CLEARWATER BEACH "SOUTH MANDALAY" REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN
e CLEARWATER BEACH
"SOUTH MANDALAY"
REDEVELOPMENTAllEA PLAN
~ PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION .OF OPTIONS ....
(jutf of Mexico
e
Cleal'lM:lter Harbor
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF CLEARWATER
CENTRAL PERMITTING DEPARTMENT
MAY 19, 1994
-
e
.
e
CLEARWATER BEACH "SOUTH MANDALAY"
REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN
~ PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS ~
Introduction
On April 21, 1994, the City Commission requested that staff develop several
redevelopment options for the area bounded by Marianne Street on the south,
Baymont Street on the north, the Gulf of Mexico on the west and Clearwater Harbor
on the east for Commission consideration at its meeting of May 19, 1994. For
simplicity in describing this area, staff is referring to it as the "South Mandalay
Redevelopment Area." Details about the land area and zoning of the area are provided
in Appendix A.
This short report provides a summation of three different options for the
redevelopment of this area. Following Commission direction, staff will initiate further
action on any option or any individual components of each of these options.
Universal Goals
Staff suggests that the starting point for any proposals for the South Mandalay study
area should begin with a determination of the most important goals to be
accomplished. We suggest further that there are six "universal goals" that should
guide any redevelopment options for this study area. These are:
~ Improve the pedestrian connection between the East Shore/Poinsettia
area and both Mandalay Avenue and the beach
~ Improve the pedestrian environment along all redevelopment area streets
~ Increase parking opportunities in the redevelopment area
~ Improve public access to Clearwater Harbor
~ Increase private investment in the redevelopment area
~ Create an identity for the redevelopment area in the context of the
identity of Clearwater Beach
While the public or the Commission may identify other goals that might be considered
"universal," these appear to staff to be sufficient in guiding any of a number of
redevelopment options for this area of Clearwater Beach. Specific options are
discussed below.
1
Option 1 - Small Scale Option
e The first option identified by staff is a relatively less complicated redevelopment
option. No public/private partnerships are proposed, and no major facilities, other than
possibly parking garages and a waterfront park, would be constructed on existing
private property. Accordingly, this option is referred to as the Small Scale Option.
The main components of the Small Scale Option are summarized in the following
paragraphs and table. Figure 1 illustrates the proposed improvements. .
Papaya Street Promenade
Conversion of Papaya Street into a pedestrian-only promenade or street mall along its
entire length from Clearwater Harbor to the Gulf of Mexico would improve the
pedestrian connection between the East Shore/Poinsettia area and both Mandalay
Avenue and the beach. Some public parking along Papaya would be lost following
this proposal, but property access would not be interfered with to any great degree.
This proposal would link the East Shore/Poinsettia area with the Beach, Mandalay
Avenue, Clearwater Harbor in a significant pedestrian-oriented way.
e
The Promenade could include passive recreation facilities and benches. Vendors and
sidewalk cafes could be established at intervals along the Promenade; it would also
serve as an area for art shows and street festivals. Breaks in the Promenade would
occur at East Shore Drive, Poinsettia Avenue, Mandalay Avenue and North Gulfview
Blvd. A cul-de-sac arrangement or T-shaped street end would have to be established
at the southern terminus of North Gulfview Boulevard in order to accommodate
vehicle turnarounds.
Baymont Street Walk
A second proposal to be considered in conjunction with, or separately from, the
Papaya Street Promenade would be to provide a widened sidewalk (approximately 1 5
feet wide) along the south side of Baymont Street from Clearwater Harbor to the Gulf
of Mexico. As with the Promenade proposal, few property access problems would
be created and some on-street parking eliminated. This proposal does have potential
of creating use conflicts with the multi-family development north of Baymont Street.
No Back-Out Parking/Pedestrian Streetscape
e
The Small Scale Option addresses the second universal goal, improving the pedestrian
environment, by implementing the previously-proposed "no back-out" parking proposal
along all redevelopment area streets. This is the proposal previously submitted to the
Commission by staff of eliminating back-out parking, providing streetscape
landscaping and widened sidewalks in conjunction with a comprehensive street
improvement program. Opportunities for sidewalk cafes and vendors could be
provided under this proposal. Examples of how this proposal could be implemented
are included in Appendix B of this report.
