered viewpoints correspond to the locations shown on the accompanying master plan map:

4

N. 10TH ST.

N. 9TH ST

3

1

Site View Historic Building Entry

2

Site View Street-Front Engagement

3

Site View Community Event Area

4

Site View Courtyard / Social Outdoor Space

PEACOCK ART DISTRICT VENDOR HALL

ST. ANASTASIA BUILDING

1 ORANGE AVE

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

2

North

NOT TO SCALE

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

20

1 INSPIRATION VISUALIZATION Key Features The proposed addition supports the adaptive reuse of the historic building by providing needed program space

The campus courtyard creates a central outdoor gathering area connected to the building entry and adjacent site features.

Water and art installations provide opportunities for community storytelling, historical education, and cultural interpretation

Proposed Addition Supports the adaptive reuse of the historic building by providing needed program space, including a lobby, stairs, and elevator access. These functions improve circulation and accessibility while allowing the historic building to remain the primary visual.

Campus Courtyard Creates a central outdoor gathering area connected to the building entry and adjacent site features. It provides a flexible space for seating, circulation, small events, and informal daily use.

Complete Streets & Pedestrian Crossings Strengthen the site’s connection to Orange Avenue. Enhanced streetscape elements improve safety and pedestrian access.

Water features and Art Installations Add visual interest and create memorable moments. These elements provide opportunities for community storytelling, historical education, and cultural interpretation tied to Fort Pierce’s identity.

Enhanced streetscape elements improve safety and pedestrian access.

HISTORIC BUILDING ENTRY

Activating Gathering. Strengthening Community.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

21

2 INSPIRATION VISUALIZATION Key Features Rooftop bar and Art Installation create a signature visual feature

Peacock Design District Vendor Hall

for the site.

supports local vendors, and flexible community programming.

Peacock Art District Vendor Hall Creates an active destination along the street frontage. It supports local businesses, artists, food vendors, and flexible community programming while reinforcing the site’s connection to the Peacock Arts District.

Street- Front Activation Brings energy and visibility to Orange Avenue. Outdoor seating, storefront activity, and pedestrian areas help create a safer, more inviting public edge.

Street Front Activation brings energy and visibility to Orange Avenue.

Complete Streets & Pedestrian Crossings Crossings, sidewalks, and streetscape improvements help create safer and more comfortable connections between the site and surrounding neighborhood.

Rooftop Bar & Art Installation Create a signature visual feature for the site.

This space adds a unique gathering area while introducing shade, color, and an artsfocused identity visible from the surrounding public realm.

Complete streets and enhanced pedestrian crossings help create connections between the site and surrounding community.

STREET-FRONT ENGAGEMENT

Activating Gathering. Strengthening Community.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

EXISTING CONDITIONS

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

22

3 INSPIRATION VISUALIZATION

The open event lawn provides

Pedestrian promenade organizes movement

a flexible green space for

through the event area while creating

community gatherings.

opportunities for vendors.

Multi-use, flex space supports changing uses without limiting the space to one fixed program.

COMMUNITY EVENT AREA

Activating Gathering. Strengthening Community.

Key Features Open Event Lawn The open event lawn provides a flexible green space for community gatherings, performances, informal recreation, and seasonal programming.

Multi-Use Flex Space Creates a covered and adaptable area for dining, events, classes, vendor activity, and day-to-day seating. The raised deck can also serve as a performance stage for bands, speakers, or small community programs, allowing the space to shift easily between casual use and event activation. The design supports changing uses without limiting the space to one fixed program.

Pedestrian Promenade and Food Vendors Organizes movement through the event area while creating opportunities for food vendors and casual gathering. This edge helps activate the site and connects the lawn, covered event space, parking, and surrounding public areas.

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

EXISTING CONDITIONS

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

23

4 INSPIRATION VISUALIZATION Key Features Two-Story Event Cover

The proposed access road and vendor air stream adds a casual food and beverage destination that can help activate the site throughout the day.

The wide entry plaza creates a generous arrival space for visitors entering the area.

Two-Story Event Cover Creates a shaded focal point for outdoor dining, events, and community programming. Its scale allows the space to function as both a comfortable daily gathering area and a larger venue for special events.

Wide Entry Plaza Creates a generous arrival space for visitors entering the area. It provides room for circulation, landscape, and flexible activation before guests move into the larger site.

Access Road and Pedestrian Promenade Provides controlled access for semipermanent vendors, service needs, and event setup, when needed. Removable bollards help protect pedestrian areas during normal use while allowing the space to remain flexible.

Semi-Permanent Coffee Airstream Adds a casual food and beverage destination that can help activate the site throughout the day. Its flexible format supports daily use, events, and a more relaxed public gathering atmosphere.

WELCOME ENTRY AND PROMENADE

Activating Gathering. Strengthening Community.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

24

CONCLUSION

The completion of the Historic St. Anastasia Master Plan and Design Guidelines marks an important step toward shaping the future of this significant Fort Pierce property. These recommendations provide a framework for thoughtful improvements that respect the historic building while creating new opportunities for public gathering, arts and culture, activation, and connection.

This document reflects both professional design analysis and the input gathered from residents, stakeholders, City leadership, and project partners.

By following this plan, the City can move forward with a clear vision that balances preservation, functionality, flexibility, and long-term community value.

Cotleur & Hearing is honored to have worked alongside the City of Fort Pierce, the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency, REG Architects, and the community in shaping this vision. With careful implementation, the Historic St. Anastasia site can become a place where history is preserved, public life is welcomed, and the future of Orange Avenue continues to grow.

This plan is dedicated to the Fort Pierce community, whose input and commitment helped shape a vision for the future of the Historic St. Anastasia site and its surrounding public spaces.

25

APPENDIX

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

26

APPENDIX: EXHIBIT A - HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

27

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950 AS-BUILT PHASE REG PROJECT #:25016 11/03/2025

EXISTING BUILDING / SITE PHOTOGRAPHY

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA 910 ORANGE AVE. FORT PIERCE FL, 34950

HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT NOVEMBER 05, 2025

Sheet List - As-Built

Sheet Number Sheet Name A-0.00 COVER SHEET A-0.10 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION A-0.20 HISTORICAL IMAGES & HISTORY A-0.30 AERIAL PLAN A-0.40 MICRO AERIAL PLAN A-0.50 SITE SURVEY A-0.70 EXISTING SITE PLAN A-0.81 EXISTING EXTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.82 EXISTING EXTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.83 EXISTING EXTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.84 EXISTING EXTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.85 EXISTING INTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.86 EXISTING INTERIOR PHOTOS A-0.87 EXISTING INTERIOR PHOTOS

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

Introduction | Historic Significance............. ...........................................................................page 3

II.

Existing Site Assessment .......................................,...............................................................page 6

III.

Existing Building Architectural Drawings................................................................................page 9

IV.

Existing Building Condition Assessment...............................................................................page 16 i. Photo Locations ii. Photo Assessment

V.

Existing Building 3D Model Views........................................................................................page 29

VI.

Proposed Improvements / ADA Accessibility.......................................................................page 31

VII.

Recommendations: Budget Options / Grant Source............................................................page 44

VIII.

Terms / References...............................................................................................................page 48

IX.

Structural & MEP Assessment Report...................................................................................page 50

2

I. INTRODUCTION | HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE

3

INTRODUCTION

HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE History of St. Anastasia Parish: Although it had been organized just three years earlier, in 1914, the small Roman Catholic parish of St. Anastasia decided to build an impressive parochial school to serve the children of the approximately thirty Catholic families in Fort Pierce and others residing between Titusville and Vero Beach. Although the 1900 census recorded no Catholics in Fort Pierce, by 1906, there were 26 families in the area. Father Michael J. Curley, the pastor of St. Peter’s in DeLand—150 miles northwest of Fort Pierce—made bimonthly visits to the community to celebrate mass. Ceremonies were held in the town hall and the homes of the worshipers.

One of the persons in Fort Pierce attending services was a winter visitor named James “Sunny Jim” P. McNichol, a Philadelphia building contractor, state senator, and owner of the W .J. McNichol Brothers firm. In 1908, McNichol purchased a city block of land near the western limits of Fort Pierce and paid for the construction of a wooden church. Three years later, he paid $5,000 to construct a rectory and, in 1914, provided $6,000 to build a school and convent. The parish was named St. Anastasia in honor of McNichol’s deceased first wife.

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA 910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950

DRAFT

The first pastor of the church was Father Rupert Gabriel. Gabriel was born in Gall, Switzerland, on April 3, 1868. He was schooled in the Order of St. Benedict at St. Meinrad Academy in Indiana. He was ordained in 1894 at St. Boniface in New Orleans and took his vows in 1897 when assigned to St. Augustine in Florida.

During his pastorate in Fort Pierce, St. Anastasia changed from a missionary outpost to a nuclear parish serving a 4,400 square mile area that reached from Titusville, approximately 60 miles to the north, to Lake Okeechobee, about 50 miles to the southwest. In 1910, Father Gabriel counted 93 Catholics in Fort Pierce, including 34 children. When the Old St. Anastasia Catholic School was completed in 1914, it had no teachers or students and stood empty for its first five years.

On August 10, 2000, it was added to the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. The FPRA Board allocated $500,000 in the 2022-2023 Fiscal Year Budget to fund the completed exterior restoration as part of a larger initiative to redevelop the site and surrounding vacant parcels. The exterior restoration is an important step in eliminating slum and blight while creating a welcoming and vibrant environment for the community. Innovative Masonry Restoration, LLC was selected as the contractor for this project, and the FPRA team worked closely with them to bring the building back to its former glory in phase I. 1. Bullet, David. “Old St. Anastasia Catholic School. ” Abandoned Florida, 9 Dec. 2024, abandonedfl.com/old-stanastasia-catholic-school/.

2. Wikipedia Contributors. “Old St. Anastasia Catholic School. ” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 31 Oct. 2025.

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

DATE

11/03/2025

MODELED

TW/RL

CHECKED

MA/REG

PROJECT #

25016

© REG 2025

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

TO SHOWING ST. ANASTASIA CATHOLIC CHURCH-SCHOOL , COMPLETED IN 1914.

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE USED BY THE OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE ARCHITECT.

HISTORICAL IMAGES & HISTORY

A-0.20

4

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

HISTORIC History of

Although i Roman Ca parochial families in Beach. Alt 1906, ther of St. Pete monthly vi the town h HISTORIC PHOTO, VIEW FROM ORANGE AVE. DATE UNKNOWN

1.

HISTORIC PHOTO SHOWING ST. ANASTASIA CATHOLIC CHURCH-SCHOOL AND RECTORY, COMPLETED IN 1914.

2.

One of the named Ja state sena McNichol Pierce and he paid $5 a school a McNichol’

The first p Gall, Switz Benedict a Boniface i Augustine

During his outpost to from Titus about 50 m Catholics Catholic S stood emp

VIEW FROM SOUTH WEST CORNER OF (ORANGE AVE & N. 10TH ST) EXISTING ST. ANASTASIA PRIOR TO EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS (2022)

3.

1. “The Old. St. Anastasia Catholic School building. date unknown, ” Abandonded FL, accessed 28 Oct. 2025, https://i0.wp.com/www.abandonedfl.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/provided.jpg?ssl=1 2. “St. Anastasia Catholic Church School and Rectory, Fort Pierce, Fla., ” Abandoned Atlas Archives, accessed 28 Oct. 2025, https://archives.abandonedatlas.com/items/show/268.

3. “Old St. Anastasia Catholic School, ” Wikipedia, accessed 28 Oct. 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_St. _Anastasia_Catholic_School#/media/File:OldSt.AnastasiaCatholicSchool.jpg.

On Augus Places. Th Budget to to redevel restoration a welcomi Masonry R and the FP former glo

1. Bullet, David. “Ol anastasia-catholic-s 2. Wikipedia Contrib

5

II. EXISTING SITE ASSESSMENT

6

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROJECT LOCATION AERIAL MAP

AVENUE B

N 8TH STREET

N 10TH STREET

N 11TH STREET

AVENUE C

PROJECT SITE

AVENUE A

HISTORIC BUILDING

HWY 68

ATLANTIC AVENUE

NORTH SCALE:

1" = 60'-0"

7

RP

E

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

E

C

EXISTING SITE PLAN

C

S

TRANSFORMER PAD

E

ELECTRIC VAULT

6' TALL CONCRETE WALL

RP

BROKEN ASPHALT AREA

A-2.00 -

CONCRETE AREA

3

C

C

C

E

EW

TE

EN

OK

BR

N 10TH ST.

A-2.00 -

1

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA SCHOOL

2

A-2.00

BROKEN ASPHALT AREA

E

C

C

S

EXISTING CONCRETE STAIR

RP

RP

CONCRETE PAD

EXISTING PORTICO

4 A-2.00 -

EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK

CONCRETE DRIVEWAY

C

ORANGE AVE.

D

S

D

1 EXISTING SITE PLAN Copy 1

HR-1

SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"

K

AL

PARCEL BOUNDARY

MY

E C

8

CO

N

E CR

SID

III. EXISTING BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS

9

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

C

D

A

B

1 A-3.00

EXISTING C

GROUND FLOOR

D

PLAN

5

STAIRWELL

STAIRWELL

430 SF

425 SF

CLASSROOM

CLASSROOM

182 SF

188 SF

4 3 A-3.00

MAIN HALL

CLASSROOM

683 SF

784 SF

3

CLASSROOM

MAIN HALL

CLASSROOM

1173 SF

672 SF

564 SF

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA

CLASSROOM 601 SF

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950

2

DRAFT

2 A-3.00

CLASSROOM 614 SF

1 NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

DN

PLAN

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

N.T.S. EASEMENT

2 GROUND FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND WALL ASSEMBLY

DATE

11/03/2025

MODELED

TW/RL

CHECKED

MA/REG

PROJECT #

25016

© REG 2025 X

WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR

10

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

EXISTING SECOND

B

C

D

A

B

C

A PLAN FLOOR

D

B

1 A-3.00

5

5

STAIRWELL

STAIRWELL

461 SF

STAIRWELL

430 SF

425 SF

CLASSROOM 182 SF CLASSROOM

4

4

387 SF 3

A-3.00

AUDITORIUM

N

3

3439 SF

CLASSROOM

MAIN HALL

CLASSROOM

388 SF

683 SF

784 SF

3

CLASSROOM

MAIN HALL

1173 SF

672 SF

2

2

2 A-3.00

CLASSROOM

CLASSROOM

612 SF

614 SF

1

1 DN

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

N.T.S.

2 GROUND FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

11

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND EASEMENT

WALL ASSEMBLY

C

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

C

EXISTING THIRD

D

A

B

C

D

5

A FLOOR PLAN

B

C

5

1/4" / 12"

STAIRWELL

STAIRWELL

461 SF

430 SF

4

AUDITORIUM

3

3439 SF

4

CLASSROOM

3

CLASSROOM

MAIN HALL

388 SF

683 SF

387 SF

4" / 12"

2

2 CLASSROOM 612 SF

1

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

N.T.S.

1

3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

12

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

A

B

C

EXISTING

D

A PLAN ROOF

5

B

5 1/4" / 12"

1/4" / 12"

STAIRWELL 461 SF

4

4

3

3

4" / 12"

2

1

1

A-1.01

N.T.S.

3439 SF

4" / 12"

2

4 ROOF PLAN

AUDITORIUM

NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN

A-1.01

13

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

EXISTING ELEVATIONS

D

C

BC

B

C

BA

A

A

5

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

D

DC

B

5

5

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

4

3

3

2

2

1

1

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

A

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

4

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

1

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

A-2.00

A

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SOUTH A B CB C D ELEVATION

3 EXISTING NORTH 3 EXISTING ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION

A-2.00

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

A-2.00

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

AB

C

B

CD

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

DRAFT DRAFT

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

EXISTING WEST 1 1 ELEVATION

GROUND FLOOR 0"

2

A-2.00

A-2.00

2

3

3

4

4

5

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

5 DATE THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY SHALL OFREMAIN THE THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT 9'-4" 9'-4" THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED THEY ARE ORMADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

2 EXISTING 2 EAST EXISTING ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

A-2.00

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

GROUND FLOOR 0"

4 EXISTING SOUTH 4 EXISTING ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION

A-2.00

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION

N.T.S.

NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE USED NOT. BY THEY THESHALL NOT BE USED BY THE OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITIONS PROJECTS TO THISOR FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEPT PROJECT BY

BY OTHERS, EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND AGREEMENT WITH IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION APPROPRIATE TO THE COMPENSATION TO THE ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT.

DATE DATE 11/03/2025 GROUND FLOORGROUND FLOOR MODELED MODELED TW/RL 0" 0" EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR ELEVATIONS MA/REG ELEVATIONS CHECKED CHECKED 22'-3 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

GROUND FLOORGROUND FLOOR 0" 0" THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

4 EXISTING 4 SOUTH EXISTING ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION

11/03/2025

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS DOCUMENTS AS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE INSTRUMENTS ARE AND OF SERVICE ARE AND

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

A-2.00

DATE 11/03/2025

MODELED MODELED TW/RL TW/RL THIRD FLOOR CHECKED CHECKED MA/REG MA/REG 22'-3 1/2" NO. DATE DESCRIPTION NO. DATE DESCR PROJECT # PROJECT 25016 # 25016 EXISTING T.O. © REG 2025 © REG 2025 BEAM 39'-7"

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 349

DRAFT DRAF

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION NO. DATE DESCRIPTION EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

1

HISTORIC ST. ANAS

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950 GROUND FLOOR 0"

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

D

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" ST. ANASTASIA HISTORIC

5 GROUND FLOOR 0"

1 EXISTING WEST 1 EXISTING ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

A

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

D GROUND FLOOR 0"

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

910 Orange Ave 910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950 Fort Pierce, FL 34950 GROUND FLOORGROUND FLOOR THIRD FLOOR THIRD 0" 0" FLOOR 22'-3 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

1 EXISTING 1 WEST EXISTING ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA

GROUND FLOORGROUND FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 0" THIRD FLOOR 0" 22'-3 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

3 EXISTING 3 NORTH EXISTING ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

A-2.00

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

1

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

GROUND FLOOR 0"

GROUND FLOOR 0"

2 EXISTING EAST 2 EXISTING ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION

A-2.00

A-2.00

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

EXISTING EAST ELEVATION

14

PROJECT #

PROJECT # 25016

© REG 2025

© REG 2025

11

M

A-2.00A-2.00

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIO INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE A

SECOND FLOOR SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERT ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT ARCHITECT WHETHER THE P 9'-4" THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXEC

NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE USED BY THE NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE US OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHE PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITION PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEPT BY PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEP AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE APPROPRIATE COMPENSATIO ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT.

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

D

GROUND FLOOR 0" EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATIONS

EXISTING BUILDI ELEVATIONS

A-2.00 A-2.0

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

EXISTING SECTIONS

B

1 A-3.001 A-3.00

C

C

A

D

D

AUDITORIUM AUDITORIUM 18 18

1

B

A-3.00

C

D

D

EXISTING T.O. EXISTING T.O. BEAM BEAM 39'-7" 39'-7"

EXISTING T.O. BEAM 39'-7"

MEZZANINE LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL 33'-9 7/256" 33'-9 7/256"

MEZZANINE LEVEL 33'-9 7/256"

C

D

ASSROOM CLASSROOM 6 6

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 11 11

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 6 7 7

ASSROOM CLASSROOM 1 1

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 17 17

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 1 2 2

CLASSROOM

11

7

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4" MAIN HALL

ROSS SECTION 2 3 EXISTING CROSS SECTION 2 CROSS SECTION 2SCALE: A-3.00 1/8" = EXISTING 1'-0" CROSS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

1

D

B

A

C

A

1 A-3.00

CLASSROOM 2 GROUND FLOOR 0"

A-3.00 A-3.00

2 A-3.002 A-3.00

2

2

1

A

EXISTING T.O. EXISTING T.O. BEAM BEAM 39'-7" 39'-7"

E

MEZZANINE LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL 33'-9 7/256" 33'-9 7/256" AUDITORIUM

MEZZ

18

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 10 10

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 11 11

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 10 9 9

MAIN HALL

CLASSROOM

11

9

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 3 3

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 17 17

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 3 1 1

MAIN HALL

CLASSROOM

17

1

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SECTION 2

3

2

3

A-3.00

2

3 A-3.003 A-3.00

4

3

4

5

SE

HISTORIC ST. A HISTORIC GRS

GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

2 EXISTING CROSS SECTION 1 2 EXISTING CROSS SECTION 1 2 EXISTING CROSS SECTION 1SCALE: A-3.00 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING CROSS

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

B

THIRD FLOOR THIRD 22'-3FLOOR 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

SECOND FLOOR 9'-4"

SECTION 1

1

B

THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"

MAIN HALL

17 GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

1 A-3.001 A-3.00

AUDITORIUM AUDITORIUM 18 18

AUDITORIUM 18 THIRD FLOOR THIRD 22'-3FLOOR 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

C

3 A-3.00

5

910 Orang 910 OrF Fort Pierce, Fort Pierc

DRA DR

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

4

5

NO. DATE DE NO. DATE MEZZANINE MEZZANINE 22 22

AUDITORIUM AUDITORIUM 18 18

AUDITORIUM STAIRWELL STAIRWELL 18 19 19

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 11 11

STAIRWELL MAIN HALL STAIRWELL 12 11 12

MAIN HALL MAIN HALL 17 17

MAIN HALL STAIRWELL STAIRWELL 17 16 16

EXISTING T.O. EXISTING T.O. BEAM MEZZANINE BEAM 39'-7" 2239'-7"

EXI

MEZZANINE LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL 33'-9 7/256" 33'-9 7/256"

MEZZAN

STAIRWELL 19 THIRD FLOOR THIRD 22'-3FLOOR 1/2" 22'-3 1/2"

STAIRWELL 12 SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

N.T.S.

OWNERSHIP AND USE DOCUMENTS & SPECIF OWNERSHIP AND U INSTRUMENTS OF &SER DOCUMENTS SP SHALL REMAIN THE OF PR INSTRUMENTS ARCHITECT WHETHER SHALL REMAIN TH THEYARCHITECT ARE MADE WHET FOR IS NOT.THEY THEYARE SHALL NOT MADE F OWNER OTHERS ON NOT.ORTHEY SHALL PROJECTS OR FOR AD OWNER OR OTHER PROJECT

BY OTHERS, PROJECTS OR FOR AGREEMENT WRITIN PROJECTINBY OTHE APPROPRIATE COMPEN AGREEMENT IN WR ARCHITECT. APPROPRIATE COM ARCHITECT.

SECO

STAIRWELL 16

GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

1 EXISTING LONGITUDINAL SECTION 1 EXISTING LONGITUDINAL SECTION 1 EXISTING LONGITUDINAL SECTION A-3.00 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

A-3.00 A-3.00

DATE DATE MODELED MODELED CHECKED THI CHECKED PROJECT # PROJECT # © REG 2025 © REG 2025

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING LONGITUDINAL SECTION

15

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

B

GROU EXISTING BUILDIN EXISTING BUIL

A-3.

A-3

IV. EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

16

RP

RP

E

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

E

SITE PHOTOS

C

KEY PLAN

C

S

7

12

11

8

RP

E

5 6

19, 29, 30

C

23

C

28 9

C

31

E

2

1

N 10TH ST.

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA SCHOOL E

C

C

27

S

16 RP

RP

18,20 17

15

26 25 24

21,22

13

3 4

C

ORANGE AVE.

D

S

D

1 EXISTING SITE PLAN Copy 2

HR-2

SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"

MY

E C

17

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

1. EAST ELEVATION

2. WEST ELEVATION

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

18

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

3. SOUTHWEST CORNER

4. SOUTH ELEVATION

5. NORTH ELEVATION

6. NORTHEAST CORNER

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

19

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

7. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING WEST TOWARDS N 10TH ST.

8. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING EAST TOWARDS N 9TH ST.

9. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING NORTH TOWARDS AVE B.

10. N. 10TH STREET OPPOSITE SIDEWALK, LOOKING SOUTHWEST

11. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING NORTHEAST TOWARDS AVE B.

12. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING NORTHWEST TOWARDS N 10TH ST.

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

20

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

13. OPEN FIELD AREA LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS ORANGE AVE.

14. N. 1OTH ST. LOOKING SOUTHEAST

15. CORNER OF N. 1OTH ST. & ORANGE AVE. LOOKING SOUTHEAST

16. WEST ELEVATION WINDOW DETAIL

17. SOUTHWEST BUILDING CORNER DETAIL

19. NORTH ELEVATION REAR ENTRY

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

21

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

20. ENTRY STAIR CASE, WEST END

21. NEWEL POST DETAIL, WEST END

22. NEWEL POST DETAIL, WEST END

23. NORTHWEST CORNER BRICK DETAIL

24. UPPER WINDOW ROOF EAVE DETAIL, SOUTH ELEVATION

25. NEWELL POST TOP ORNAMENT DETAIL

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

22

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

26. ENTRY PORTICO COLUMN & CORNICE DETAIL

27. LOWER WINDOW DETAIL, EAST ELEVATION

28. UPPER ARCHED WINDOWS DETAIL, EAST ELEVATION

29. REAR DOOR ENTRY, NORTH ELEVATION

30. UPPER ARCHED WINDOW, NORTH ELEVATION

31. LOWER BRICK ARCHWAYS DETAIL

REFER TO SITE PHOTOS KEY (PG 17) FOR VIEW LOCATIONS

23

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

1. INTERIOR STAIR WELL

2. INTERIOR STAIR LEADING UP TO SECOND FLOOR

3. 2ND FLOOR HALLWAY PEERING TROUGH WINDOW.

4. STAIRWELL LEADING TO REAR EXIT

5. CENTRAL STAIR HALL

6. REAR EXIT VIEW INTO LOWER LEVEL

24

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

7. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM

8. STAIRWAY INTO LOWER LEVEL

9. STAIR UP TO MEZZANINE

10. CENTRAL STAIR UP TO SECOND FLOOR

11. SECOND FLOOR CORRIDOR

12. SECOND FLOOR CORRIDOR

25

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

13. ARCHED OPENING

14. STAIR TO MEZZANINE

15. LOWER LEVEL STAIR

16. TOP OF STAIR LEADING TO SECOND FLOOR

17. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM

18. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM

26

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

19. FIRST FLOOR STAIRWELL

20. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM

21. SECOND FLOOR STAIR LANDING

22. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM

23. FIRST FLOOR CLASSROOM DOORWAY

24. FIRST FLOOR AUDITORIUM

27

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

25. FIRST FLOOR AUDITORIUM, MEZZANINE ABOVE

26. FIRST FLOOR WINDOW DETAIL

27. HEXAGON TILE DETAIL

28. STAIR RAILING DETAIL

29. STAIRWELL BRICK PAINT DETERIORATION DETAIL

30. STAIRWELL BRICK PAINT DETERIORATION DETAIL

31. ENTRY INTO AUDITORIUM

32. CORRIDOR CEILING DETAIL

33. STAIRWELL WINDOW INTO AUDITORIUM

28

V. EXISTING BUILDING 3D MODEL VIEWS

29

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

EXISTING ISOMETRIC VIEWS

ISOMETRIC 1: NORTHWEST CORNER

ISOMETRIC 2: SOUTHWEST CORNER

HISTORIC ST.3: ANASTASIA ISOMETRIC SOUTHEAST 910 Orange Ave CORNERFort Pierce, FL 34950

DRAFT

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

DATE

11/03/2025

MODELED

TW/RL

CHECKED

MA/REG

PROJECT #

25016

© REG 2025 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT

30

VI. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS / ADA ACCESSIBILITY

31

E

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

E

C

PROPOSED SITE PLAN

C

S

TRANSFORMER PAD

E

ELECTRIC VAULT

6' TALL CONCRETE WALL

RP

A-4.05

CONCRETE AREA

3

C

C

C

E

NEW CONCRETE SIDEWALK TO COORDINATE WITH FUTURE MASTER PLANNING

PARCEL BOUNDARY

CANOPY OVER PROPOSED ADDITION ENTRY

N 10TH ST.

A-4.05

2

1

A-4.05

E

C

C

S

RP

RP

PROPOSED ADDITION EXISTING PORTICO

CANOPY OVER PROPOSED ADDITION ENTRY

EXISTING CONCRETE STAIR

4

NEW CONCRETE SIDEWALK TO COORDINATE WITH FUTURE MASTER PLANNING EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK

A-4.05

EXISTING PARCEL BOUNDARY

C

ORANGE AVE.

D

S

D

1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN

A-4.00

SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" MY

E C

32

12.17 MHS

11.65 MHS

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

S

S

PROPOSED SITE PLAN: BUBBLE DIAGRAM

M

M

M

C

C

C

C

C

C

E

E

E

E

M

C

C

C

E

C

RP

M

RP

M

C

C

E

C

C

F

M

C

RP

RP

E

E

N 9TH ST.

N 10TH ST.

C

C

S

RP

E

C

C

C

E

F S

E

C

C

S

OLD ST. ANASTASIA CATHOLIC SCHOOL C

RP

RP

PROPOSED ADDITION

E

C

E E

D

D

MY

MY

ORANGE AVE.

D

S

S

D

MY

MY

E C

BBLE DIAGRAM

SCALE:

E

1" = 30'-0"

33

STAIRS

MECH./STORAGE

2

ELEV. LOBBY DOUBLE DOORS HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC 2STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

PROPOSED

LOBBY

DN

STAIRS

1.1

MECH./STORAGE

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

DN

STAIRS

A

B

C

STA

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

D

5

UP

NORTH

PROPOSED GROUND 1.1

A-4.04

DN

FLOOR PLAN NORTH

3 THIRD 5 FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

2 SECOND FLO

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.04

COLOR LEGEND STAIRWELL

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

425 SF

A-4.04

NORTH

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE TECHNOLO 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (AD WOMEN'S RESTROOM A-4.04 ADAPTIVE RE-USE GALLERY SCALE: 3/16" = 1S MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

COLOR LEGEND MECH./STORAGE ADULT LEARNING

ADULT LEARNING

182 SF

188 SF

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

COLOR LEGEND 4 MECH./STORAGE

4

AUDITORIU

ADULT LEARNING

CIRCULATION

ADULT LEARNING

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

MECH./STORAGE

ADULT LEARNING

INCUBATOR SPACE 564 SF

E

3

H

2.1 RENTAL SPACE (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT)

2.1

MAIN HALL MEN'S RESTROOM

" A'-0 AøD5

672 SF

1173 SF

øA 5'D -0A "

161 SF

WOMEN'S RESTROOM 189 SF

HISTOR

91 Fort

2

LOBBY

ELEV.

701 SF

57 SF

ADAPTIVE RE-USE (SUMMER CAMP) 601 SF

STORAGE

1

STAIRS UP

32 SF

1.1

169 SF

MECH./STORAGE 65 SF

1.1

E 1

DR

H

1

NO. DAT

A

B

C

1 GROUND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN

A-4.02

D NORTH

DATE

MODELE

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

CHECKE

PROJEC

N.T.S. TECHNOLOGY SPACE GALLERY SPACE

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND EASEMENT

BROAD LEAF TREE AND/OR LARGE SHRUB

WALL ASSEMBLY WOOD FLOORING

© REG 2

34

X

WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE

S36B G11

WALL TAG, SEE WALL TYPES

E

1

DN

OWNERSHIP DOCUMENTS INSTRUMENT SHALL REMA ARCHITECT W THEY ARE MA NOT. THEY S OWNER OR O PROJECTS O

DN

STAIRS

MECH./STORAGE

2

ELEV. LOBBY DOUBLE DOORS HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC 2STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

PROPOSED

LOBBY

DN

STAIRS

1.1

MECH./STORAGE

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

DN

STAIRS

A

B

C

A-4.04

NORTH

2 SECOND FLO

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.04

COLOR LEGEND

STAIRWELL 430 SF

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE TECHNOLO 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (AD WOMEN'S RESTROOM A-4.04 ADAPTIVE RE-USE GALLERY SCALE: 3/16" = 1S

NORTH

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

COLOR LEGEND MECH./STORAGE RENTAL SPACE (PROFIT/NON-PROFIT) 387 SF

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

ADULT CLASSROOM 388 SF

683 SF

ADULT LEARNING

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

ADULT LEARNING

E

H

2.1

2.1 " A'-0 AøD5

A-4.05

1

2

GALLERY SPACE 1 / ART STUDIO

GALLERY SPACE 2

612 SF

614 SF

øA 5'D -0A "

3

RENTAL SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

CIRCULATION MEN'S RESTROOM TECHNOLOGY/MEDIA CENTER MECH./STORAGE 784 SF

MEN'S RESTROOM

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

161 SF

189 SF

LOBBY

ELEV.

701 SF

57 SF

STAIRS

UP

218 SF

1.1

MECH./STORAGE 65 SF

H

1

A

B

C

2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN

A-4.02

1.1

DN

E 1

AUDITORIU

ADULT LEARNING

CIRCULATION

COLOR LEGEND 4 MECH./STORAGE

MAIN HALL/ART GALLERY WALK

STA DN

FLOOR PLAN

3 THIRD 5 FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

4

UP

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

D

5

NORTH

PROPOSED SECOND 1.1

A-4.04

D NORTH

1

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

A-4

N.T.S.

COLOR LEGEND CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE

35

TECHNOLOGY S

STAIRS

MECH./STORAGE

2

ELEV. LOBBY DOUBLE DOORS HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC 2STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

PROPOSED

STAIRS

1.1

MECH./STORAGE

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

DN

STAIRS

A

B

C

5

UP

NORTH

STA

PROPOSED THIRD 1.1

A-4.04

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

D

DN

FLOOR PLAN

3 THIRD 5 FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

NORTH

2 SECOND FLO

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.04

COLOR LEGEND

STAIRWELL 461 SF

3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

NORTH

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE TECHNOLO 2 SECOND FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (AD WOMEN'S RESTROOM A-4.04 ADAPTIVE RE-USE GALLERY SCALE: 3/16" = 1S MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

COLOR LEGEND MECH./STORAGE RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

ADULT LEARNING

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

MECH./STORAGE

ADULT LEARNING

E 3

H

2.1

2.1 " A'-0 AøD5

AUDITORIUM FLEX SPACE 3439 SF

AUDITORIU

ADULT LEARNING

CIRCULATION

COLOR LEGEND 4 MECH./STORAGE

4

MEN'S RESTROOM

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

163 SF

189 SF

HISTORIC ST. ANAS

2

LOBBY

ELEV.

701 SF

57 SF

218 SF

910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 349

DRAF

MECH./STORAGE

STAIRS

1

NOLOGY SPACE

LOBBY

DN

øA 5'D -0A "

1

DN

65 SF

DN

1.1

1.1 E

1

H

1

NO. DATE DESCR

A

B

C

1 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN

A-4.03

D NORTH

DATE

11

MODELED

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

CHECKED

M

PROJECT #

N.T.S.

FLOOR PLAN LEGEND EASEMENT

WALL ASSEMBLY WOOD FLOORING

36 X

WINDOW TAG, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE

© REG 2025

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIO INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE A SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERT ARCHITECT WHETHER THE P THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXEC NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE US

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED A

B

C

ROOF PLAN

D

5

5 1/4" / 12"

1/4" / 12"

4

4

E 3

2.1

4" / 12"

4" / 12"

1" / 12"

4" / 12"

1

2.1

2

4" / 12"

1" / 12"

A-4.05

H

1.1

1.1 E

1

1

A

B

2 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN

A-4.03

N.T.S.