2
e
e
SMALL SCALE OPTION
e
GOAL PROPOSALS
UNIVERSAL GOALS
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BETWEEN THE EAST ~ CONVERT PAPAYA STREET INTO A PEDESTRIAN.ONLY
SHORE/POINSmIA AREA AND BOTH MANDALAY AVENUE AND THE PROMENADE OR STREET MALL
BEACH ~ PROVIDE WIDENED SIDEWALK ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF
BAYMONT STREET
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT ALONG ALL ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK.OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
INCREASE PARKING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK.OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
~ ESTABLISH NORTH AND SOUTH END PARKING GARAGES
IMPROVE PUBLIC ACCESS TO CLEARWATER HARBOR ~ CREATE A PUBLIC WATERFRONT PARK AT PAPAYA STREET
INTERCONNECTING WITH THE PROMENADE/STREET MALL
~ ESTABLISH A LINEAR BOARDWALK INTERCONNECTING ALL
WATERFRONT PROPERTIES
INCREASE PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL
GOALS
CREATE AN IDENTITY FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN THE ~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL
CONTEXT OF THE IDENTITY FOR CLEARWATER BEACH GOALS
~ CREATION OF KEY ENTRYWAY FEATURES r'GATEPOSTS") AT
SELECTED LOCATIONS
~ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TROPICAL SEASCAPE THEME
3
e
Nt ~
C)
~
\S
:r:
~
~
w ~
~
~ ~
\S
...J ~
<x: ~
8 0
z
. -... <x:
~ ~
~
()
~
~
e
~D
ra
~
CB
o
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK
MARIANNE
EXISTING I
CIVIC
CENTER
I~
e
CAUSEWAY BLVD.
_ SIDEWALK
_ PUBLIC USE
_ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
FIGURE 1
e
e
Parking Garages
To meet the third universal goal, increasing parking opportunities, staff would suggest
establishing both a north and south end parking garage in the redevelopment area.
The north end garage is regarded as the more critical as it would serve to fill the gap
between beachside public parking located in the Palm Pavilion and Pier 60/South
Beach Pavilion parking areas. The existing Pelican Walk surface parking lot provides
an ideal location for this north end parking garage. This area could be converted to
approximately triple the number of parking spaces provided by the Pelican Walk
development, and eliminate the large expanse of paved surface parking in this area,
creating a more pedestrian-friendly environment. Street level shops could be provided
in the parking garage to improve its pedestrian-related function.
The location of a parking garage on the south end of the redevelopment area could be
accomplished through either of two alternatives. First, the surface parking lot on the
north end of the Holiday Inn Surfside could be converted into a parking garage with
street level shops. This would allow an interconnection with the Papaya Street
Promenade, and eliminate a large "blank" space in the Mandalay Avenue and Papaya
Street pedestrian environment. Alternately, should the Holiday Inn Surfside not be
interested in such an arrangement, some other relatively large property would need
to be purchased, through negotiation or condemnation, in order to create a parking
structure in another place in the southern part of the redevelopment area. (See the
Civic Center site discussion on page 5 below.)
Papaya Street Waterfront Park
Concerning the fourth universal goal, improvement of public access to Clearwater
Harbor, staff suggests the creation of a waterfront park at the eastern terminus of
Papaya Street to interconnect with the street mall/promenade. There is a relatively
dilapidated property located on the north side of Papaya Street adjoining Clearwater
Harbor which contains approximately 0.67 acres. This property has an appraised
property tax value of approximately $500,000, and could be purchased to establish
a public waterfront park.
Harbor Walk
Alternately, or in conjunction with the proposed Papaya Street park, would be a linear
boardwalk interconnecting all waterfront properties in this area. This proposal may
prove attractive to waterfront property owners, excepting residential property owners
and those having small scale marina operations. These property owners may find
themselves having concerns about safety due to the added accessibility to their
properties. Given the existing development pattern, the boardwalk would likely have
to be constructed over Clearwater Harbor, creating some permitting difficulties. Also,
the boardwalk could be extended north of the redevelopment area, linking it with the
Recreation Center, its associated parking, and the ferry stop.