H

C

D NORTH

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

COLOR LEGEND

37

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED ADDITION PLANS 33 2.1 2.1

2.1 2.1

22

PROPOSED PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS DOUBLE DOORS

22

MEN'S RESTROOM

STAIRS STAIRS

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

NORTH NORTH

22 SECOND SECONDFLOOR FLOORPROPOSED PROPOSEDPLAN PLAN(ADDITION (ADDITIONONLY) ONLY)

A-4.04 A-4.04

A ø DA A ø 5'-0DA 5'- " 0"

3

GROUND FLOOR

2

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

NORTH NORTH

CANOPY ABOVE

1.1 1.1

NO. NO.DATE DATEDESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION

2

ELEV.

LOBBY

A-4.04 A-4.04

DRAFT DRAFT

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

11 GROUND GROUNDFLOOR FLOORPROPOSED PROPOSEDPLAN PLAN(ADDITION (ADDITIONONLY) ONLY)

3/16" 3/16" = 1'-0" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

910 910 Orange Orange Ave Ave Fort Fort Pierce, Pierce, FLFL 34950 34950

UPUP

STAIRS STAIRS

CANOPY CANOPY MEN'S ABOVE RESTROOM ABOVE

PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS

NORTH NORTH

3/16" 3/16" = 1'-0" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

D

MECH./STORAGE

3

E

H

MECH./STORAGE

D DATE DATE

UP

2.1

DN

STAIRS

ND D

MEN'S RESTROOM

GALLERY GALLERYSPACE SPACE AUDITORIUM AUDITORIUM

GG 3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

NORTH

PROPOSED PROPOSED PLAN LOBBY (ADDITION ONLY) 2 2 SECOND FLOOR DOUBLE DOORS

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.04

TW/RL TW/RL

CHECKED CHECKED

MA/REG MA/REG

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

NORTH

ELEV.

25016 25016

CANOPY ABOVE

OWNERSHIP OWNERSHIP AND AND USE USE OFOF THESE THESE DOCUMENTS DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS & SPECIFICATIONS AS AS INSTRUMENTS INSTRUMENTS OFOF SERVICE SERVICE ARE ARE AND AND SHALL SHALL REMAIN REMAIN THE THE PROPERTY PROPERTY OFOF THE THE ARCHITECT ARCHITECT WHETHER WHETHER THE THE PROJECT PROJECT THEY THEY ARE ARE MADE MADE FOR FOR IS EXECUTED IS EXECUTED OROR NOT. NOT. THEY THEY SHALL SHALL NOT NOT BE BE USED USED

BY BY THE THE OWNER OWNER OROR OTHERS OTHERS ONON OTHER OTHER PROJECTS PROJECTS OROR FOR FOR ADDITIONS ADDITIONS TOTO THIS THIS PROJECT PROJECT

BY BY OTHERS, OTHERS, EXCEPT EXCEPT

BY BY AGREEMENT AGREEMENT IN WRITING IN WRITING AND AND WITH WITH APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION COMPENSATION TOTO THE THE ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT.

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGYSPACE SPACE

ACE CE

11/03/2025 11/03/2025

MODELED MODELED

©© REG REG 2025 2025

1.1

A ø DA 5'0"

A " AD 5'-0 ø

DN

3

PROJECT PROJECT ##

STAIRS

1.1

SE E

HISTORIC HISTORIC ST.ST. ANASTASIA ANASTASIA

3

2.1 MECH./STORAGE MECH./STORAGE

1.1 1.1

ELEV.

LOBBY

D

H

STORAGE STORAGE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

DNDN

SECOND FLOOR

ELEV. ELEV.

LOBBY LOBBY

A " AD 5'-0 ø

A " AD 5'-0 ø

UPUP

2.1

WOMEN'S WOMEN'S RESTROOM RESTROOM

E

D

A ø DA 5'0"

MECH./STORAGE MECH./STORAGE

2

PROPOSED PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS DOUBLE DOORS

H

MECH./STORAGE MECH./STORAGE

MEN'S MEN'S RESTROOM RESTROOM

CANOPY CANOPY ABOVE ABOVE

ELEV. ELEV.

LOBBY LOBBY

3

1.1 1.1

2.1 2.1

WOMEN'S WOMEN'S RESTROOM RESTROOM

E

D

33

A ø DA A ø 5'-0DA 5'- " 0"

"

'-0

MEN'S MEN'S RESTROOM RESTROOM

ELEV. ELEV.

HH

A " ADA5'-0" AøD 5'-0 ø

A " ADA5'-0" AøD 5'-0 ø

LY) Y)

WOMEN'S WOMEN'S RESTROOM RESTROOM

EE

DD

HH

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

EE

DD

A ø DA 5'0"

HH

PROPOSED PROPOSED FLOOR FLOOR PLANS PLANS (ADDITION (ADDITION ONLY) ONLY)

PROPOSED 1 2GROUND FLOOR PROPO DOUBLE DO

A-4.04

A-4.04 A-4.04

MECH./STORAGE

DN

COLOR LEGEND

STAIRS

CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

WOMEN'S RESTROOM

ADAPTIVE RE-USE

GALLERY SPACE

MEN'S RESTROOM

INCUBATOR SPACE

AUDITORIUM

MECH./STORAGE

ADULT LEARNING

1.1

THIRD FLOOR 3 THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PLAN (ADDITION ONLY)

A-4.04

NORTH

2 SECOND FLO

SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"

A-4.04

38

COLOR LEGEND CIRCULATION

RENTAL SPACE

TECHNOLOGY SPACE

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED ADDITION BUILDING ELEVATIONS

E

D

D

C

C

B

B

A

2.1

A

EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING BEYOND BEYOND

2.1

1.1

1.1

EXISTING T.O. EXISTING T.O. BEAM BEAM 39'-7" 39'-7"

H H

E E

D D

C C

B B

A A

A-4.05

2.1 2.1

1.1 1.1 BREEZEWAY T.O. BREEZEWAY T.O. BEAM BEAM 31'-3 1/2"31'-3 1/2" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"22'-3 1/2"

MAINMAIN ADDITION ADDITION SECOND SECOND FLOOR T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM FLOOR 9'-4" 32'-9 32'-9 1/2" 9'-4" 1/2"

MAINMAIN ADDITION ADDITION T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM SECOND FLOOR 32'-9SECOND 1/2" 32'-9 1/2" FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BREEZEWAY BEAM BEAM 31'-3GROUND 1/2" 31'-3 1/2" FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 22'-3 1/2" 1/2"

BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BREEZEWAY BEAM BEAM 31'-3 31'-3 1/2" 1/2" GROUND GROUND FLOOR FLOOR 0" 0" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 22'-3 1/2" 1/2"

E

E

H GROUND HGROUND FLOOR FLOOR 0"

0"

A-4.05

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 1.1

1.1

2.1

2.1

C C

D D

A-4.05 A-4.05

12" / 12" 4"

4" /

4" 12" / 12"

NO. DATE NO. DESCRIPTION DATE DESC

E E

H H

EXISTING EXISTING T.O. T.O. BEAM BEAM 39'-7" 39'-7"

MAIN ADDITION MAIN ADDITION T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM 32'-9 1/2"32'-9 1/2"

MAIN ADDITION MAIN ADDITION T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM 32'-9 1/2"32'-9 1/2"

1.1 1.1

2.1 2.1

A-4.05 A-4.05

1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION

N.T.S.

DATE

11/03/20251

EXISTING T.O. T.O. EXISTING BEAM BEAM 39'-7"39'-7"

MAINMAIN ADDITION ADDITION SECOND SECOND FLOOR T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM FLOOR 9'-4" 32'-9 32'-9 1/2" 9'-4" 1/2"

OWNERSHIP OWNERSHIP AND USE OF AND THESE USE OF TH DOCUMENTSDOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS & SPECIFICATI AS INSTRUMENTS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE OF SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN SHALL THE REMAIN PROPERTY THEOF PROPER THE ARCHITECT WHETHER ARCHITECT THE WHETHER PROJECT THE P THEY ARE MADE THEY FOR ARE ISMADE EXECUTED FOR ISOR EXE NOT. THEY SHALL NOT. THEY NOT BE SHALL USEDNOT

BY THE BE U OWNER OR OTHERS OWNER ON OR OTHER OTHERS ON OTH PROJECTS OR PROJECTS FOR ADDITIONS OR FORTO ADDITIO THIS PROJECT BY PROJECT OTHERS, EXCEPT

BY OTHERS,

BY EXCE AGREEMENTAGREEMENT IN WRITING AND IN WRITING WITH AN APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION COMPENSATI TO THE ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT.

BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BREEZEWAY BEAM BEAM DATEDATE 11/03/2025 11/03/2025 31'-3 31'-3 1/2" 1/2" GROUND GROUND FLOOR FLOOR MODELED TW/RL MODELED TW/RL 0" 0" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR PROPOSED PROPOSED BUILDINGBUIL CHECKED CHECKED MA/REG MA/REG 22'-3 22'-3 1/2" 1/2" ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS PROJECT # PROJECT #

2 PROPOSED 2 PROPOSED SOUTH SOUTH ELEVATION ELEVATION

= 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" SCALE:

4 4 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION

DATE

MAINMAIN ADDITION ADDITION SECOND SECOND FLOOR T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM FLOOR 9'-4" 32'-9 32'-9 1/2" 9'-4" 1/2"

4 PROPOSED 4 PROPOSED WESTWEST ELEVATION ELEVATION A-4.05

BREEZEWAY BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BEAM BEAM 31'-3 1/2"31'-3 1/2"

MODELED MODELED TW/RL THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR CHECKEDMA/REG 22'-3 1/2"22'-3 1/2" CHECKED NO. NO. DATEDATE DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION PROJECT PROJECT # # 25016 EXISTING T.O. T.O. EXISTING BEAM BEAM © REG 2025 © REG 2025 39'-7"39'-7"

THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"22'-3 1/2"

BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BREEZEWAY BEAM BEAM 31'-3GROUND 1/2" 31'-3 1/2" FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 22'-3 1/2" 1/2"

A-4.05

910 Orange Ave Ave 910 Orange Fort Pierce, FL 34950 Fort Pierce, FL 34950

DRAFT DRAFT

1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

BREEZEWAY BREEZEWAY T.O. T.O. BEAM BEAM 31'-3 1/2"31'-3 1/2" 4" /

DRAFT DRAF HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA

GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

EXISTING EXISTING T.O. T.O. BEAM BEAM 39'-7" 39'-7"

B B

910 Orange910 AveOrange Av Fort Pierce,Fort FL Pierce, 34950 FL 34

= 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" SCALE:

1 1 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION

4" / 12" 1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

A A

HISTORICHISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA ST. ANAS

1 PROPOSED 1 PROPOSED NORTH NORTH ELEVATION ELEVATION

A-4.05

3 3 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATION4" / 12" 12" 12" EAST 4" / 4" /

A-4.05 A-4.05

EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING BEYOND BEYOND

EXISTING T.O. T.O. EXISTING BEAM BEAM 39'-7"39'-7"

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

D

39'-7"

EXISTING T.O. T.O. EXISTING BEAM BEAM 39'-7"39'-7"

= 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" SCALE:

PROPOSED SOUTH A ELEVATION A B B C C D

39'-7"

BREEZEWAY T.O. BREEZEWAY T.O. BEAM BEAM 31'-3 1/2"31'-3 1/2" THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR 22'-3 1/2"22'-3 1/2"

3 PROPOSED 3 PROPOSED EASTEAST ELEVATION ELEVATION

A-4.05

EXISTING T.O. EXISTING T.O. BEAM BEAM

MAIN ADDITION MAIN ADDITION T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM 32'-9 1/2"32'-9 1/2"

MAIN ADDITION MAIN ADDITION T.O. BEAM T.O. BEAM 32'-9 1/2"32'-9 1/2"

A-4.05

A-4.05

25016 25016

© REG 2025 2025 © REG

= 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" SCALE:

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 9'-4" 9'-4"

GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR 0" 0"

2 2 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION

A-4.05 A-4.05

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

E

1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: SCALE:

PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION

39

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

H

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASEPROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

H

OWNERSHIP AND USE OF USE THESE OWNERSHIP AND OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE OF THE SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR THEY AREFOR MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR NOT. THEY BE NOT USED THE BY THE NOT.SHALL THEYNOT SHALL BEBY USED OWNEROWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER OR OTHERS ON OTHER PROJECTS OR FOROR ADDITIONS TO THISTO THIS PROJECTS FOR ADDITIONS PROJECT

BY OTHERS, EXCEPTEXCEPT BY PROJECT

BY OTHERS, BY AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE TO THE APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION ARCHITECT. ARCHITECT.

A-4.05 A-4.0

PROPOSED BUILDING PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS

A-4.05 A-4.05

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED ADDITION ISOMETRIC VIEWS

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA 910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950

DRAFT

PROPOSED ISOMETRIC 1: NORTHWEST CORNER

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

DATE

11/03/2025

MODELED

TW/RL

CHECKED

MA/REG

PROJECT #

25016

PROPOSED ISOMETRIC 2: SOUTHWEST CORNER

PROGRESS SET - AS-BUILT PHASE

© REG 2025 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS & SPECIFICATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE ARE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT THEY ARE MADE FOR IS EXECUTED OR NOT. THEY SHALL NOT BE USED BY THE OWNER OR OTHERS ON OTHER PROJECTS OR FOR ADDITIONS TO THIS PROJECT BY OTHERS, EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE ARCHITECT.

3D AXON VIEWS - PROPOSED

A-7.01

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA 910 Orange Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34950

DRAFT

PROPOSED ISOMETRIC 3: SOUTHEAST CORNER

NO. DATE DESCRIPTION

DATE

11/03/2025

MODELED

TW/RL

CHECKED

MA/REG

PROJECT #

25016

© REG 2025 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF THESE

40

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED RENDER (SUBJECT TO CHANGE)

ARTIST RENDTITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: LOOKING NORTHWEST FROM ORANGE AVE.

ARTIST RENDITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: LOOKING NORTHWEST FROM ORANGE GROVE AVE. (N.T.S.)

41

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED RENDER (SUBJECT TO CHANGE)

ARTIST RENDTITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: LOOKING NORTHEAST FROM ORANGE AVE.

ARTIST RENDITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: LOOKING NORTHEAST FROM ORANGE GROVE AVE. (N.T.S.)

42

ST RENDTITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: VIEW LOOKING NORTH OF NEW GROUND FLOOR ENTRY

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

PROPOSED RENDER (SUBJECT TO CHANGE)

ARTIST RENDITION OF PROPOSED ADDITION: LOOKING NORTH AT NEW GROUND FLOOR ENTRY (N.T.S.)

43

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: BUDGET OPTIONS / GRANT SOURCES

44

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

BUDGET OPTIONS

EXISTING RENOVATION (INTERIOR ONLY)

Square FT. (net)

Low $/SF

Medium $/SF

High $/SF

Proposed Renovation (Base Floor, First Floor & Second Floor)

11,954

$200.00

$250.00

$300.00

$2,390,800.00

$2,988,500.00

$3,586,200.00

$119,540.00 $478,160.00 $239,080.00

$149,425.00 $597,700.00 $298,850.00

$179,310.00 $717,240.00 $358,620.00

$3,227,780.00

$4,034,725.00

$4,841,670.00

Square FT. (gross)

Low $/SF

Medium $/SF

High $/SF

4,698

$200.00

$250.00

$300.00

SUBTOTAL

$939,600.00

$1,174,500.00

$1,409,400.00

Site Improvements (Allowance) OH Profit + General Condition 20% Soft Cost 10% (A&E plans)

$46,980.00 $187,920.00 $93,960.00

$58,725.00 $234,900.00 $117,450.00

$70,470.00 $281,880.00 $140,940.00

$1,268,660.00

$1,585,825.00

$1,902,990.00

Square Feet

Low $/SF

Medium $/SF

High $/SF

16,652

$250.00

$300.00

$350.00

$4,496,440.00

$5,620,550.00

$6,744,660.00

SUBTOTAL Site Improvements (Allowance) ±5% OH Profit + General Condition 20% Soft Cost (A&E plans) 10% EXISTING RENOVATION TOTAL

PROPOSED ADDITION Proposed Addition (Base Floor, First Floor & Second Floor)

PROPOSED ADDITION TOTAL

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA TOTAL BUDGET Total Proposed Renovation GRAND TOTAL

The following includes a low, medium and high calculation for the overall recommended site and building additional reports and renovation and restoration costs to be considered when pursuing grants and other financing options.

EXCEPTIONS

Major Unforeseen Structural Repair is not included in Grand Total.

45

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

GRANT SOURCES

City of Fort Pierce

A grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation

St. Lucie County. FL

can be just the boost a project needs to ensure its

Florida Office of Cultural and Historical Programs http://flheritage.com/grants

The site provides information on grants applications, including

deadlines,

forms

and

conditions

for

submission, as well as examples of similar applications

success. NTHP grants are primarily for planning

preservation projects, though some special programs focus on preservation planning in particular fields or

geographic regions, or allow for the funding of physical

preservation work. Grant applications are due at various times of the year, depending on the program.

for matching grants.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

http://flheritage.com/grants/preservation

Preserve America Grants are designed to support a

Approx. $2 million total up to $50,000 per applicant.

innovative approaches to the use of historic properties

Small Matching Preservation Grants

http://flheritage.com/grants/special

Special Category Grants for major historic building

restoration. $50,000-500,000 appropriated annually by Florida Legislature. Multiple years available. http://flheritage.com/grants/museum

Depending on program: This site provides specific

information for grant assistance for historical museums and exhibit projects. Information includes the requests

variety of activities related to heritage tourism and as educational and economic assets. This matching

grants program began October 1, 2005. Over $21.7 million in federal Preserve America grant funding has been awarded to date.

These grants are intended to complement “bricks and

mortar” grants by funding research and documentation,

interpretation and education, planning, marketing, and training.

for applications, deadlines, categories eligible for

Eligible

and project selection, review criteria, non-allowable

Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, designated

funding, eligibility, matching grants, application review costs, award amounts ad award period, award

agreement, meeting and panelists and reporting forms and instructions.