Redevelopment Area Identification
While the improvements recommended above will serve to create an identity of sorts
for the redevelopment area, a more active approach is recommended. First, the City
should install "gateposts" at key spots along the street frontages bordering and within
e the redevelopment area (e.g., shaded benches, pillars, light pole banners, or other
5
e
distinctive architectural devices) to identify the area's key features and entrys.
Second, a coherent street-side landscaping theme should be established and
implemented along all redevelopment area streets. Third, the tropical seascape theme
design theme should be implemented across Clearwater Beach, with incentives for
compliance focused on the redevelopment area.
On-Site/Off-Site Option
Staff proposes a second option for Commission consideration. This option, referred
to in this report as the On-Site/Off-Site Option, consists generally of the Small Scale
Option proposals, with the added goal of moving Dublic functions into the
redevelopment area. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate two versions of this option.
Public Function Relocation
As the following table indicates, an added option goal for the On-Site/Off-Site Option,
includes the following possible proposals:
~ Relocate the Civic Center to the redevelopment area.
~ Relocate the Recreation Center to the redevelopment area.
~ Locate a Conference Center in the redevelopment area.
e
Each of these proposals would involve the purchase of existing private property in
order to locate public functions in the redevelopment area. Any or all of these
proposals would serve to reinforce the importance of the redevelopment area to the
overall Clearwater Beach community. Any or all of the proposals could be linked with
any of the universal goal proposals. In particular, the Papaya Street Promenade and
waterfront park could serve as an excellent opportunity to capitalize on the
interrelationships between the various goal proposals.
Finally, there is no reason why these public functions cannot be combined. The Civic
Center and Conference Center functions have a natural overlap since both involve
meeting facilities; this particular combination might result in a maximum utilization of
the meeting facilities. Shared parking would provide advantages to any of the
possible uses, also maximizing the use of land.
Civic Center Site
Should the Civic Center be relocated to the redevelopment area, the existing Civic
Center site could serve as a possible parking garage location, or, in the alternative,
eliminating all existing land uses on this area and creating a passive "landing zone" for
people coming onto the beach. This latter proposal would reduce congestion in the
beach's entryway and provide an opportunity for visitors and residents alike to "catch
their breath" as they enter the beach area.
e
Should the parking garage proposal be accepted for the Civic Center site, some
effective means of crossing Marianne Street and Causeway Boulevard would need to
be established. Either elevated walkways or an improved pedestrian-activated
signalized crosswalk could be used to address this situation. Ground level shops and
restaurants should be established in the parking garage, if this option is chosen, in
6
e
Nt ~
C)
-t:
cs
:r:
~
~
ui cs
~ ~
~ cs
....J ~
<( ~
8 0
z
'- <(
~ ~
~
~
~
~
e
MARIANNE
e
_ SIDEWALK
~D .
o
~ CAUSEWAY BLVD.
~
9J
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK _ PUBLIC USE _ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
FIGURE 2
e
Nt ~
C)
~
~
:r:
~
~
u..i ~
~ ~
~ ~
-' ~
<( ~
8 0
z
<(
'8 ~
~
6'
':!:::-
~
e
o
e
CAUSEWAY BLVD,
_ SIDEWALK
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK _ PUBLIC USE _ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
FIGURE 3
e
e
ON-SITE/OFF-SITE OPTION
e
GOAL PROPOSALS
UNIVERSAL GOALS
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BETWEEN THE EAST ~ CONVERT PAPAYA STREET INTO A PEDESTRIAN-ONLY
SHORE/POINSmIA AREA AND BOTH MANDALAY AVENUE AND THE PROMENADE OR STREET MALL
BEACH ~ PROVIDE WIDENED SIDEWALK ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF
BAYMONT STREET
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT ALONG ALL ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK.OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
INCREASE PARKING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK-OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
~ ESTABLISH NORTH END PARKING GARAGE WITH EITHER A
SOUTH END OR "CIVIC CENTER" SITE PARKING GARAGE
IMPROVE PUBLIC ACCESS TO CLEARWATER HARBOR ~ CREATE A PUBLIC WATERFRONT PARK AT PAPAYA STREET
INTERCONNECTING WITH THE PROMENADE/STREET MALL
~ ESTABLISH A LINEAR BOARDWALK INTERCONNECTING ALL
WATERFRONT PROPERTIES
INCREASE PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL
GOALS AND THE OPTION GOAL BELOW
~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL
GOALS AND THE OPTION GOAL BELOW
~ CREATION OF KEY ENTRYWAY FEATURES f'GATEPOSTS") AT
SELECTED LOCATIONS
~ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TROPICAL SEASCAPE THEME
OPTION GOAL
MOVE PUBLIC FUNCTIONS INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ RELOCATE CIVIC CENTER TO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
~ RELOCATE RECREATION CENTER TO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
~ LOCATE CONFERENCE CENTER IN REDEVELOPMENT AREA
9
order to improve pedestrian interest. The shops and restaurants would also provide
public revenue to fund the construction of the garage and other public improvements.
e
Large Scale Option
The Large Scale Option includes the proposals from both the Small Scale and On-
Site/Off-Site options. The Large Scale Option offers one additional option goal:
~ Consolidation of properties in the East Shore/Poinsettia area into a single
development proposal centered around a Conference Center and a major
hotel facility or facilities, or, alternately, centered around a mixed use
residential/commercial project.
This option, as envisioned by staff, would either centralize the Conference Center in
the redevelopment area and orient one or more major hotel facilities to the Conference
Center area, or establish a mixed use residential/commercial project similar to Hyde
Park in Tampa. Figures 4 through 7 illustrate versions of this option.
Staff points out that versions of this option would allow the vacation of parts of East
Shore Drive, Poinsettia Drive, and Baymont Street, minimizing the amount of area
taken up by public infrastructure in the redevelopment area. Approximately 400
hotel/motel units or 100 + residential units with a substantial amount of commercial
floor area could be constructed on either of these consolidated areas.
e
If the Commission decides to pursue a hotel development, existing density regulations
allow a density that roughly corresponds to ten Sea Stone Resorts, three Clearwater
Beach Hotels, or one Holiday Inn Surfside. Hotel development of this scale could
accommodate any parking required for the Conference Center at the hotel site(s).
A mixed use commercial and residential project, similar to Hyde Park, would also be
a possibility for the redevelopment area. The Conference Center would likely not be
a part of a mixed use project due to land area constraints, unless it was held to a
smaller scale. However, such a project could be designed to mesh well with the
universal goals identified early in the report, some public functions could be located
into the redevelopment area, and land use conflicts could be minimized through careful
design. Having residential development in close proximity to the major commercial
features of the redevelopment area, including Mandalay Avenue, would help insure the
success of the commercial facilities.
There are other possibilities for major redevelopment projects in this part of the
redevelopment area. The waterfront location lends itself to a variety of commercial
and residential development possibilities. Staff did not pursue these possibilities in
this report for a variety of reasons. First, we did not consider purely residential
development in this area due to the limited amount of commercially-zoned land on
Clearwater Beach and the potential for land use conflicts inherent in providing a purely
residential project in such close proximity to "downtown" Clearwater Beach. As
noted above, the Harbor Walk proposal may also conflict with a pure residential use
in this area.
e
10
e
N! ~
a
-t:
c:s
:t:
~
w .2
c:s
~ S
~ ~
c:s
-l <\J
<( ~
8 0
z
<(
'S ~
~
C5'
~
~
e
MARIANNE
~D EXISTING I I L:>
CIVIC
CENTER
ca CAUSEWAY BLVD.
e ~
fb
0
_ SIDEWALK
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK _ PUBLIC USE _ HOTEU {_ MULTI-FAMILY
FIGURE 4
e
Nt ::...
C)
~
c:s
::r:
::...
u.i ~
~ ~
>-
<( c:s
...J <.\J
<( 0
() 0
z
.~ <(
~ ~
~
6-
~
~
e
~D
~
~
~
o
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK
MARIANNE
EXISTING 1
CIVIC
CENTER
IL>
.
CAUSEWAY BLVD.
_ SIDEWALK
_ PUBLIC USE
_ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
FIGURE 5
e
Nt ~
C)
~
\:S
::r::
~
.8
u..i \:S
~ ~
~ \:S
-l \v
<( ~
8 0
z
.~ <(
~
~
()
~
~
e
~D
ca
~
~.