National Trust for Historic Preservation

recipients

for

these

matching

(50/50)

grants include State Historic Preservation Officers, Preserve America Communities, and Certified Local

Governments that are applying for Preserve America Community designation. Individual grants range from $20,000 to $250,000.

https://forum.savingplaces.org/build/funding/grantseekers

46

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

GRANT SOURCES

National Park Service Grant: African American Civil Rights Grants

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/historicpreservationfund/ african-american-civil-rights.html

Competitive grants for documenting, interpreting, and

preserving the sites and stories related to the African

American struggle to gain equal rights as citizens in the 20th Century.

National Endowment for the Arts https://www.arts.gov/grants

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is the only arts funder in the United States—public or private—

that provides access to the arts in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. jurisdictions. Each year, we award thousands of grants to provide everyone in

the United States with diverse opportunities for arts participation.

We award cost/share matching grants to nonprofit organizations for a wide variety of arts projects,

literature fellowships for published creative writers

and translators, and partnership agreements with the

62 state/jurisdictional arts agencies and regional arts organizations.

Through our programs, we encourage activities that rebuild the creative economy and educate the next

generation; unite and heal the nation through the arts; and serve the nation’s arts field. We are committed to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, and fostering mutual respect for the diverse beliefs and values of all individuals and groups.

47

VIII. TERMS / REFERENCES

48

HISTORIC ST. ANASTASIA / HISTORIC STRUCTURES REPORT

TERMS & REFERENCES

Preservation is defined as the act or process of

restoration project. The Restoration Standards allow

form, integrity, and materials of an historic property.

history by preserving materials, features, finishes, and

applying measures necessary to sustain the existing

Work, including preliminary measures to protect and

stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials

for the depiction of a building at a particular time in its spaces from its period of significance and removing those from other periods.

and features rather than extensive replacement and

Reconstruction is defined as the act or process

of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and

form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site,

new construction. The limited and sensitive upgrading

other code-required work to make properties functional

is appropriate within a preservation project. However,

new exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment. The Standards for Preservation require

retention of the greatest amount of historic fabric along with the building’s historic form.

Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving

of depicting, by means of new construction, the landscape, building, structure, or object for the purpose

of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. The Reconstruction

Standards establish a limited framework for recreating

a vanished or non-surviving building with new materials, primarily for interpretive purposes.

4. United States, Congress, U.S. Department of the Interior, et al. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.”

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, National Park Service, 2017.

those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. The Rehabilitation

Standards acknowledge the need to alter or add to a historic building to meet continuing or new uses while retaining the building’s historic character.

Restoration is defined as the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of

time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing

features from the restoration period. The limited and

sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and

plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a

49

XI. STRUCTURAL & MEP ASSESSMENT REPORT

50

Page |1

ST. ANASTASIA ORIGINAL SCHOOL FT. PIERCE, FLORIDA EXISTING BUILDING ASSESSMENT REPORT 8/29/2025

Prepared for: City of Ft. Pierce 110 North 10th Street Ft. Pierce, FL 34950

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |2 7370 Cabot Court, Suite 103 Melbourne, FL 32940 (32) 636-0274 TLC Project No. 524310

Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 2 2.

PURPOSE ................................................................................................................................. 3

3.

BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 3

4.

STAFF PERFORMING WORK ................................................................................................... 3

5.

DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING SYSTEMS ................................................................................. 4 5.1.

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS ................................................................................................. 4

5.1.1.

STRUCTURAL FIELD OBSERVATIONS ........................................................................ 4

5.2.

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 4

5.3.

PLUMBING SYSTEMS ....................................................................................................... 4

5.3.1.

PLUMBING SYSTEMS FIELD OBSERVATIONS ........................................................... 4

5.4.

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS ......................................................................................... 6

5.5.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS ................................................................................................... 6

5.5.1

ELECTRICAL FIELD OBSERVATIONS.......................................................................... 6

5.6.

TELECOM SYSTEM .......................................................................................................... 7

5.6.1 TECHNOLOGY FIELD OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................. 7 5.7.

FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS .................................................................................................... 7

5.7.1 FIRE ALARM FIELD OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................. 7 6.

7.

EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 8 6.1.

STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 8

6.2.

MECHANICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................... 9

6.3.

PLUMBING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. 10

6.4.

FIRE PROTECTION EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 11

6.5.

ELECTRICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 11

6.6.

TELECOM AND SECURITY EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... 12

6.7.

FIRE ALARM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 12

PHOTOGRAPHS ..................................................................................................................... 14 7.1.

STRUCTURAL: ................................................................................................................ 14

7.2.

PLUMBING:...................................................................................................................... 19

7.3.

ELECTRICAL: .................................................................................................................. 20

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A facility assessment was performed for the existing St. Anastasia School located in Ft. Pierce, Florida.

Evaluation was based on a visual, non-invasive site assessment including exposed elements and

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |3 representative class rooms. The school is in poor condition and appears to lack routine maintenance in many areas and lack of occupancy for many years.

The following report outlines findings and recommendations.

2. PURPOSE TLC Engineering was commissioned by REG Architects to perform a facility assessment of the existing original St Anastaisa School, equipment, and systems including useful life expectancies and availability of services for potential future alterations or improvements to the buildings. The assessment is intended to include: • • • •

Structural HVAC, Plumbing, Fire Protection Electrical Technology

Necessary and recommended repairs are dependent upon the proposed use of the facility, AHJ interpretation of FBC Existing Building Code positions, and City preferences to upgrade and modernize the facility equipment to new construction options.

3. BACKGROUND TLC evaluation / assessment scope is based on discussions with REG Architects and as expressed in TLC’s proposal dated July 3, 2025. TLC Engineering performed an engineering system evaluation of the existing systems on August 12, 2025, serving as a sub consultant to REG Architects, who is performing life safety and architectural assessment. The site visit was conducted by Jim Mullen, Bill Nance, and Mitchell Cavanaugh from TLC. Based on field observations, the building opened in 1914. Field observations were generally visual in nature and did not include destructive testing, removal of finishes or invasive means and methods of evaluation. The original design or construction documents were not available for review at the time of inspection. TLC was provided with an architectural floor-plan for reference.

The building is considered “Historic” by local, State or Federal registrations.

The Historic St. Anastasia School consists of a three story building in 1914.

4. STAFF PERFORMING WORK This survey was conducted by the following staff members of TLC Engineering: • Structural: o Mitchell Cavanaugh, PE • Mechanical (HVAC, Plumbing, Fire Protection): o Jim Mullen, PE • Electrical & Telecom: o Bill Nance, RCDD, OSP, PSP

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |4 5. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING SYSTEMS 5.1. STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS Existing structural systems were visually observed during our site evaluation. No existing building drawings were provided prior to the inspection and the field evaluation was visual in nature only. No destructive investigation was performed.

Building 1 is a 3-story building (including the attic), consisting of a mix of brick, concrete masonry unit (CMU) exterior walls. The floor appears to be framed with a 4” concrete slab bearing on steel beams, and the roof is metal deck supported by steel angle trusses. There are hold down rods running continuously from the bottom of the steel trusses through each floor to the foundation. There is a wood framed balcony in the 3rd floor auditorium and a stage. The stage consists of a 4” concrete slab with hard wood flooring.

5.1.1. STRUCTURAL FIELD OBSERVATIONS Building 1: The structural systems readily observed appeared to be in fair condition with the following noted exceptions: Crack in the bottom of the 2nd floor elevated slab. See photo S1.1.

Concrete breakout at hold down rod attachment to wall/foundation. See photos S1.2.

Crack in concrete stair. See photo S1.3.

Front of the concrete step is broken off. See photos S1.4.

Bottom of steel beam is exposed and showing signs of surface rust. See photo S1.5.

Concrete slab has large chunk of concrete busted out. See photo S1.6.

CMU exterior wall has cracks. See photos S1.7, S1.10, S1.13, S1.14, S1.15, S1.16, S1.18 and S1.19 for representative conditions.

8. Concrete cracks on exterior end of stair from 2nd to 3rd floor. See photo S1.8.

9. Crack in interior wall above the door. See photos S1.9 and S1.11 for representative conditions.

10. Water damage on the second-floor ceiling. See photo S1.12.

11. Majority of wood planks on the balcony are rotted/missing. See photo S1.17.

12. Stage wood floor is rotten and missing boards. See photo S1.20.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

5.2. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS No existing building drawings were provided prior to the inspection, and the field evaluation was visual in nature only. There were no signs of any mechanical systems visually observed during our site evaluation.

5.3. PLUMBING SYSTEMS The existing plumbing systems were visually observed during our site evaluation. No existing building drawings were provided prior to the inspection, and the field evaluation was visual in nature only. No destructive investigation was performed and access above the ceiling was not available.

5.3.1. PLUMBING SYSTEMS FIELD OBSERVATIONS The building has two group restrooms under the stair on the bottom floor. The fixtures and the piping are unusable and will need to be completely removed.

The northern part of the building, over the stairs, there is a flat roof with an internal roof drain system.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |5 The storm piping Men’s restroom has two counter mounted lavatories, three floor mounted water closets, three wall mounted urinals, and a floor drain. The Women’s restroom has four floor mounted water closets, two counter mounted lavatories, and a floor drain. Between the entrance to the group restrooms there is a Janitor Closet with Mop Sink. There is a separate single use ADA restroom with a wall mounted lavatory and floor mounted water closet. In the corridor there is a wall mounted water cooler. In the front office area, there is a single-use restroom with a wall mounted lavatory and a floor mounted water closet.

In the front office administration area of the building there is two single use restrooms that share a wall with water and drainage pipes in it. Both restrooms have a wall mounted lavatory and floor mounted water closet. There is a gas meter on the southwest exterior corner of the building. There is backflow preventers and meter boxes near the street by the southwest corner of the building. A water heater for this building could not be located during the site visit. See Plumbing Photos P1.1 through P1.13 Building 2: The gym has two natural gas water heaters located in the same room in the center of the open gym. These water heaters are 69 gallons with a 365 MBH input at a max working pressure of 160 psi. They were both manufactured in 1986 by A.O Smith. Both have their own flue vent that penetrates the ceiling of the room. There is a Men’s and Women’s locker with a gang restroom, showers, locker area, and an office with a restroom and shower. The Men’s portion has two floor mounted water closets, two urinals, and a floor drain. In the corridor section there is a counter mounted lavatory. There are seven shower stalls and floor drains staggered between shower heads. There is an ADA shower in an alcove in the shower area with a removeable shower head and floor drain. The Women’s portion has three floor mounted water closets with a floor drain. In the corridor there are two counter mounted lavatories. There is an ADA shower in the alcove of the corridor on the way into the shower section with a removeable shower head and a floor drain. The shower portion has seven shower heads on the long wall and two heads on the opposite wall. Like the Men’s section, the floor drains are staggered between the heads.

There is an electric water cooler in the corridor of both locker rooms. Both offices have the same restroom layout. A floor mounted water closet, wall mounted lavatory, and shower with floor drain. Inside one of the storage rooms there is what looks like a water pipe, there is a valve which is assumed to be an isolation valve. There is a gas meter on the outside wall near the northeast corner. See Plumbing Photos P2.1 through P2.11 Building 3: A water heater for this building could not be located during the site visit. The auditorium has two group restrooms in the main lobby. The Men’s restroom consists of a counter mounted lavatory, two urinals with a floor drain between them, a floor mounted water closet, an ADA stall with a floor mounted water closet and wall mounted lavatory. The Women’s restroom consists of a counter mounted lavatory, two floor mounted water closets, an ADA stall with a floor mounted water closet, floor drain, and wall mounted lavatory. In the main lobby there is a wall mounted water cooler. A gas meter for this building was not able to be located during the initial site visit. See Plumbing Photos P3.1 through P3.4 Building 4: The cafeteria has a full service kitchen with back of house offices, storage, and restrooms. In the open kitchen there are multiple floor sinks throughout. There is an abandoned kitchen equipment line underneath the existing hood. The connections are abandoned in place as the equipment is no longer there. There are multiple wash tables with dish / hand sinks that drain into an associated floor sink below.

There is also a floor drain close to this type of table throughout the kitchen. There are hand washing stations with foot pedal activated water connections in the main open kitchen and the side dish washing room. In the dishwashing room there is a three-compartment sink, an industrial dishwasher with exhaust hood, and standard wash table. Both wash tables at each side of the room have their own floor sink. The industrial dishwasher drains indirectly into the floor sink being used by one of the wash tables. The singleuse employee restroom has a floor mounted water closet, wall mounted lavatory, and a floor drain. There is a laundry room with a washer box, and a floor drain that have been abandoned in place in this room.

In the janitor closet there is a mop sink and a gas water heater for the building. This water heater is 100 gallons with a 275 MBH input at a max working pressure of 160 psi. This water heater was built by State Industries on July 14, 2017. Outside there is a manhole cover that is assumed to be access to the grease C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |6 trap for the kitchen. There are two group restrooms and one ADA restroom that can be accessed from outside the cafeteria, these doors were locked and were not viewed during the site visit. See Plumbing Photos P4.1 through P4.23 Building 5: The media center has classrooms, offices, storage, two group restrooms accessed from the exterior, and a single-use restroom near the offices in the open floor plan. A water heater for this building could not be located during the site visit. There is a counter mounted sink in the break room in the middle offices. There is also a demolished sink with the connections still under the cabinet in the opposite office.

The single-use restroom has a floor mounted water closet and wall mounted lavatory. In the science lab classroom, there are cabinet sinks with no fixtures along the edges of the room. There is also an emergency shower / eye wash near the exit at the rear of the classroom. Outside the doors leading to the exterior restrooms there is a wall mounted water cooler. In the Men’s restroom there are two wall mounted urinals, two counter mounted lavatories, two floor mounted water closets, and a floor drain. The Women’s restroom has two counter mounted lavatories, three floor mounted water closets, and a floor drain. See Plumbing Photos P5.1 through P5.12.

5.4. FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS The building was not observed to have an automatic fire suppression system.

5.5. ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS The existing electrical and telecom systems were visually observed during our site evaluation. No existing building drawings were provided prior to the inspection, and the field evaluation was visual in nature only.

No destructive investigation was performed and access above the ceiling was not available.

5.5.1

ELECTRICAL FIELD OBSERVATIONS

Building power distribution: The electrical service for the building is not determined due to age and damage to the main switch board located on the lower level of the building. There were two other electrical panels located in the building, one on the 2nd floor and one on the 3rd floor of the building. No manufacturer information could be found on any of the three panels. The panels appeared to be installed prior to the 1940s.

Note: The distribution panel appears to be over seventy years old and past the end of useful life. (See Image E1, E2, E3) Building Power outlets: Receptacles in the existing classrooms are a combination of recess wall mounted, surface mounted, and wire-mold. Original receptacle locations are recess mounted. All of the observed receptacles located in the building are non-grounding type receptacles. (See Image E4) Cover plates are missing from some of the junction boxes.

Surge suppression: There was no observed surge suppression on the power distribution system in the building.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |7 Building lighting: Existing light fixtures in the existing classrooms and corridors are older socket-type fixtures.

Emergency lighting was not observed in the building.

Site lighting: Pole mounted site lights are floor-type with HID Metal halide lamps. The fixtures are mounted on wood poles The fixtures and poles are in fair to poor condition with some of the poles leaning due to storm winds.

Building lighting controls: Existing light controls consist of 120-volt toggle switches for control of fixtures.

Recommend providing occupancy/vacancy sensors and photocells for daylight harvesting in all class rooms, corridors and etc. to meet current (2023) Florida energy code requirements.

Building Lightning protection system.

No lightning protection system was observed on the building.

5.6. TELECOM SYSTEM 5.6.1 TECHNOLOGY FIELD OBSERVATIONS No telecommunications systems were observed in the building.

No security cameras were observed in the building.

No wireless access points were observed in the building.

No card readers or door access equipment was observed in the building.

No telecommunications grounding-bonding equipment was observed in the building.

5.7. FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS 5.7.1 FIRE ALARM FIELD OBSERVATIONS An existing fire alarm system was not observed in the building.

Note: To bring this building up to current NFPA 72 and NFPA 101 code, a new fire alarm system will ned to be installed.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |8 6. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1. STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Building 1: Recommendations provided below correlate to the numbered structural field observations in section 5.1.1. Refer to the end of this section for typical repair instructions.

1. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

2. Recommend an in-depth visual inspection of the area to determine attachment of hold down to foundation/wall. May require demolition to uncover attachment to wall/foundation.

3. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

4. Recommend reforming and repouring stair to match existing conditions.

5. Steel corrosion shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general steel corrosion recommendations below.

6. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

7. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

8. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

9. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

10. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

11. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

12. Recommend an in-depth visual inspection of the area to determine whether cracking or spalling is present. Properly seal the floor and surrounding areas to prevent ongoing water damage. Chip out wet, damaged portions of concrete at the wall, avoiding any existing reinforcement. Remove any loose pieces of concrete or debris and apply high strength repair mortar. Monitor the location after repairing to ensure water damage does not recur.

13. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

14. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

15. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below. Demo around beams to determine if rust is present. If corrosion is present refer to the general steel corrosion recommendations below.

16. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

17. Recommend an in-depth visual inspection of the area and potential demolition of the wood structure to ensure all rotten wood is removed and replaced with equivalent.

18. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

19. Crack shall be addressed to prevent further deterioration. Refer to the general crack repair recommendations below.

20. Recommend an in-depth visual inspection of the area and potential demolition of the wood structure to ensure all rotten wood is removed and replaced with equivalent.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

Page |9 General Recommendation: It is recommended that the entire facility be evaluated by a waterproofing specialist to determine any sources of water intrusion and to provide recommendations to prevent future issues. It is recommended that the destructive testing be done to determine the size, spacing and condition of the elevated slab support beams. It is recommended to scan the exterior masonry walls and concrete elevated slabs to determine reinforcing.