<6
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK
MARIANNE
EXISTING 1
CIVIC
CENTER
It:>
e
CAUSEWAY BLVD.
_ SIDEWALK
_ PUBLIC USE
FIGURE 6
_ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
e
Nt ~
C)
~
~
::c:
~
~
UJ ~
~ ~
>- ~
<l: ~
...J \V
<l: 0J
8 0
Z
<l:
.~ ~
~
~
~
~
e
:~. :..~ .~-'~;Ji~~; ~ .
~.'A '.l!l".",.. '"".
iii!l:il' . :-.,.~'f .
~.~. i} '.
'0&-;-1 .
e
~D
~
~
f6
I.)
_ LANDSCAPE/PARK
MARIANNE
EXISTING I
CIVIC
CENTER
It>
CAUSEWAY BLVD.
_ SIDEWALK
_ PUBLIC USE
FIGURE 7
_ RETAIL _ MULTI-FAMILY
.
e
LARGE SCALE OPTION
e
GOAL PROPOSALS
UNIVERSAL GOALS
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BETWEEN THE EAST ~ CONVERT PAPAYA STREET INTO A PEDESTRIAN-ONLY PROMENADE
SHOREIPOINSETTlA AREA AND BOTH MANDALAY AVENUE AND THE OR STREET MALL
BEACH ~ PROVIDE WIDENED SIDEWALK ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF
BAYMONT STREET
IMPROVE THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT ALONG ALL REDEVELOPMENT ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK-OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
AREA STREETS REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
INCREASE PARKING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ IMPLEMENT NO BACK.OUT PARKING PROPOSAL ALONG ALL
REDEVELOPMENT AREA STREETS
~ ESTABLISH NORTH END PARKING GARAGE WITH EITHER A SOUTH
END OR "CIVIC CENTER" SITE PARKING GARAGE
IMPROVE PUBLIC ACCESS TO CLEARWATER HARBOR ~ CREATE A PUBLIC WATERFRONT PARK AT PAPAYA STREET
INTERCONNECTING WITH THE PROMENADElSTREET MALL
~ ESTABLISH A LINEAR BOARDWALK INTERCONNECTING ALL
WATERFRONT PROPERTIES
INCREASE PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL GOALS
AND THE OPTION GOALS BELOW
~ ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH MEETING THE ABOVE UNIVERSAL GOALS
~ CREATION OF KEY ENTRYWAY FEATURES r'GATEPOSTS") AT
SELECTED LOCATIONS
~ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TROPICAL SEASCAPE THEME
OPTION GOALS
MOVE PUBLIC FUNCTIONS INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA ~ RELOCATE CIVIC CENTER TO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
~ RELOCATE RECREATION CENTER TO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
~ LOCATE CONFERENCE CENTER IN REDEVELOPMENT AREA
CONSOLIDATE EAST SHORElPOINSETTIA PROPERTIES INTO A MAJOR ~ SEEK OUT ONE OR MORE MAJOR HOTEL OPERATIONS FOR JOINT
PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT VENTURE, WITH CONFERENCE CENTER PARKING PROVIDED BY
HOTELS
~ SEEK OUT A MAJOR MIXED USE DEVELOPER FOR JOINT VENTURE
15
e
e
e
A large scale commercial project, perhaps including amusement functions, could be
developed in this area. However, there are non-waterfront locations available for
purely commercial projects, and the likely scale of a purely commercial development
might shift the commercial focus in the redevelopment area from Mandalay Avenue
to the waterfront. Location of public functions, except possibly the Conference
Center, into the redevelopment area would likely not occur as part of a large
commercial project.
Staff can provide the Commission with more information on any of these alternatives
if desired.
Evaluation of the Options
The following table provides a summary comparison of how the "universal" and option
goal proposals could be funded under each of the three options proposed in this
report. Funding sources are listed in order of most probable funding source. As noted
in the discussion below, staff feels that the Large Scale Option represents a preferred
approach in accomplishing the stated goals.
Of the three redevelopment options, the Large Scale Option appears to allow the
"universal" and option goals to be met with the least amount of land use conflict and
General Fund expense, although considerable Dublic expense, through a
redevelopment agency, could result. As proposed by staff, this option would not be
pursued unless a public/private partnership and redevelopment agency (CRA) could be
established. This partnership could be a three-way arrangement between the City, the
developer (or developers), and the property owners, with the property owners being
offered "shares" in the development based upon a pro rata estimate of relative
participation. Alternately, it could be a two-way arrangement, with the City and the
developer(s) utilizing the City's redevelopment authority to acquire property and the
developer's capital to partially or fully finance the property acquisition and
development. (This latter scenario appears more likely, given existing property
ownership patterns and the number of owners in the area.) The developer could be
responsible for the development costs of the streetscape improvements, the Harbor
Walk and the Waterfront Park, and could also be required to participate in the costs
of relocating the Civic Center or Recreation Center to this area. As mentioned above,
in the event that the hotel alternative is chosen, the parking for the Conference Center
should be provided by the hotel developer.
Regardless of the option selected, if a Conference Center is developed in this area, it
should be with either substantial (if not full) funding from, preferably, the Tourist
Development Council (TDC) or, alternately, the hotel developer. Conference centers
are regional attractions that result in regional economic benefits. Consequently, the
City of Clearwater should not be required to capitalize the Center by itself. TDC
funding of the Center would result in a greater likelihood of success for the Large
Scale Option since it would allow the developer to more fully participate in the other
desired on and off site improvements and would minimize developer risk associated
with the Conference Center. Further, it would provide greater public control over the
scheduling of events and functions within the Center since no specific hotel or
development entity would control the Center.
16
e
e
e
The Commission should be advised that further study of and action pursuant to the
desired option or proposals may be necessary to insure compatibility with City
concurrency regulations and regional hurricane evacuation goals. Depending on
Commission direction, a formal redevelopment area may need to be established to
allow prompt City action to consolidate properties.
Further, the Commission should also be advised that a number of the proposals
discussed above may require code amendments. For example, the existing height
regulations in the Beach Commercial zoning district may require some modification in
order to accommodate a major commercial or hotel development project. Floor area
ratio requirements may also need modification in order to accommodate major
commercial development.
At this time, staff does feel that these procedural and regulatory "obstacles" to any
of the above options or proposals can be overcome with specific action and further
study. We are ready to formalize our approach to achieving the goals of this study
by aggressively pursuing any option or proposed improvement the Commission
desires.
17
e
e
e
PROBABLE FUNDING SOURCES . OPTION PROPOSALS
PROPOSAL SMAll SCALE omON ON-SITE/OFf.S1TE omON LARGE SCALE 0P110N
PAPAYA STREET PROMENADE CITY.FUNDED CITY.FUNDED CITY .FUNDED; DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
BAYMONT STREET WALK CITY.FUNDED CITY .FUNDED CITY .FUNDED; DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
NO BACK.OUT PARKING CITY.FUNDED CITY.FUNDED CITY .FUNDED; DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
PARKING GARAGES CITY .FUNDED; POSSIBLE LAND CITY.FUNDED; POSSIBLE LAND CITY.FUNDED; POSSIBLE LAND
DEDICATION FROM PRIVATE DEDICATION FROM PRIVATE DEDICATION FROM PRIVATE
SOURCE(S) SOURCE(S) SOURCE(S); DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
PAPAYA STREET WATERFRONT CITY.FUNDED CITY.FUNDED DEVELOPER.FUNDED; CITY
PARK CONTRIBUTION
HARBOR WALK CITY.FUNDED CITY .FUNDED DEVELOPER.FUNDED; CITY
CONTRIBUTION
CIVIC CENTER SITE NIA CITY.FUNDED CITY.FUNDED; DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
CONFERENCE CENTER NIA TDC.FUNDED; CITY.FUNDED TDC.FUNDED; DEVELOPER.