Typical Concrete Cracks: Development of cracks in concrete and masonry structures is normal and can be the result of curing, temperature changes, settlement, change in load configuration, corrosion, and other factors. TLC’s survey is an attempt to identify the typical cracking, corrosion, spalling, and displacement of the structure. Typical identification and repair of these cracks are as follows: • • •

Cracks less than or equal to 1/32” are considered small cracks and may be repaired by filling the crack with sealant and painting over.

Cracks larger than 1/32” but less than 1/4" are considered large cracks; proper repair detail utilizing concrete patching compound or epoxy is required.

Cracks larger than 1/4" are considered structural cracks; engineered repair detail is required to repair these conditions.

Typical Concrete Spalls: Typical concrete spalls (also expressed initially as cracking) are characterized by partial or complete delamination of concrete at areas of reduced concrete cover. Chloride intrusion (often airborne due to close adjacency to ocean) often attacks the concrete surface eventually migrating to the reinforcing steel and initiating corrosion of the reinforcing steel. As the reinforcing steel corrodes, it expands and creates internal forces that cause initial cracking and eventually spalling of the surface concrete. Once exposed the process accelerates and the reinforcing steel is eventually structurally compromised.

Repairs generally require: removal of loose concrete, cleaning of reinforcing steel, confirmation that reinforcing steel has not been compromised (more than 10% section loss) and repair with a specially formulated mortar customized for each application.

• •

Small Concrete Spalls, 1/2" or less in depth, may be repaired by squaring the edges of the spall and coating with cement or epoxy-based repair compound.

Large Concrete Spalls, deeper than 1/2" or where exposed reinforcing has more than surface corrosion, require an engineered repair detail to complete the repair.

Typical Structural Steel Corrosion: Steel hardware and fastener corrosion severity is identified as follows: • •

•

Minimal Surface Corrosion consists of sporadic light corrosion that is typical of steel elements and does not require immediate restoration Moderate Surface Corrosion consists of large or complete area coverage of surface corrosion; cleaning and application of oxide inhibiting coating is required to prevent structural section loss of the steel components.

Corrosive Section Loss is noted when corrosion has reduced the structural steel component size and requires the replacement or reinforcement of the element, hardware, or fastener.

6.2. MECHANICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Building 1: All systems serving the lower level are very outdated and it is recommended they be replaced

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 10 with newer models or possibly match the systems and layouts of the floor above. The administration portion of the main level has a unit serving it from 2023, so this unit is up to date and is not need of replacement. The attic space has excess equipment in the area that is not in use and is recommended that it be removed, for example, the old abandoned chilled water units and their abandoned chilled water piping connections. It is our recommendation that the outdoor air ducts from main to each of the new chilled water air handlers be properly connected. We also recommend replacing the current chilled water air handlers, replace chilled water piping, and replace controls infrastructure to bring the building up to date. It is also our recommendation that each of the classrooms receive an updated model thermostat. It is recommended that the pumps and associated piping would need to be demolished and replaced with new controllers and actuators. Fans for each of the restrooms should be evaluated for proper operation and if needed replaced and properly rebalanced.

Building 2: The four systems serving the main gym complex need to be replaced due to their old age and out of date refrigerant. TLC recommends they be replaced in a like for like format. Since this building was constructed in 1936, there may be some restrictions to alterations with regards to the wall louvers. The two systems serving the locker rooms are due for a changeout. They are at the end of their life span of 17 years per ASHRAE and will soon need new systems to pass code. It is also recommended that the exhaust systems should be replaced so all systems are new and operate together seamlessly. New thermostats should be installed with the new units in the same location the thermostats are currently in.

Components can be replaced in a like-for-like fashion to bring the building up to the current code.

Building 3: The 25-ton packaged Trane unit is only five years into its life cycle and therefore will not need to be replaced. The current thermostat installed is an older model and it is recommended changing the thermostat for a newer model for easier interface and scheduling. Fans for each of the restrooms should be evaluated for proper operation and if needed replaced and properly rebalanced.

Building 4: The two Carrier units currently installed are out of their life-cycle expectancy and should be replaced with newer units. Upon verification that there is no paired indoor unit, the Trane condensing unit should be removed from the site. Fans for each of the restrooms should be evaluated for proper operation and if needed replaced and properly rebalanced. The thermostats should be replaced with newer models for better user interface operation and scheduling. Other components can be replaced in a like-for-like fashion to bring the building up to the current code.

Building 5: The two air handlers in operation were installed in 2018 and are in the middle of their 17 year life expectancy and will continue to function with the proper maintenance. It is recommended that these units are properly replaced and zoned as intended when building was initially designed. There are a total of four thermostats inside indicating that the building was downsized and partially abandoned. All thermostats should be removed and replaced with newer models for a better user interface and scheduling. Upon confirmation that there are no paired indoor units associated, the three condensers that have been abandoned in place should be removed from the site. The two condensers should be replaced with newer models while leaving room for other units to be installed in the same fenced area.

Fans for each of the restrooms should be evaluated for proper operation and if needed replaced and properly rebalanced. Components can be replaced in a like-for-like fashion to bring the building up to the current code.

6.3. PLUMBING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Building 1: All fixtures in the building at minimum should undergo thorough cleaning if not fully replaced.

Ensure the water heater is installed and meets current code requirements. Based on pipe installation C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 11 date and current condition, piping for drainage and water supply may need to be replaced throughout the entire building. All fixtures and pipes shall be replaced with a like-for-like fashion.

Building 2: All fixtures in the building at minimum should undergo thorough cleaning if not fully replaced.

It is our recommendation that the owner replace all fixtures to ensure proper operation. Showers should be tested for operation and potentially changed out for better use. Gas water heaters are well above their life expectancy and need to be replaced with newer models. All associated piping, valves, and actuators should be replaced with them. Based on pipe installation date, piping for drainage and water supply may need to be replaced throughout the entire building. All fixtures and pipes shall be replaced with a like-forlike fashion.

Building 3: All fixtures in the building at minimum should undergo thorough cleaning if not fully replaced.

It is our recommendation that the owner replace all fixtures to ensure proper operation. Ensure the water heater is installed and meets current code requirements. Based on pipe installation date and current condition, piping for drainage and water supply may need to be replaced throughout the entire building.

All fixtures and pipes shall be replaced with a like-for-like fashion.

Building 4: All fixtures in the building at minimum should undergo thorough cleaning if not fully replaced.

Kitchen equipment still in place should be evaluated by food service consultants to determine use in future kitchen. It is our recommendation that the owner replace all fixtures to ensure proper operation.

The current water heater should be replaced since it is nearing its useful life. Based on pipe installation date and current condition, piping for drainage and water supply may need to be replaced throughout the entire building. All fixtures and pipes shall be replaced with a like-for-like fashion.

Building 5: All fixtures in the building at minimum should undergo thorough cleaning if not fully replaced.

It is our recommendation that the owner replace all fixtures to ensure proper operation. Ensure the water heater is installed and meets current code requirements. Based on pipe installation date and current condition, piping for drainage and water supply may need to be replaced throughout the entire building.

All fixtures and pipes shall be replaced with a like-for-like fashion.

6.4. FIRE PROTECTION EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Verify all extinguishers in each building are up to date and operate as intended. It is our recommendation that the fire protection piping in building 1 shall be pressure tested to ensure pipe stability. A new flow test should be conducted to ensure proper flow to the building is being met. The fire riser and equipment associated with the riser shall be replaced as needed. Sprinklers shall be replaced on a case-by-case basis.

6.5. ELECTRICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend the following power distribution changes: 1. Provide new electrical service to building, suggested 800-amp, 120/208-volt, 3-phase, 4-wire service with the new main panel and a 200-amp sub panel located on the 2nd & 3rd floor.

2. Provide new surge suppression on all new panels.

Recommend the following wiring device changes: 1. Replace all receptacles and cover plates with new throughout the entire building.

2. Add maintenance receptacles at outdoor HVAC equipment. Replace existing exterior receptacles with new GFCI receptacles in weatherproof in-use receptacles.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 12

Recommend grounding changes: 1. Provide a new copper main ground bus in the electrical room on the lower level next to distribution panel. Bond this ground bus to the new building grounding system and distribution panel.

Recommend providing a UL master label lightning protection system on the roof per NFPA 780.

Recommend providing building surge protection at the building main and surge protection devices on all branch circuit panels.

For building lighting and lighting controls recommend the following: 1. Replace all light fixtures with new energy efficient LED fixtures with dimmable drivers.

2. Recommend providing low voltage dimming switches, power packs, occupancy/vacancy sensors and photocells for daylight harvesting in all classrooms, corridors and etc. to meet current 2023 Florida energy code requirements.

3. Recommend providing emergency lights and exit signs throughout the building.

4. Replace existing pole mounted site fixtures with LED pole mounted fixtures and poles that meet the current Florida building code wind load requirements.

6.6. TELECOM AND SECURITY EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend the following: 1. Recommend providing a voice-data IT system compatible with a CAT 6 cable system.

2. Recommend providing a communication copper ground bus bar at each IT spce per ANSI/TIA607.

3. Recommend providing data outlets and cover plates in the building. Provide new cat 6 cabling throughout the building.

4. Providing an IT rack on the lower floor with telecommunications service connection and UPS. 5. Recommend providing new A/V cabling to new A/V devices as programmed by Owner/Architect.

6. Recommend providing new security cameras throughout the building and coverage outside.

7. Provide card reader access to data rooms and exterior doors. Also security hardware at required doors.

6.7. FIRE ALARM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommend the following: 1. Provide new fire alarm system for building.

2. Provide duct smoke detectors for HVAC equipment greater than 2000 cfm and relay to shut down unit upon detection of smoke in the duct.

3. Provide flow and tamper switches if building is determined to require a fully sprinklered building.

DISCLAIMER AND LIMITATIONS OF REPORT Please note that this assessment is preliminary in nature and does not include complete calculations of all conditions and non-typical cases of the building envelope and structure.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 13 TLC Engineering Solutions, Inc. prepared the report for the exclusive use of the REG Architects for the evaluation of the noted St. Anastasia School as identified herein. The observations described in this report are valid on the dates of the investigation and were made under the conditions noted in the report.

TLC Engineering Solutions, Inc. does not intend for any other individual or party to rely upon the report without our express written consent. If another individual or party utilizes references or relies on the report, TLC Engineering Solutions, Inc. shall not be held liable for any damages, losses, or expenses that may occur as a result of its unsanctioned use.

This report is limited to the specific visual observations and studies we performed as part of our scope of services. Evaluation did not include removal of surface materials, furnishings, or equipment, undertake any excavations, or perform any destructive or invasive testing other than as noted in this report.

Accordingly, we cannot comment on the condition of systems and components that we could not visually observe or did not investigate. In addition, we are not responsible for conditions that were not within the scope of our services at the time of the investigation. We did not assess the overall stability of the building, perform any engineering analysis other than noted herein as part of this evaluation, nor did we conduct a comprehensive code review.

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 14 7. PHOTOGRAPHS 7.1. STRUCTURAL:

S1.1 – Crack in elevated Slab (1st floor ceiling)

S1.2 – Concrete breakout at hold rod attachment to wall/foundation (Typ. at all 1st floor hold down rods)

S1.3 – Crack in concrete stair.

(1st floor stair)

S1.4 – Front of step is broken off.

(1st to 2nd floor stair)

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 15

S1.5 – Exposed steel beam has Surface rust.

(2nd floor ceiling)

S1.7 – Concrete Cracking at windowsill.

(2nd floor window in staircase)

S1.6 – Concrete slab has large chunk of concrete busted out.

(2nd floor slab)

S1.8 – Cracks on exterior end of stair.

(2nd to 3rd floor stairs)

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 16

S1.9 – Vertical crack in wall.

(2nd floor classroom)

S1.10 – Vertical cracking in exterior masonry wall (2nd floor classroom)

S1.11 – Vertical crack in wall.

(2nd floor classroom)

S1.12 –Water damage to the 2nd floor ceiling. (2 nd floor classroom)

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 17

S1.13 – Diagonal crack under window in exterior masonry wall.

(2nd to 3rd floor stair landing)

S1.14 – Vertical cracks from ceiling to top of window. (2nd to 3rd floor stair landing)

S1.15 – Cracking in exterior masonry wall and potential rust stains on end of ceiling Beams. (Ceiling in staircase.)

S1.16 – Vertical crack at column to bottom of windowsill. (2nd to 3rd floor stair landing)

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 18

S1.17 – Majority of wood balcony is rotted/ missing (3rd floor balcony)

S1.18 – Vertical crack in exterior masonry wall (3rd floor auditorium)

S1.19 – Vertical crack in exterior masonry wall (3rd floor auditorium)

S1.20 – Stage wood floor is rotten and missing boards. (3rd floor stage)

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 19 7.2. PLUMBING:

P1 – Men’s Restroom Under Stair

P2 – Sink At top of Stairs

P3 – HB & Abandoned Fixture

P4 – Storm Piping in Corner of Stair 2nd

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 20

P5 – Water Cooler in Auditorium Lobby

P6 – aerial View of Flat Roof

7.3. ELECTRICAL:

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

P a g e | 21 E1. Existing Service Entrance Panel

E3. Existing Third Floor Panel

E2. Existing Second Floor Panel

E4. Existing Electrical Receptacles

E5. Existing Corridor Light Fixtures

C:\Users\Danielle.Eberhardt\AppData\Local\Temp\Bluebeam Software\84387639.docx

APPENDIX: EXHIBIT B - MARKET RENT & FEASIBILITY STUDY

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

99

Old St. Anastasia School Master Plan Market Rent & Feasibility Study As of April 24, 2026 Prepared For: Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency 100 N U.S. Highway 1 Fort Pierce, FL 34950 & Cotleur & Hearing 1934 Commerce Lane, Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Prepared By: Cushman & Wakefield Valuation & Advisory 100 SW Albany Avenue, Suite 200 Stuart, Florida 34994

May 28, 2026 Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency 100 N U.S. Highway 1 Fort Pierce, FL 34950 & Cotleur & Hearing 1934 Commerce Lane, Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458

Cushman & Wakefield Regional, LLC Valuation & Advisory 100 SW Albany Avenue, Suite 200 Stuart, Florida 34994

Dear FPRA, In fulfillment of our agreement as outlined in the Letter of Engagement, we are pleased to transmit the attached report which includes our market & feasibility study regarding the adaptive reuse & redevelopment of the Old St. Anastasia School property & surrounding parcels located at 910 Orange Avenue in Fort Pierce, Florida.

The City of Fort Pierce & Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency’s recent notable participation in redevelopment & revitalization projects within the Downtown Fort Pierce market area are expected to spur private revitalization and redevelopment efforts in the area, and the subject could serve as a catalyst for revitalization within the Orange Avenue/Peacocks Arts District corridor.

Please note, this report is not intended, nor should it be considered, as an appraisal or in support of a market value conclusion(s). Our report provides quantitative and qualitative overviews of the subject’s market and overall supply and demand indicators reflecting the subject’s viability.

Key assumptions utilized in our analysis are discussed in detail regarding their reasonableness based on our independent research of market data and information.

While the information herein may be reliable, certain data is sourced from third parties and we cannot warranty or guarantee any portion of the information in this report to be all inclusive or wholly accurate.

The most consistent feedback from market participants when asked for their insight into realistic expectations for lease-up of the proposed conceptual master plans was that a civic/non-profit anchor would benefit the lease-up of the office space proposed, while the new commercial product may take some time to lease up, and the proposed project may not currently be feasible considering the lack of recent commercial development in the market and currently available retail space along more attractive corridors in the market. Significant tenant improvement allowances will also likely be required considering the new construction and adaptive re-use to attract tenants to the property.

Furthermore, the reader should be cautioned and reminded that any conclusions presented in this market study apply only as of the effective date(s) indicated. The author makes no representation as to the effect of the subject property of this event, or any event, subsequent to the effective date of this report.

It has been a pleasure to be of service; please reach out with any questions or comments at any time.

Respectfully submitted, Cushman & Wakefield Regional, LLC Thomas J. Johnson, MAI, SRA Senior Director, Valuation & Advisory Tom.johnson@cushwake.com

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Table of Contents I.

Introduction & General Information (Pages 4-10)

II.

SWOT Analysis (Page 11)

III.

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development (Pages 12-19)

IV.

Competitive Inventory Analysis (Pages 20-26)

V.

Rent Concessions Analysis (Page 27)

VI.

Summary of Findings (Page 28)

VII.

Assumptions & Limiting Conditions (Pages 29-30)

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Introduction & General Information

I. Introduction & General Information Description of Assignment & Scope of Work

History of Subject Site and Summary of Proposed Development

Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. (or its subsidiary) was engaged by Cotleur & Hearing (the “Client”) to perform a market & feasibility study regarding the proposed master plan redevelopment of the Historic Old St. Anastasia School Site located at 910 Orange Avenue in Fort Pierce, Florida.

The subject involves an improved church site with the existing historic Old St. Anastasia school improvement and two (2) vacant tax parcels for a total site area of 3.475 acres per the survey provided by the Client. The school improvement was initially constructed in 1914 and was added to the U.S. National Register of Historic Places on August 10, 2000. The FPRA (Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency) Board allocated $500,000 in the 2022-2023 Fiscal Year Budget to fund the completed exterior restoration as part of a larger initiative to redevelop the site and surrounding vacant parcels. The exterior restoration is an important step in eliminating blight while creating a welcoming and vibrant environment for the community.

Scope of work is the type and extent of research and analyses involved in an assignment. To determine the appropriate scope of work for the assignment, we considered the intended use of the report, the needs of the user, the relevant characteristics of the subject property, and other pertinent factors.

As part of this analysis, we researched existing competitive retail and office inventory, inventory under construction/planned for the competitive area, demographic projections, labor market projections, and economic activity relevant to the primary trade area (determined to be the City of Fort Pierce). Rent concessions & typical leasing terms within the subject’s competitive market area were also analyzed and researched.