FUNDED; CITY .FUNDED
CIVIC CENTER RELOCATION NIA CITY.FUNDED CITY .FUNDED; DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION
RECREATION CENTER NIA CITY .FUNDED CITY.FUNDED; DEVELOPER
RELOCATION CONTRIBUTION
CBSIIULSS
18
e
e
e
APPENDIX A
GENERAL INFORMATION -
REDEVELOPMENT AREA
LAND AREA IN REDEVELOPMENT AREA BY ZONING DISTRICT
(INCLUDING STREETS)
ZONING DISTRICT LAND AREA
BEACH COMMERCIAL (CB) 22.29 ACRES
RESORT COMMERCIAL 28 (CR-28) 12.22 ACRES
TOTAL 34.51 ACRES
ZONING REQUIREMENTS IN REDEVELOPMENT AREA BY ZONING DISTRICT
REQUIREMENT BEACH COMMERCIAL RESORT COMMERCIAL 28
RESIDENTIAL 26 UNITS/ACRE MAX. 26 UNITS/ACRE MAX.
DENSITY
HOTEL/MOTEL 40 UNITS/ACRE MAX. 40 UNITS/ACRE MAX.
DENSITY
FLOOR AREA RATIO 1.2 MAX. 1.05 MAX.
BUILDING COVERAGE 75% MAX. 45% MAX.
SETBACKS
~ STREET ~ NONE ~ 20 FEET MIN. *
~ SIDE ~ NONE ~12FEETMIN.*
~ REAR ~ NONE ~15FEETMIN.*
* INCREASES PROPORTIONATELY IF
STRUCTURE EXCEEDS 20 FEET IN HEIGHT
OPEN SPACE
~ FRONT YARD ~ NONE ~ 50%
~ SITE ~ 5% MIN. ~ 25%
HEIGHT 35 FEET MAX. 80 FEET MAX.
19
APPENDIX B
e STREET REORIENTATION OPTIONS -
"NO BACK-OUT PARKING" PROPOSAL
e
e
The City's Traffic Engineering Group prepared the following graphics that depict the
existing back-out parking arrangement typical to most streets in the commercial areas
of Clearwater 8each (Figure 8-1), along with a variety of proposals to "retrofit"
existing street layouts to eliminate back-out parking and improve pedestrian access
(Figures 8-2 through 8-6). Note the lack of sidewalks and extremely poor pedestrian
environment that currently exists.
Any of the retrofit options might be considered under this redevelopment plan, getting
the particular parking and access needs of a specific situation. The options are
provided for information only, but special attention should be paid to the landscape,
pedestrian access and parking improvements shown in Figure 8-2. Figure 8-6 should
only be considered in areas where maximizing parking is the primary concern.
The following table illustrates the trade-offs involved in moving from the existing
parking arrangement to each of the possible options.
RGUIE DESCRlPTIOI lUMBER OF SIDEWAlX PAVED
lUMBER SPACES- WIDTH AREA
WlDTH--
B.1 EXISTING BACK.OUT PARKING 18-28." NONE 60 FT.
WITH 2-WAY TRAVEL
B.2 45 DEGREE PARKING ON ONE 9 7.5 FT. 35 FT.
SIDE WITH ONE.WAY TRAVEL
AND 5 FT. WIDE PLANTER AREAS
ON EACH SIDE
B.3 90 DEGREE PARKING ON ONE 14 8 FT. 44 FT.
SIDE WITH 2.WAY TRAVEL
8-4 45 DEGREE PARKING ON ONE 14 12 FT. 36 FT.
SIDE WITH ONE.WAY TRAVEL
B-5 PARALLEL PARKING ON BOTH 10 8 FT. 44 FT.
SIDES WITH 2-WAY TRAVEL
B-6 45 DEGREE PARKING ON BOTH 18 NONE 60 FT.
SIDES WITH ONE.WAY TRAVEL
· OVER A 130 FT. STREET CROSS-SECTION.
.. STREET AND PARKING AREA WIDTH ONLY; EXCLUDES SIDEWALKS AND LANDSCAPED AREAS.
... DEPENDING ON ORIENTATION OF SPACES.
20
ilGURE B-1
e
.
~,...,L-\?~~~~-
'- '-.. '-.., '"
e
"
,
,
'. I
,
" I
~
,
,
I
1
,- J
I I
---'~
"'\<'.c::.~ L, \Vr_"''_
- .~~
~---------
j-
~
--=-'~~'- -G:::,o' ~~,-t+\ - 9' vJJ..'(
~'K.\ "':>\1 N.~ ~ ~\~ '>;;:-\ '\ I. <::::>~ '>-
VA...~: ,C:=>I.J..",,?- -Y~R..'< \~.G':.