In 2025, Cotleur & Hearing was tasked by the FPRA to prepare conceptual master plans for the Old St. Anastasia School for the continued rehabilitation of the historic school building and 3.475-acre property. The site is intended to anchor the new Peacock Arts District, extending from the subject property east along Orange Avenue into the Downtown Fort Pierce market area. Cotleur & Hearing’s design team prepared three conceptual master plans that focus on the enhancement of the existing school building and the improvement of the surrounding site. The concepts focused on varying levels of improvement and redevelopment, implementing the initial feedback collected during a community survey that garnered almost 500 responses from City of Fort Pierce residents.

Recent meetings between the City and Cotleur & Hearing have revealed the preferred conceptual plan to be Concept B, which includes a 21,000 SF mixed-use two-story commercial improvement, a large canopy-covered outdoor area, lawn event area, and the adaptive re-use of the existing historical improvement on site.

Research We have not performed independent auditing procedures and provide no assurances, expressed or implied, regarding the accuracy of the information provided by others. We interviewed brokers and developers familiar with the area, as well as representatives of existing commercial properties in the competitive market. The planning and development databases for St. Lucie County, the City of Fort Pierce and the City of Port St. Lucie were extensively researched for market data regarding proposed and planned projects of significance. Relevant data was collected, verified, and analyzed. Demographic and labor market data from Lightcast and Esri/ArcGIS, including tapestry segmentation data, was also utilized. Comparable market and property data was obtained from various sources (public records, third-party datareporting services such as REIS, Moody’s CoStar, YardiMatrix, etc.) and confirmed with parties directly involved in projects wherever possible. It is, however, sometimes necessary to rely on other sources deemed reliable, such as data reporting services.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Introduction & General Information

I. Introduction & General Information Key Findings

Space Type

Projected Rent per Square Foot (Gross)

TI Allowance/SF Leasing (Grey Shell Typical Term Commissions Delivery)

Annual Escalators

Absorption

Retail

$28.00

$40.00

5 Years

6.00%

4.00%

2 Years

Restaurant

$30.00

$45.00

5 Years

6.00%

4.00%

2 Years

Office

$25.00

$30.00

3-5 Years

6.00%

4.00%

1 Year

Civic Space

-

-

5-10 Years

-

-

-

Absorption Considerations

Unit Mix Considerations

Key Feasibility Indicators

We surveyed absorption rates of local retail properties in the market of newer and older construction. Given the subject’s proposed characteristics, limited competitive inventory in the official construction and planning pipelines, and considering demand in the market for newly constructed space, we believe that it would take approximately two (2) years to lease the proposed commercial, revenue-generating spaces, assuming that the property is anchored by a civic/non-profit tenant and that concessions are provided. The proposed office spaces within the school improvement can likely be leased up over a one (1) year period assuming the civic/nonprofit tenant anchor in place.

Considering our research, the subject’s positioning within the market, discussions with active leasing agents, and the overall makeup of the surrounding market, we believe that a mix of civic/non-profit, professional office, and retail/restaurant-oriented uses would likely be the most feasible on the subject site. Considering the proposed communal spaces, family-oriented retail uses would likely find more success.

Brokers in the market report that concessions on new lease agreements are typically granted in the form of free rent periods rather than tenant improvement allowances. There’s been a very limited amount of new commercial product delivered in the City of Fort Pierce market area in recent years. A survey of new construction multi-tenant commercial improvements in the St. Lucie County & Martin County markets revealed an average TI allowance of $38.89/Square Foot for commercial space delivered in grey shell condition with no Mechanical, Electrical, or Plumbing work completed within the tenant bays.

The overall sentiment from active leasing agents surveyed was that the close proximity of the subject to the Downtown market is a plus, however there were concerns for safety and other draws to the immediate area. Smaller spaces reportedly turnover much quicker than larger spaces in the market given the larger tenant pool which consists mostly of mom/pop and regional tenants in the Fort Pierce market.

There has been limited new commercial development in the Fort Pierce market in recent years, indicating a lack of demand for new commercial space. New commercial development has mostly been limited to nationally tenanted investment properties.

Smaller retail/office tenant bays would have quicker lease-up periods and can generally demand higher rental rates in the market than larger spaces, however there is additional management and investor risk involved when compared to having larger spaces and less tenants.

Based on recently completed projects in the region and in the State of Florida as a whole, we believe that storefront tenant bays would find greater success in the subject market than an interior vendor hall for the proposed mixed-use improvement. A breezeway design with front- and back-door entry from the rear parking lot and along Orange Avenue would provide superior access on site to the tenant bays & communal areas.

Brokers report that landlords typically seek 5-year lease terms in the market, with many also reporting that a minimum of a 3-year lease is required for many of their properties.

Option periods are not common per our research. Rent escalators in the market range from 3.00% to 5.00% with the most common answer from surveyed leasing agents being 4.00% or CPI. Office spaces surveyed in the market appear to have shorter lease terms on average than retail space in the market. Typical commissions on new leases in the market are 6.00%, with half of the commissions due on signing and the remainder due at rent commencement.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

I. Introduction & General Information Aerial View of Subject Site

Introduction & General Information

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

I. Introduction & General Information Conceptual Master Plan Drawings

Introduction & General Information

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

I. Introduction & General Information Conceptual Master Plan Drawings (Cont.)

Introduction & General Information

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

I. Introduction & General Information Conceptual Master Plan Drawings (Cont.)

Introduction & General Information

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

I. Introduction & General Information Conceptual Master Plan Drawings (Cont.)

Introduction & General Information

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

II. SWOT Analysis Strengths

SWOT Analysis

Weaknesses

• The subject will benefit from its • proximity to the Downtown Fort Pierce market and location within the Fort Pierce Redevelopment Area, which has seen significant government action to revitalize the area and eliminate blight.

• Surrounding uses are largely residential and institutional in nature, which would • likely benefit from a mixed-use, community-oriented development on the subject property.

• The St. Lucie County market as a • whole, including the City of Fort Pierce, are expected to grow significantly in the coming years, with 10,000+ units proposed and approved west of the subject in the unincorporated St. Lucie County market area, and • commercial/industrial projects also proposed and underway within the City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County.

The Treasure Coast as a whole is • currently experiencing a stage of growth, and the Fort Pierce market is expected to continue benefitting from the growth occurring in the market.

•

Opportunities

Threats

Orange Avenue sees lower daily traffic counts than other commercial roadways in the subject market and rents are typically lower than what is demanded along busier commercial roadways in the subject’s market including Okeechobee Road and US Highway 1.

• The subject property is envisioned as • an anchor to the Peacock Arts District and has potential to assist in the revitalization of the local economy as a driver of growth and revitalization. The property is well positioned along a major roadway in the market.

Absorption times for new commercial product in the market are difficult to estimate considering the lack of available data and new product in the market. The subject’s immediate surrounding area appears to see less demand than other commercial roadways in the market.

Surrounding improvements are typically of older construction and there is notable blight in the surrounding market area.

• There has been notable private & • public investment in the elimination of blight and revitalization of the area with the assistance of FPRA provided incentives including the moratorium on impact fee waivers and grants programs in place to assist in the • rehabilitation of older commercial properties.

The provided community survey and discussions with market participants revealed that there are concerns regarding safety and crime in the subject’s surrounding market area.

The subject’s historic improvement will require extensive interior rehabilitation, code upgrades, and maintenance and upkeep, which increases development risk and financial investment risk.

Existing commercial product in the market is typically Class C/D office & retail improvements, which see demand in the market. Brokers report fairly limited vacancies for well-maintained spaces. There is concern regarding the demand for new construction product in the market, and if the economics of the area would support higher rental rates.

The historic designation may limit design flexibility options for adaptive reuse of the existing improvement.

• Community surveys provided show high demand for cultural, educational, and public-space amenities in the subject’s market area.

Brokers & developers report concerns over the feasibility of commercial and residential projects in the subject market.

• Civic/non-profit anchor with local government backing could function as a • Rising construction costs, inflation, & general strong anchor for the center. economic uncertainty could cause feasibility issues for the proposed project.

Proposed communal and civic spaces do not typically generate significant revenue.

• Community interests in arts & amenities, as captured by the community surveys provided, do not always result in feasible uses needed to support operations.

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Delineation of Competitive Market Area: Primary Market The Fort Pierce market area is an established market area in St. Lucie County that is currently in a state of revitalization and growth. New development and revitalization in the market has been mostly focused along commercial corridors, near to interchanges with Interstate 95 and Florida’s Turnpike, and in the Downtown Fort Pierce market area. New residential development in the market is typically situated in the western and southern reaches of the City with large-scale mixed-use development proposed west of the City of Fort Pierce in the unincorporated St. Lucie County market area.

The Orange Avenue commercial corridor has seen limited redevelopment, development, and revitalization in the past 10-20 years, with blight being present. The Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency was initially established in the 1990s to begin the process of revitalizing the area and curing existing blight. The FPRA offers a number of grants to revitalize existing commercial properties including commercial façade grants ($100,000 total), paint grants ($150,000 total), and signage grants ($50,000 total).

Demolition grants to remove blighted structures are also available ($100,000 total), as well as small business support grants ($50,000 total), intended to help local entrepreneurs launch or expand. Several revitalization projects have been completed in recent years by private ownership and through the FPRA. The Freebee program is a 100% electric, free transit program focused in the Downtown Fort Pierce market area that has experienced high public use and strong feedback since launching in 2023. The program is currently under expansion at a total cost of $600,000 to improve wait times and provide better access.

The Peacock Arts District (“PAD”), established in 2016, is intended to refresh the Orange Avenue corridor, historically a bustling part of Fort Pierce. The area extends from 10th Street (subject property) to US Highway 1 and includes the Avenue A, Avenue B, Atlantic Avenue, Boston Avenue, and Citrus Avenue stretches from 7th Street to US Highway 1.

Proposed projects by the FPRA within the Peacock Arts District include Parking Lot enhancements to the parking lot at 7th Street and Orange Avenue, including the addition of public art, landscaping, and pedestrian improvements, the Old St. Anastasia Redevelopment, and ongoing mural and alleyway beautification and activation projects.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development FPRA 5-Year Capital Improvements Budget

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Demographic Demand Drivers

Housing Units (Number, % Change Y-O-Y)

Population and Households

Population and household growth within the City of Fort Pierce is expected to outpace the State of Florida and contribute to the significant growth occurring in the St. Lucie County market, projected to see population growth of 13.20% by 2030 compared to 5.52% in the State of Florida and 7.73% in the City of Fort Pierce. A majority of the new housing product currently proposed is situated in the western reaches of St. Lucie County, and significant development is anticipated just west of the Fort Pierce market area along the Kings Highway Jobs Corridor, and also north along Indrio Road, where the Towns, Villages, and Countrysides land use was recently amended to support development in an area that remained largely stagnant for 15+ years.

Population and Household Growth - 2025-2030 1-Mile Radius

3-Mile Radius

5-Mile Radius

City of Fort Pierce

St. Lucie County

State of Florida

2025 Total Population 2030 Total Population 2025-2030 Growth (%) 2025-2030 Annual Growth (%)

11,220 12,172 8.48% 1.70%

50,554 53,854 6.53% 1.31%

69,852 75,129 7.55% 1.51%

49,822 53,673 7.73% 1.55%

375,434 424,977 13.20% 2.64%

23,027,836 24,297,976 5.52% 1.10%

2025 Total Households 2030 Total Households 2025-2030 Growth (%) 2025-2030 Annual Growth (%)

4,191 4,612 10.05% 2.01%

19,359 20,971 8.33% 1.67%

27,408 29,935 9.22% 1.84%

20,026 21,915 9.43% 1.89%

149,302 170,609 14.27% 2.85%

9,263,074 9,873,376 6.59% 1.32%

2025 Average Household Size 2030 Average Household Size Change

2.64 2.60 -1.52%

2.59 2.55 -1.54%

2.51 2.47 -1.59%

2.46 2.43 -1.22%

2.50 2.47 -1.20%

2.43 2.41 -0.82%

2025 Family Households 2030 Family Households 2025-2030 Growth (%) 2025-2030 Annual Growth (%)

2,390 2,613 9.33% 1.87%

11,984 12,883 7.50% 1.50%

16,735 18,148 8.44% 1.69%

11,948 13,008 8.87% 1.77%

102,040 116,609 14.28% 2.86%

6,004,732 6,406,245 6.69% 1.34%

Source: Esri

City of Fort Pierce St. Lucie County

State of Florida

Y-O-Y Y-O-Y Y-O-Y Y-O-Y Y-O-Y # of Units Change # of Units Change # of Units Change # of Units Change # of Units Change 2010 4,702 21,030 30,502 21,911 136,963 2011 4,668 -0.72% 21,040 0.05% 30,518 0.05% 21,887 -0.11% 137,672 0.52% 2012 4,670 0.04% 21,060 0.10% 30,531 0.04% 21,906 0.09% 138,262 0.43% 2013 4,678 0.17% 21,078 0.09% 30,609 0.26% 21,937 0.14% 138,598 0.24% 2014 4,676 -0.04% 21,083 0.02% 30,641 0.10% 21,962 0.11% 139,026 0.31% 2015 4,655 -0.45% 21,077 -0.03% 30,677 0.12% 21,962 0.00% 139,755 0.52% 2016 4,655 0.00% 21,120 0.20% 30,725 0.16% 21,986 0.11% 141,118 0.98% 2017 4,655 0.00% 21,176 0.27% 30,811 0.28% 21,997 0.05% 142,484 0.97% 2018 4,647 -0.17% 21,207 0.15% 30,847 0.12% 21,986 -0.05% 143,942 1.02% 2019 4,643 -0.09% 21,247 0.19% 30,905 0.19% 21,981 -0.02% 145,797 1.29% 2020 4,656 0.28% 21,338 0.43% 31,075 0.55% 22,076 0.43% 148,431 1.81% 2021 4,651 -0.11% 21,306 -0.15% 31,048 -0.09% 22,095 0.09% 149,852 0.96% 2022 4,628 -0.49% 21,353 0.22% 31,198 0.48% 22,229 0.61% 153,662 2.54% 2023 4,603 -0.54% 21,397 0.21% 31,347 0.48% 22,334 0.47% 157,900 2.76% 2024 4,606 0.07% 21,596 0.93% 31,734 1.23% 22,642 1.38% 163,428 3.50% 2025 4,634 0.61% 21,785 0.88% 32,097 1.14% 22,919 1.22% 169,060 3.45% 2030 (Projected) 5,084 1.94%* 23,588 1.66%* 35,030 1.83%* 25,073 1.88%* 190,918 2.59%*

Y-O-Y # of Units Change 9,000,894 9,057,317 0.63% 9,117,417 0.66% 9,180,280 0.69% 9,256,430 0.83% 9,345,763 0.97% 9,462,023 1.24% 9,568,752 1.13% 9,686,116 1.23% 9,782,882 1.00% 9,892,271 1.12% 9,965,002 0.74% 10,120,259 1.56% 10,261,349 1.39% 10,443,579 1.78% 10,635,372 1.84% 11,296,285 1.24%*

1-Mile Radius

3-Mile Radius

Year

5-Mile Radius

Source: Esri; *This reflects average annual growth for this five-year period.

The number of housing units in the subject’s immediate market area is also expected to outpace growth seen in the State of Florida, illustrating optimism for future development & expansion within the Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County markets. It is noted that significant growth in housing units is projected with focal points for new development being mostly in the unincorporated St. Lucie County market areas west of the City of Fort Pierce and City of Port St. Lucie’s existing development. It is noted that the Kings Highway Corridor in the western Fort Pierce/unincorporated St. Lucie County market area has a number of proposed industrial, commercial, and residential projects including large-scale mixed-use development along Indrio Road to the north and west of the subject site, proposed multi-family and subdivision developments along Kings Highway, and large-scale residential projects west of the Tradition/West Port St. Lucie markets to the south and west of the subject.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Demographic Demand Drivers Migration Trends

St. Lucie County overall is expected to experience strong population and household growth over the next five years, adding nearly 50,000 new residents (a 13.2% increase), compared to the nation at 0.42% and the State of Florida at 5.52% over the same five-year period.

The most recent available county-to-county migration data indicates that St. Lucie County draws many of its residents from the Palm Beach, Broward, Martin, and Miami-Dade County markets to the south of the subject’s market area.

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Demographic Demand Drivers Household Income

Over the next five years, median household incomes for age cohorts likely to start families, settle down or become empty nesters are projected to increase within the State of Florida as a whole.

The City of Fort Pierce shows the weakest projected increases and lowest average and median household incomes in the first three age groups analyzed (25-34, 35-44, and 45-54), emphasizing a need for workforce housing and affordable housing.

The 45-54, 55-64,and 65+ age cohort are expected to outperform their younger peers in household income growth. Despite the impact of likely retirement on household income, the 55-64 and 65+ age cohort groups show the strongest projected increases in median household income from 2025 to 2030.

The median household income in the subject’s immediate vicinity is notably lower than the surrounding market areas. As the Kings Highway Jobs Corridor continues to be built out, and more development occurs in the market, we anticipate that the area will experience some economic growth that should benefit the subject. It should be noted that household income is a relevant economic variable for retail and restaurant tenants.