~~~a:::.JJ,-~-..~~ -\.....\e,.
~........~L.. \" ~ Z-e>'
-==::3., do E:-W ~ L '\
~~
_FIGURE B-2
"
"
e
~u.' L 't:7.'. ~.c:::::':",_,>"
./ ' .
-, / Z. 7,d.>:~ A u.<..'
e
~
- /
~?-
f
~u
I
~
ig
~
I
'~
I
'~
'~ ",,:./ --r}f' 5:<.\~"-\-'"
~
I
~
I
.
,---,
I :
'K' 1'?'~L~_~;s:.
~Yr-"i.:::::t:-L- - '::::Se:> ~e~\~..
't):.:. <::00' ~-==\~- ~- vjt:...~
Y -?Lt... N \E-\<- b... i2- c-~?", ~
~,dE-'v...\~L~"':7- -~......,-: ~6L-;~
..-=7-c:. h.1.-e. \ ./::: c:.e:>'
~.,.,...
-
~IGURE 8.]
.
~....... , Lt>, -......-,-:;=-
e
.........
........
'I
~
..........,
"'-
~
',-
'",-
'-,
"
""-
~
"
"-
'-,
"
'-
""-
,
~
~
,
'-,
.......... , ..........',
"'-
/"
e.' '"'"";7. d.~....)~~
e
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
~...
I
!
, i
z>~
,
.c;>
_~ ~ .e:..~
~e.,M'=-H"'--
~~ '--' ~ r.=.... ____
~~
~~~)
e=,. ?-.Ot:-'::-....\h'r-~
~
.....,-~c:: I>-\..- - ~/ 'l?4't-4-r- <='t - J:...\
-c-vJ~,\ ~-..JA.'f WI~H
~o ~R"K:J~iC, - \ ~\.dt::-
~J".,.L-L \" -::. z..o'
,.-.~,..I<
-
ilGURE 8.4
e
~~~L~.~~~
Z' -4.-6~-"-'t-\--~
e
f
I
Ill? ~
"
I
I
/1
, 1
/'
/
/'
\ -Z/ -7,.d.'W-~\...~
_~~_c~Ack .~__4_r;.~__~R.-'<' ~
~\~_ u (.,..0' K. ~ I,-\; ~ ~'F - v-.J .b... '\
_ ~,4-\4. ~...~e::-'~lt...'-\<'o;;;. ~\t\
,
.,?-"d.~ .
---:::?.::J:...'- e-. " "::, z,c. ,
~
tflGURE 8.5 -........
.......
'I
"'-.
"'-.1
"-
.......
.......
,
"-
, "-
",
,
"
.......
"-
"
-........
"
.......
.......
"-
"
"'-.
-........
,
.
!5-'....... L'C>. ~~~~
e
"
-........ ....... "'-.'
_B'
e
:
i
I
-~'~
~
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
i
I
I
14-'
14-'
. 15" ~d.-r=:J ~L~
//
";--.
I
I
R"; c>. '^'. L:".a~~_ -, .
"-
\
/
~//
~p-; ...c.~ - GO' R\~H;'.~- \lJL..,
_ ..?- LA..~e:.-- ~~\ 'y--./'+-h-
. ~R e....L \... ~l- ~ i?:"-'<I~6...
.-7'::"u. t.-. \ ., <. -z.o ' --;~~ ~
jlGURE 8.6
,
!'7'L....' L~. ~~"'\'?-
e
-......... ,
e
-.........
,
'I
---.....
-.........1
, "
,
-zo'
"
'-,-
',-
'"
.,
,
'"
'"
'"
'"
2d
/
I
I
/
V
_~~NE:..~______
.------.
rr-
-r~~- &0/ ~~\4""'-~- ~b.,
_ \-~b..,,\ R'~'dwt:::..\ '^'\.-+~
~ S ~ ?'is.f<: I.-G 'o,-.L~
~- -=;>', ~- "ojt.-LK-
~t:..,-~ ,"= 'Lot
~-'~