Household Income by Age Cohort (2025-2030) 1-Mile Radius

3-Mile Radius

5-Mile Radius

City of Fort Pierce

St. Lucie County

State of Florida

Householder Age 25-34 2025 Avg. Household Income 2030 Avg. Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$50,816 $54,838 7.9% 1.6%

$61,448 $67,173 9.3% 1.9%

$66,718 $72,722 9.0% 1.8%

$64,936 $70,527 8.6% 1.7%

$92,328 $103,563 12.2% 2.4%

$105,745 $120,272 13.7% 2.7%

2025 Median Household Income 2030 Median Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$38,480 $44,918 16.7% 3.3%

$52,030 $55,159 6.0% 1.2%

$54,769 $58,723 7.2% 1.4%

$54,417 $58,034 6.6% 1.3%

$72,777 $81,718 12.3% 2.5%

$79,999 $91,853 14.8% 3.0%

Householder Age 35-44 2025 Avg. Household Income 2030 Avg. Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$48,032 $52,683 9.7% 1.9%

$61,650 $68,463 11.1% 2.2%

$68,941 $77,288 12.1% 2.4%

$66,021 $73,245 10.9% 2.2%

$111,951 $124,921 11.6% 2.3%

$129,988 $143,851 10.7% 2.1%

2025 Median Household Income 2030 Median Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$35,000 $39,243 12.1% 2.4%

$50,009 $52,965 5.9% 1.2%

$52,837 $57,280 8.4% 1.7%

$52,168 $56,193 7.7% 1.5%

$89,773 $102,553 14.2% 2.8%

$100,142 $110,112 10.0% 2.0%

Householder Age 45-54 2025 Avg. Household Income 2030 Avg. Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$46,717 $50,520 8.1% 1.6%

$66,367 $72,544 9.3% 1.9%

$74,327 $81,548 9.7% 1.9%

$72,088 $79,321 10.0% 2.0%

$112,051 $124,596 11.2% 2.2%

$135,330 $149,210 10.3% 2.1%

2025 Median Household Income 2030 Median Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$34,176 $37,417 9.5% 1.9%

$52,060 $54,727 5.1% 1.0%

$56,065 $59,845 6.7% 1.3%

$55,317 $59,094 6.8% 1.4%

$90,366 $102,695 13.6% 2.7%

$102,405 $113,279 10.6% 2.1%

Householder Age 55-64 2025 Avg. Household Income 2030 Avg. Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$43,923 $50,168 14.2% 2.8%

$68,518 $77,821 13.6% 2.7%

$78,609 $88,761 12.9% 2.6%

$72,449 $81,641 12.7% 2.5%

$106,833 $121,842 14.0% 2.8%

$126,503 $142,919 13.0% 2.6%

2025 Median Household Income 2030 Median Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$26,315 $32,703 24.3% 4.9%

$48,421 $54,386 12.3% 2.5%

$54,883 $62,144 13.2% 2.6%

$52,320 $58,209 11.3% 2.3%

$82,317 $99,219 20.5% 4.1%

$91,100 $107,212 17.7% 3.5%

Householder Age 65+ 2025 Avg. Household Income 2030 Avg. Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$36,444 $39,863 9.4% 1.9%

$55,975 $62,274 11.3% 2.3%

$65,831 $73,023 10.9% 2.2%

$61,682 $68,670 11.3% 2.3%

$79,474 $88,835 11.8% 2.4%

$90,571 $104,134 15.0% 3.0%

2025 Median Household Income 2030 Median Household Income % Change % Change (Annual)

$22,293 $24,729 10.9% 2.2%

$37,145 $42,539 14.5% 2.9%

$44,731 $51,626 15.4% 3.1%

$41,432 $49,328 19.1% 3.8%

$56,608 $62,594 10.6% 2.1%

$57,776 $67,818 17.4% 3.5%

Source: Esri

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Economic Drivers

Age of Existing Housing Existing housing product within the subject’s immediate area is mostly of older construction (1950s to 1980s) with a limited amount of new housing product, similar to the state of commercial product along Orange Avenue and within the Peacock Arts District.

New residential projects within the City of Fort Pierce include a recently approved 48-lot subdivision in the southern Fort Pierce market area along Sunrise Boulevard and a recently completed quasi-governmental workforce housing project along Avenue D (90 units).

In recent years, the majority of new housing stock has been developed in the western Port St. Lucie market area and in the unincorporated St. Lucie County market area west of the Fort Pierce & Port St. Lucie markets. There are over 12,000 more units planned and approved for construction in the next 5-10 years within the St. Lucie County market.

The subject would likely benefit from new housing projects within the City of Fort Pierce, and it is likely that some of the existing product that’s of older construction will begin to be demolished and replaced with newer product in the coming years. Brokers report developers have recently had some concerns regarding the feasibility of larger residential development projects in the City of Fort Pierce market.

Housing Age (Number, % Share) - ACS 5-Year (2019-2023)

Year Built: 1939 or Earlier (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1940-1949 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1950-1959 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1960-1969 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1970-1979 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1980-1989 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1990-1999 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2000-2009 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2010-2019 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2020 and Later TOTAL:

1-Mile Radius 427 301 1,040 656 1,076 1,039 137 172 101 0 4,949

3-Mile Radius 833 1,049 3,290 2,996 4,806 4,400 1,723 2,738 819 143 22,797

5-Mile Radius 990 1,376 3,846 3,593 6,739 7,212 2,833 4,436 1,497 281 32,803

City of Fort Pierce 841 793 2,964 2,478 4,787 5,024 1,706 3,337 1,023 210 23,163

St. Lucie County 1,324 1,719 5,326 6,250 17,811 35,967 23,961 41,472 15,679 5,421 154,930

State of Florida 200,972 182,470 666,724 836,097 1,635,872 1,954,002 1,539,741 1,827,235 1,054,469 184,774 10,082,356

Year Built: 1939 or Earlier (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1940-1949 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1950-1959 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1960-1969 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1970-1979 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1980-1989 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 1990-1999 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2000-2009 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2010-2019 (ACS 5-Yr) Year Built: 2020 and Later TOTAL:

8.6% 6.1% 21.0% 13.3% 21.7% 21.0% 2.8% 3.5% 2.0% 0.0% 100.0%

3.7% 4.6% 14.4% 13.1% 21.1% 19.3% 7.6% 12.0% 3.6% 0.6% 100.0%

3.0% 4.2% 11.7% 11.0% 20.5% 22.0% 8.6% 13.5% 4.6% 0.9% 100.0%

3.6% 3.4% 12.8% 10.7% 20.7% 21.7% 7.4% 14.4% 4.4% 0.9% 100.0%

0.9% 1.1% 3.4% 4.0% 11.5% 23.2% 15.5% 26.8% 10.1% 3.5% 100.0%

2.0% 1.8% 6.6% 8.3% 16.2% 19.4% 15.3% 18.1% 10.5% 1.8% 100.0%

MEDIAN YEAR BUILT (ACS 5-YR):

1970

1977

1980

1979

1994

1988

Source: American Community Survey (5-Year; 2019-2023)

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Economic Drivers Major Employers Major Employers - St. Lucie County Employer

No. of Employees

Product/Service

Location

St. Lucie Public Schools HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital Cleveland Clinic Martin Health City of Port St Lucie Walmart Distribution Center HCA Florida St. Lucie Hospital St. Lucie County Indian River State College Pursuit Boats Florida Power & Light Co. St. Lucie County Fire District Maverick Boat Group Fed Ex Ground A-1 Industries of Florida City of Fort Pierce Southern Eagle Distributing Amazon Fort Pierce Utilities Authority St. Lucie Battery & Tire FAU's Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute City Electric Supply / TAMCO Natalie's Orchid Island Juice Company Cheney Brothers PGA Golf Club

5,253 1,896 1,544 1,363 1,273 937 791 734 652 610 539 470 469 365 358 304 300 275 260 233 221 215 201 200

Education Healthcare services Healthcare services City government Dry goods distribution Healthcare services County government Education Boat manufacturer Electric utility Fire protection Boat manufacturer Warehouse/Distribution Truss manufacturer City government Beverage distribution Distribution Utilities Auto services Research organization Manufacturer Fruit juice manufacturer Warehouse/Distribution Recreation

Port St. Lucie Fort Pierce St. Lucie County Port St. Lucie Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie St. Lucie County Countywide Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie Countywide Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie Fort Pierce Fort Pierce Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie Fort Pierce Countywide Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie Fort Pierce Port St. Lucie Port St. Lucie

Source: Economic Development Council of St. Lucie County

Demand Drivers for Proposed Development

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

III. Demand Drivers for Proposed Development Economic Drivers

Industry & Occupation Data The chart herein delineates the largest industries in the St. Lucie County market as a whole.

Health Care, Government, & Retail Trade are the largest industries in the market, followed by construction, accommodation & food services, and administrative and support and waste management and remediation services. St. Lucie County, FL had a December 2025 unemployment rate of 5.15%, decreasing from 8.01% 5 years before.

St. Lucie County, FL had a December 2025 unemployment rate of 5.15%, decreasing from 8.01% 5 years before. Labor force participation in the market has decreased by approximately 3% in the same 5-year period to 50.92%.

From 2020 to 2025, jobs increased by 17.6% in St. Lucie County, FL from 91,014 to 107,045.

This change outpaced the national growth rate of 10.6% by 7.0%. As the number of jobs increased, the labor force participation rate decreased from 54.9% to 50.9% between 2020 and 2025.

Largest Industries NAICS Code

Industry

62 90 44 23 72 56 81 48 31 54 42 71 53 61 52 22 11 51 55 21

Health Care and Social Assistance Government Retail Trade Construction Accommodation and Food Services Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services Other Services (except Public Administration) Transportation and Warehousing Manufacturing Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Wholesale Trade Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Educational Services Finance and Insurance Utilities Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Information Management of Companies and Enterprises Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction

Timeframe 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 January - August 2025 October 2025 November 2025 December 2025

Labor Force Participation Rate 54.33% 54.24% 54.16% 53.92% 52.43% 50.94% 51.17% 50.96% 50.92%

2020 Jobs

2025 Jobs

National Average in 2025 Jobs

Change in Jobs

% Change in Jobs

2025 Earnings Per Worker

12,698 13,983 12,021 7,591 8,056 7,472 5,327 3,167 4,095 4,763 2,522 1,482 2,039 1,528 1,707 760 924 572 178 18

15,596 15,453 13,780 9,669 9,608 7,258 6,298 5,682 4,720 4,551 3,255 2,153 2,107 1,981 1,916 1,071 868 607 269 82

14,566 15,570 9,870 6,232 8,864 6,212 5,327 4,673 7,972 7,455 3,800 1,955 1,867 2,801 4,292 371 1,223 1,883 1,597 365

2,898 1,470 1,759 2,078 1,552 (214) 971 2,515 625 (212) 733 671 68 453 209 311 (56) 35 91 64

23% 11% 15% 27% 19% (3%) 18% 79% 15% (4%) 29% 45% 3% 30% 12% 41% (6%) 6% 51% 358%

$73,434 $80,683 $47,140 $63,004 $31,153 $50,640 $43,338 $54,553 $77,829 $80,763 $81,152 $50,321 $59,632 $45,817 $90,434 $150,501 $56,775 $76,452 $97,096 $81,327

Timeframe 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Jobs 91,014 95,091 99,454 103,443 105,495 107,045 109,505 111,408 112,904 114,036 114,582

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis

Introduction and Market Survey Area Boundaries For purposes of analyzing the competitive inventory and establishing the most appropriate competitive set for the proposed project, the primary market area is considered to be retail and office-oriented commercial product, primarily within the Downtown Fort Pierce market area, along the Orange Avenue corridor, and within the City of Fort Pierce market area. It should be noted that the subject would not be considered a direct competitor to existing Downtown space within already developed, pedestrian-friendly portions of the market, or against properties situated along the major commercial corridors (US Highway 1 & Okeechobee Road), as these will see greater daily traffic counts and have more commercial activity than Orange Avenue.

The map herein portrays the surveyed market area and includes the location of properties included in our market rent study herein. Leases and properties surveyed include anchored shopping plazas, strip retail/office centers, multi-tenant retail and office improvements, single-tenant retail and office improvements, and restaurant space.

Subject Location, Orange Avenue Corridor, & Downtown Fort Pierce

Orange Avenue is a two-lane east/west collector roadway providing access from Interstate 95 into the Downtown Fort Pierce market area, but functions as a 4-lane commercial corridor further west in the market between the interchange with Interstate 95 and S 13th Street. Uses along the roadway west of 13th Street are primarily commercial/service commercial in nature, while uses in the subject’s 2lane portion of Orange Avenue are a mix of residential, commercial, and institutional uses, including multiple religious facilities.

Uses surrounding the subject property are as follows: North - Multi-Family Residential South - Vacant Land & Religious Facility East - Retail, Single-Family Residence and Vacant Land West – Vacant Land & Single-Family Residences

Subject Location (Red) & Surveyed Properties (Blue)

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Construction Pipeline The current construction pipeline for residential product is extensive in the unincorporated St. Lucie County market area surrounding the City of Fort Pierce but fairly limited within the jurisdictional boundaries of the city given the mostly built out nature of the market.

New commercial product is rare in the market beyond national brands moving into build-to-suit locations along heavily trafficked roadways. As of February 2026, no new commercial building permits had been filed within the City of Fort Pierce in 2026 per the City Manager’s report. 4 were filed in 2025.

Developments proposed along Orange Avenue are limited and mostly focused near to the interchange between Orange Avenue and Interstate 95. A number of industrial and residential projects are proposed in close proximity to the interchange and future development along the Orange Avenue corridor should benefit the subject property. Also worth noting is the proposed expansion of Jenkins Road, a north/south roadway, to connect with Angle Road just east of Kings Highway, providing greater accessibility to the jobs corridor that has seen significant improvement, development, and interest in recent years just west of the City of Fort Pierce’s jurisdiction.

The proposed King’s Landing development received site plan approval in September 2025 on a 7.824-acre waterfront site in the Downtown Fort Pierce market area along North 2nd Street. The development will feature a 140-room Marriott Tribute hotel, 100 condominium units, restaurants, retail, and a parking garage. The development has been stalled for some time, and the currently phased timeline requires the hotel to be completed by July 2028, with restaurants, shops, condominiums, and a garage completed by May 2029, and remaining residential and retail completed by November 2029. The development will reportedly cost north of $150 million. Marriott reportedly approved the Kings Landing development in March 2026.

The Marina Square Redevelopment project was initially announced in November 2022 as part of the newly established Downtown Master Plan, aimed to enhance the core of the market by building on its greatest assets. Phase 1 of the Master Plan involved developing a well-designed public space at the Marina Square, currently utilized for many communal events & farmer’s markets, that can accommodate a variety of communal uses. A September 2025 meeting allowed the project consultants to expand their scope of work to continue refining the proposed plans.

A 10,950 SF GLA 2-tenant retail plaza was constructed at the corner of Okeechobee Road and McNeil Road as an outparcel to the Walmart in 2022 that contains Aspen Dental and MDNow. The Harbour Isle plazas were constructed in 2021/2022 and are reportedly fully leased.

The properties are situated along Seaway Drive near the entrance to the North Hutchinson Island market area east of the subject.

The Gateway Plaza, located at the northwest corner of Virginia Avenue and US Highway 1, recently underwent significant renovation and re-lease after the prior anchor tenant, Big Lots, moved out. The plaza is now anchored by Burlington, Ross, & Harbor Freight and has multiple outparcels.

WaWa, Chik-fil-A, & Starbucks were all completed in the past five years along Okeechobee Road. A Buc-ee’s is currently proposed along Indrio Road near the Interstate 95 intersection.

In summary, the surrounding market has limited commercial inventory that would be considered a direct competitor to the proposed development on the subject site considering the age of existing product in the market. There appears to be fairly limited demand and poor feasibility for new product in the market given the lack of commercial construction occurring and based on our discussions with active leasing agents in the market.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Supply/Demand Analysis Existing inventory along the Orange Avenue Corridor from the subject’s positioning at 10th Avenue east to Indian River Blvd and within the FPRA and Peacock Arts District are of older construction, ranging in age from the early 1900’s to 2010 with an average building age of approximately 80 years. A market vacancy survey of properties listed for lease on major listing sites within the subject’s immediate Orange Avenue/Downtown market area revealed high vacancies for commercial space.

There are a number of vacant land sites surrounding the subject property, notably the southwest and northwest non-signalized corner parcels at 10th Street & Orange Avenue. There are a number of other vacant commercially zoned sites located west of the subject along the corridor. The sites have no advertisements for sale and are not listed for sale on major listing sites.

The Fort Pierce market has seen minimal development in recent years, and the Orange Avenue corridor has seen minimal development or revitalization in recent years beyond properties located in the Downtown market area. Older commercial product were typically constructed as zero-lot-line storefront designs abutting the sidewalks within neighborhood.

The area is currently tenanted mostly by mom/pop shops serving the local market area, including restaurants. It is noted that there are several religious facilities/organizations within the immediate vicinity of the subject site (First United Methodist Church of Fort Pierce, Ft. Pierce Haitian United Methodist Church, Rock Church, St. Mark Missionary Baptist Church, Greater New Bethel Baptist Church, Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church, First Bethel Baptist Church, etc.). The subject will likely benefit from increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic on days of religious observance/celebration.

Newer commercial product is typically located along more heavily trafficked commercial corridors in the market (Okeechobee Blvd, US Highway 1) and near to signalized intersections and interchanges with Interstate 95/Florida’s Turnpike. Okeechobee Blvd & US Highway 1 are desirable locations for national tenants per discussions with brokers active in the market while Orange Avenue is often considered more of an arterial/collector roadway in the market, though it shares an interchange with Interstate 95. General sentiment from brokers interviewed was that the Orange Avenue corridor is a secondary location in the market for commercial product that will not see similar demand to spaces along Okeechobee Road and US Highway 1.

Address 116 N 2nd Street 200-208 Avenue A 200 N US Highway 1 601-605 Orange Ave 129 N 5th Street 100-108 S 2nd Street

Market Vacancy - Survey Building SF Vacant SF Vacant % City 69% 14,068 9,650 Fort Pierce 30% 13,424 4,000 Fort Pierce 67% 7,327 4,900 Fort Pierce 49% 5,672 2,803 Fort Pierce 50% 3,200 1,600 Fort Pierce 1% 15,274 202 Fort Pierce Average 44%

It should be noted that there is a limited amount of new commercial retail/restaurant/office product in the City of Fort Pierce market beyond build-to-suit, national tenantoccupied properties. There are no national retail brands situated along Orange Avenue beyond gas station/convenience store product and discount stores.

The properties surveyed in the Downtown market are all of much older construction and likely require some renovation or significant concessions from a landlord to bring strong tenants into place. It is noted that 100-108 S 2nd Street, the Galleria of Pierce Harbor, was significantly renovated in the 2010s and is now fully leased with a number of restaurants and boutique retail shops in place. Vacancies are typically second floor executive suite/retail spaces.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Supply/Demand Analysis Properties available for lease on major listing sites were surveyed along commercial corridors in the market and outside of the Downtown Fort Pierce market area are included in the chart herein for reference. Brokers report lower vacancy in larger centers with anchor tenants in place.

Active leasing agents in the market reported greater demand and faster absorption times for smaller retail and office tenant bays within the subject market given the existing tenant pool in the market, consisting mostly of mom/pop and regional commercial tenants beyond anchored grocery plazas and locations with significant exposure/visibility in the market, such as along US Highway 1 or Okeechobee Road. The condition of the tenant bay and exposure/location are important parameters that have significant impact on absorption within the market area. Tenant bays less than 2,000 Square Feet in size and in good/average condition are reportedly turning over quicker than similar condition bays larger than 2,000 Square Feet in size.

Restaurant space reportedly has faster absorption than retail bays within commercial plazas in the market, indicating limited supply and existing demand, at least for 2nd generation restaurant space (when considering the lack of new construction commercial space in the market). It is noted that the most recently constructed non-national restaurant was the Phatz Chicken Shack along US Highway 1 in the northern Downtown Fort Pierce market area. Phatz had an existing restaurant location across the street from their new building.

It should be noted that the Seaway Drive properties included in the survey are the newest construction multi-tenant commercial product delivered in the subject’s Fort Pierce market area. 2517 S Federal Highway is noted as having had a junior anchor tenant vacate their space in the past two years.

An LOI for lease was reportedly received and the broker was optimistic that the deal will go through. 2705-2819 Peters Road also has a large space vacant that is contributing to the high vacancy figure.

The properties surveyed within the greater City of Fort Pierce market are typically situated along major roadways and would have greater appeal than the subject space if exposed to the market considering similar quality/condition commercial tenant bays. Gateway Plaza at 1963-2111 S US Highway 1 is reportedly only 5.00% vacant after undergoing significant renovation in recent months/years. A desirable anchor civic/non-profit tenant that can draw some traffic to the subject site should benefit the lease-up of the proposed improvements.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Retail Space A number of retail leases were analyzed to determine the best competitive set for the subject’s proposed development. Considering the subject’s positioning, comparable rents in close proximity or within the Downtown Fort Pierce market area were included in the charts herein. The leased spaces to the left ranged in modified gross rental rates from $17.00/Square Foot to $30.00/Square Foot with an average of $21.86/Square Foot.

The currently listed retail spaces located within or in proximity to the Downtown Fort Pierce market ranged from $24.00/Square Foot to $28.00/Square Foot with an average of $25.50/Square Foot on a modified gross lease basis. Brokers report more demand on tenant bays less than 2,000 square feet in size with typical absorption periods being from 1-6 months to lease. Larger retail spaces often take longer to lease unless they have good exposure and are in good condition.

Tenant concessions are most typically offered in the form of free rent in the subject’s market.

Sale No.

Summary of Retail Rent Listings 3

1

2

Name/Address

200 N US Highway 1

1717 S US Highway 1

City County Rent Commencement Typ. Term Size (SF) Est. YOC Tenancy Lease Type Rate/SF*

Fort Pierce St. Lucie 1-3 Years Listing 4,900 1926 Multi-Tenant NNN $13.47

Fort Pierce St. Lucie 1-3 Years Listing 1,200 1979 Multi-Tenant Modified Gross $25.00

4

5

108 N Depot Drive

129 N 5th Street

2517 S US Highway 1

Fort Pierce St. Lucie 3-5 Years Listing 3,300 1897; 2002 Multi-Tenant Base + CAM $24.00

Fort Pierce St. Lucie 1-10 Years Listing 1,600 1947; 2024 Multi-Tenant Base + CAM $28.00

Fort Pierce St. Lucie 5 Years Listing 2,175 1975 Multi-Tenant Modified Gross $25.00

Photo

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Restaurant Space Leasing agents reported good demand for 2nd generation restaurant space within the Downtown Fort Pierce market and along commercial corridors. These spaces reportedly have quicker absorption than standard retail tenant bays given a limited supply of turnkey product available in the market.

Lease terms for restaurants are typically 3-10 years in length with less than 3-year lease terms not being common in the market. No brokers reported percentage rent agreements based on revenues.

3.00% to 5.00% rent escalations are most common for restaurant spaces.

Concessions are typically provided in the form of free rent, with restaurant space typically getting the most free rent concessions out of commercial use types due to the permitting and buildouts required. The most recent 1st generation restaurant spaces not leased to national tenants and completed in the market were in the Harbour Isle Shoppes along Seaway Drive on Hutchinson Island. In this instance, TI allowances were provided from $15.00/SF to $20.00/SF for the pizza & bar-b-que restaurants currently in place, delivered in vanilla shell condition.

The restaurant tenant bays surveyed ranged in rental rates from $17.35/Square Foot to $47.70/Square Foot with an average rental rate of $29.89/Square Foot on a Modified Gross lease basis. Not considering Rents 1 & 5, which are on the low end of the range and represent inferior restaurant space when compared to the remainder of the comparable rents, the rents range from $22.56/Square Foot to $47.70/Square Foot with an average of $34.46/Square Foot on a Modified Gross lease basis.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Competitive Inventory Analysis

IV. Competitive Inventory Analysis Office Space Demand for office space is reportedly fairly limited, but supply is also fairly limited in the market. Medical office tenants typically prefer locations in closer proximity to the HCA Lawnwood Hospital while professional office tenants typically seek locations near or within the Downtown market or within existing commercial plazas and multi-tenant office centers.

Office leases are typically 1-5 years in length in the market with the standard lease term being 3 years. Tenant concessions are most typically provided in the form of free rent, with the amount of free rent provided typically determined by the condition of the unit and work required to bring the space to a tenant-ready condition.

Brokers report that small, executive-suite style tenant bays have seen decent demand in the Downtown Fort Pierce market area. Regus, a coworking office space operator, currently operates a number of executive/coworking/office spaces out of the Renaissance Financial Plaza. Additionally, the property at 100-108 N 2nd Street includes some 2nd floor executive suite space. These spaces typically demand higher rental rates per square foot but require more management and upkeep than typical tenant bays.

The office tenant bays surveyed ranged from $15.35/Square Foot to $28.00/Square Foot, with an average rental rate of $20.88/Square Foot on a Modified Gross lease basis. Currently listed office space in the market is listed from $18.00/Square Foot to $31.00/Square Foot on a Modified Gross lease basis.

Office leases surveyed contained annual rent escalators ranging from 3.00% to 7.50% with 3.00% to 4.00% or CPI escalators being most common in the market.

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Rent Concessions Analysis

V. Rent Concessions Analysis As mentioned previously, active leasing agents for commercial space within the City of Fort Pierce market report that free rent is the most common form of tenant concessions granted in the subject’s market, and that typically tenant improvement allowances are not provided by landlords. Free rent periods typically range from 1-6 months of time, with longer free rent periods for restaurant space given the permitting process & buildouts required, and shorter free rent periods for good condition space that doesn’t require significant improvement/renovation. The longest free rent provided at properties surveyed was 9 months for a restaurant space as the space was not previously built out for restaurant use and significant permitting was required. Spaces in good turnkey condition typically don’t require free rent periods or other tenant concessions.

Free rent is sometimes offered to attract tenants to good condition spaces if vacancy is high or the space has sat for some time.

Address XXXX Village Pkwy 10650 SW Crosstown Pkwy XXXX SW Village Pkwy 1208 SW Gatlin Blvd 3153 S Kanner Hwy 825 Seaway Drive 835 Seaway Drive 1020 SE Federal Hwy

New commercial product in the Treasure Coast market as a whole is typically delivered in a grey or vanilla shell condition, with grey shell being most common.

We surveyed recently constructed commercial plazas within the St. Lucie County & Martin County markets to determine typical tenant improvement allowances provided by landlords for new space. The chart herein includes a breakdown of total TI allowances provided by landlords at recently constructed properties. The delivery status (grey shell vs. vanilla) of the properties surveyed is noted below for reference. Subject space is assumed to be delivered in grey shell condition with no mechanical, electrical, or plumbing systems in place. It is noted that the currently proposed plans for the adaptive re-use of the historic improvement on site include common area restrooms and lobbies, which should reduce the required landlord-provided TI as no plumbing work will be required.

City Port St. Lucie Port St. Lucie Port St. Lucie Port St. Lucie Stuart Fort Pierce Fort Pierce Stuart

Year Built Est. 2026 2025 2020 2023 Est. 2026 2021 2022 2023

Delivery Status Grey Shell Grey Shell Grey Shell Vanilla Shell Grey Shell Vanilla Shell Vanilla Shell Grey Shell

Bldg. Size (SF) 12,376 11,767 8,960 10,494 24,779 10,530 6,532 12,528

The subject space would require significant tenant improvement allowances given the new construction status whereby free rent will not be able to offset buildout costs burdened by the tenants. The average TI allowance provided for grey shell space within the St. Lucie/Martin County markets is $38.89/Square Foot. Further analysis of the surveyed properties reveals restaurant space typically requires higher TI allowances per square foot, with as much as $50.00/Square Foot being provided to a national restaurant tenant within one of the surveyed plazas. Office space reportedly requires a similar amount of TI allowance to retail space, though this depends on the level and quality of buildout. Given the historic nature of the school/church improvement, buildout costs will likely be high considering code requirements and government regulations.

TI Allowance/SF ($) $42.17 $33.33 $40.00 $20.00 - $25.00 $40.00 $4.95 $9.27 $38.96

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Summary of Findings

VI. Summary of Findings Per the community surveys provided, there is a desire for communal/art/civic space within the Peacock Arts District and Downtown Fort Pierce market area. Civic/non-profit space typically demands less rent than professional office space, and the balance of revenue-generating vs. civic/non-profit space will have an effect on the feasibility of the proposed adaptive re-use of the improvement.

Our analysis indicates that there is available commercial space in the market with fairly limited demand for new product. The existing product is of older construction and rental rates for retail and office space appear to be relatively stagnant in the market. The subject’s proposed adaptive reuse of the historical improvement will likely require some significant concessions and an anchor non-profit/civic tenant to function as a draw to the property, and rental rates for office space are typically lower than that of retail/restaurant space, which could create feasibility issues.

Significant concessions will likely be required to lease up the subject property considering the current inferior nature of the Orange Avenue corridor when compared to US Highway 1 and Okeechobee Road. Free rent periods, which are the standard type of concession within the market for commercial space, would likely not subsidize enough of the buildout costs to bring the subject’s proposed spaces to good, marketable condition.

There are concerns within the community regarding safety within the immediate market area, which could have a significant negative impact on the marketing of the proposed improvements. Walkability in the subject’s immediate area when compared to the Downtown Fort Pierce market is currently significantly inferior, though this project would likely tie the Orange Avenue Corridor and Downtown market together well, especially considering the potential links to other civic/cultural properties in the market.

The feasibility of the proposed 21,000 SF mixed-use improvement does not currently appear viable given the high vacancies & limited new construction in the market; however, it is noted that the surrounding market area would likely benefit from the development, and that the proposed project could function as a catalyst to spurn new growth, revitalization, and development in the surrounding market area, including on the vacant commercial sites located in close proximity to the subject along Orange Avenue.

TI Allowance/SF Leasing (Grey Shell Typical Term Commissions Delivery)

Space Type

Projected Rent per Square Foot (Gross)

Retail

$28.00

$40.00

5 Years

Restaurant

$30.00

$45.00

Office

$25.00

Civic Space

-

Assuming the space is delivered in a grey shell condition with no Mechanical, Electric, or Plumbing (MEP) in place, a TI allowance of $30.00/Square Foot for the proposed office spaces, $40.00/Square Foot for the proposed retail spaces, and $45.00/Square Foot for restaurant space is considered reasonable and should provide ample concessions to entice tenants to the property, assuming a strong civic/nonprofit anchor tenant is in place.

Annual Escalators

Absorption

6.00%

4.00%

2 Years

5 Years

6.00%

4.00%

2 Years

$30.00

3-5 Years

6.00%

4.00%

1 Year

-

5-10 Years

-

-

-

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

VII. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions •

"Report" means the appraisal or consulting report and conclusions stated therein, to which these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions are annexed.

•

"Property" means the subject of the Report.

•

"C&W" means Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. or its subsidiary that issued the Report.

•

"Appraiser(s)" means the employee(s) of C&W who prepared and signed the Report.

•

The Report has been made subject to the following assumptions and limiting conditions:

•

1. No opinion is intended to be expressed and no responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for any matters that are legal in nature or require legal expertise or specialized knowledge beyond that of a real estate appraiser. Title to the Property is assumed to be good and marketable and the Property is assumed to be free and clear of all liens unless otherwise stated. No survey of the Property was undertaken.

•

2. The information contained in the Report or upon which the Report is based has been gathered from sources the Appraiser assumes to be reliable and accurate. The owner of the Property may have provided some of such information. Neither the Appraiser nor C&W shall be responsible for the accuracy or completeness of such information, including the correctness of estimates, opinions, dimensions, sketches, exhibits and factual matters. Any authorized user of the Report is obligated to bring to the attention of C&W any inaccuracies or errors that it believes are contained in the Report.

•

3. The opinions are only as of the date stated in the Report. Changes since that date in external and market factors or in the Property itself can significantly affect the conclusions in the Report.

•

4. The Report is to be used in whole and not in part. No part of the Report shall be used in conjunction with any other analyses. Publication of the Report or any portion thereof without the prior written consent of C&W is prohibited. Reference to the Appraisal Institute or to the MAI designation is prohibited. Except as may be otherwise stated in the letter of engagement, the Report may not be used by any person(s) other than the party(ies) to whom it is addressed or for purposes other than that for which it was prepared. No part of the Report shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, or used in any sales, promotion, offering or SEC material without C&W's prior written consent. Any authorized user(s) of this Report who provides a copy to, or permits reliance thereon by, any person or entity not authorized by C&W in writing to use or rely thereon, hereby agrees to indemnify and hold C&W, its affiliates and their respective shareholders, directors, officers and employees, harmless from and against all damages, expenses, claims and costs, including attorneys' fees, incurred in investigating and defending any claim arising from or in any way connected to the use of, or reliance upon, the Report by any such unauthorized person(s) or entity(ies).

•

5. Except as may be otherwise stated in the letter of engagement, the Appraiser shall not be required to give testimony in any court or administrative proceeding relating to the Property or the Appraisal.

•

6. The Report assumes (a) responsible ownership and competent management of the Property; (b) there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the Property, subsoil or structures that render the Property more or less valuable (no responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them); (c) full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local zoning and environmental regulations and laws, unless noncompliance is stated, defined and considered in the Report; and (d) all required licenses, certificates of occupancy and other governmental consents have been or can be obtained and renewed for any use on which the value opinion contained in the Report is based.

•

7. The physical condition of the improvements considered by the Report is based on visual inspection by the Appraiser or other person identified in the Report. C&W assumes no responsibility for the soundness of structural components or for the condition of mechanical equipment, plumbing or electrical components.

•

8. The forecasted potential gross income referred to in the Report may be based on lease summaries provided by the owner or third parties. The Report assumes no responsibility for the authenticity or completeness of lease information provided by others. C&W recommends that legal advice be obtained regarding the interpretation of lease provisions and the contractual rights of parties.

Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

VII. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions •

9. The forecasts of income and expenses are not predictions of the future. Rather, they are the Appraiser's best opinions of current market thinking on future income and expenses. The Appraiser and C&W make no warranty or representation that these forecasts will materialize. The real estate market is constantly fluctuating and changing. It is not the Appraiser's task to predict or in any way warrant the conditions of a future real estate market; the Appraiser can only reflect what the investment community, as of the date of the Report, envisages for the future in terms of rental rates, expenses, and supply and demand.

•

10. Unless otherwise stated in the Report, the existence of potentially hazardous or toxic materials that may have been used in the construction or maintenance of the improvements or may be located at or about the Property was not considered in arriving at the opinion of value. These materials (such as formaldehyde foam insulation, asbestos insulation and other potentially hazardous materials) may adversely affect the value of the Property. The Appraisers are not qualified to detect such substances. C&W recommends that an environmental expert be employed to determine the impact of these matters on the opinion of value.

•

11. Unless otherwise stated in the Report, compliance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) has not been considered in arriving at the opinion of value.

Failure to comply with the requirements of the ADA may adversely affect the value of the Property. C&W recommends that an expert in this field be employed to determine the compliance of the Property with the requirements of the ADA and the impact of these matters on the opinion of value.

•

12. If the Report is submitted to a lender or investor with the prior approval of C&W, such party should consider this Report as only one factor, together with its independent investment considerations and underwriting criteria, in its overall investment decision. Such lender or investor is specifically cautioned to understand all Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions and the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions incorporated in this Report.

•

13. In the event of a claim against C&W or its affiliates or their respective officers or employees or the Appraisers in connection with or in any way relating to this Report or this engagement, the maximum damages recoverable shall be the amount of the monies actually collected by C&W or its affiliates for this Report and under no circumstances shall any claim for consequential damages be made.

•

14. If the Report is referred to or included in any offering material or prospectus, the Report shall be deemed referred to or included for informational purposes only and C&W, its employees and the Appraiser have no liability to such recipients. C&W disclaims any and all liability to any party other than the party that retained C&W to prepare the Report.

•

15. By use of this Report each party that uses this Report agrees to be bound by all of the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, Hypothetical Conditions and Extraordinary Assumptions stated herein.

Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

Old St. Anastasia School – Market Rent & Feasibility Study

Experience

APPENDIX: EXHIBIT C - SITE SURVEY

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency

S T. A N A S TA S I A M A S T E R P L A N A N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S

131

Fort Pierce Redevelopment Agency ST. ANASTASIA MASTER PL AN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES M AY 2 0 2 6 PREPARED BY:

LAND PLANNING + L ANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

AARON WILBUR, PLA COTLEUR & HEARING CONSULTANT PROJECT MANAGER, CO-PRESIDENT AWILBUR@COTLEUR-HEARING.COM