10/03/2005
eRA Agenda
Date: 10/03/2005
Location: Council Chambers - City Hall
Call to Order
Approval of Minutes:
09-12-2005
CRA Item
1. Presentation of Initial Recommendations of the Downtown Clearwater Market Study by
Lambert Advisory, LLC
Executive Director (Assistant City Manager) verbal reports
Other Business
Adjourn
eRA Agenda 10/3/2005
Page 1 of 1
f
:~.
CRA Cover Memorandum
Trackinq Number: 1,523
Actual Date: 10/03/2005
Subiect / Recommendation:
Presentation of Initial Recommendations of the Downtown Clearwater Market Study by Lambert
Advisory, LLC
Summary:
As a joint effort between the CRA and the Downtown Development Board (DDB), a Downtown
Market Study was identified as a critical first part in a multi-part analysis of downtown to guide
future redevelopment/recruitment efforts. With funds from the DDB, the CRA selected Lambert
Advisory to conduct the study on April 18, 2005.
The goals for the study are:
1. Identify Downtown Clearwater's existing economic base.
2. Identify the market potential for future redevelopment within Downtown Clearwater.
3. Identify opportunities for projects that would draw visitors and users from throughout the
Tampa Bay region to Downtown Clearwater.
4. Identify potential residential supporting uses for downtown.
5. Identify recommendations and next steps based upon the baseline data collected.
The study will also address:
1. Short and long-term economic climate.
2. Demographic and Economic trends.
3. Development patterns.
4. Existing retail and office space supply and trends.
5. Economic development strengths and weaknesses.
6. Existing and potential trade area including drive times.
7. Spending patterns.
8. Markets for special events and promotions in Downtown.
9. Over-all market opportunities.
During the past 60 days, Lambert Advisory has met with staff to clarify the study, interviewed
key downtown business and civic leaders, and completed their data collection and analysis.
Based upon their analysis, they have concluded:
1. Market and economic trends indicate that downtown retail and office could be performing
better than is actually the case.
2. Given land prices and market trends, downtown will primarily be a for-sale as opposed to
for-rent luxury housing market for the foreseeable future. The first few developments are now
in the planning/development stage serving as a bellwether of how deep the market is for
downtown luxury condos.
3. Significant opportunity to attract restaurants/retailers downtown with the
f
:~.
CRA Cover Memorandum
right mixed-use space, improved self/valet parking, improved street scene and the potential to
support the anchor restaurant users.
4. Consistently strong competition from Safety Harbor and Dunedin requires downtown
Clearwater to differentiate itself from the downtown "quaint" village feel.
5. First wave of new retail investment will need to be strong local and regional stores,
restaurants, and entertainment venues willing to take a risk in downtown. National retailers will
be part of the next evolution.
6. Focus on downtown corporate retention and attraction leverages off of relatively strong
county and region wide office employment trends.
7. City can better market its infrastructure capacity and high regulatory development capacity to
i nvesto rs.
Following the CRA presentation, Lambert will present their findings to the DDB on September 5,
2005. The initial draft will be completed by the end of August. The final report should be
concluded by the end of September. Once the final report is received, the Economic
Development and Housing Department in conjunction with the CRA and DDB will review and
implement next steps.
Oriqinatinq: Economic Development and Housing
Cateqorv: Other
Public Hearinq: No
Financial Information:
~ Other
Bid Required? No
Bid Exceptions:
Other
Other Contract?
Presentation and Update--no cost
Review Approval
Geraldine Camoos
08-08-2005
17:00:08
Garrv Brumback
08-22-2005
11:43:54
Geraldine Camoos
08-08-2005
17:00:46
Bill Horne
09-01-2005
11 : 11 : 04
Cyndie Goudeau
09-01-2005
15:46: 58
Executive Summary
Lambert Advisory has completed a Market Study for the City of Clearwater, with the
following stated goals:
1. Identify Downtown Clearwater's existing economic base;
2. Identify the market potential for future redevelopment within Downtown
Clearwater;
3. Further, identify development projects that could become catalysts for further
development in Downtown Clearwater; and
4. Make recommendations and delineate next steps based on the baseline data
collected.
The report that follows this executive summary corresponds to the goals above.
Demographic and Economic Profile and Real Estate Market Analysis identify and
characterize Downtown Clearwater's existing economic base. Market Potentials assesses
the current and future demand for key real estate uses, including retail, office, and
hotel. Site Analysis links sites with opportunity programs to further revitalize Downtown
and to attract a broad range of users. Other Recommendations highlights key initiatives
that the City can undertake in the near-term to best position Downtown for further
investment.
Demographic and Economic Profile
. Based on Pinellas County projections and current development trends in Downtown
Clearwater over the next five years, the rate of population growth Downtown is
expected to far outpace the growth rates of both the City and County, with
Downtown growing by nearly 4 percent annually, adding nearly 1,400 new residents.
This addition of over 600 new households has a number of positive implications for
Downtown, including enhanced demand for new retail. In fact, Downtown growth
will represent nearly ten percent of the County's growth.
. The 2000 median household income in Downtown was just over $25,500. This
represents approximately 70 percent of both the City ($36,500) and County
($37,000) medians. Since planned and marketed Downtown units are priced at
points that are generally affordable to households with annual incomes of at least
$100,000, we expect to see household incomes rise significantly as these units come
on-line.
. Pinellas County is projected to gain nearly 80,000 new jobs over the next five years,
a steady annual growth rate of four percent. Over that period, the Information
sector will see the highest growth rate. In terms of sheer numbers, Professional
Business Services (33,000 new jobs) and Education and Health Services (11,500 new
jobs) rank highest. All of these are major office employment categories and will
drive additional demand for office space in the market.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
1
. Lambert estimates current Downtown employment at 8,200. This figure includes
employment in all industry classifications, including office, retail, and industrial
employment.
Real Estate Market Analysis
Residential
. The average price of a new single family home is significantly higher in Pinellas
($364,000), than in Pasco ($224,000) or Hillsborough ($246,000) counties. The
average closing price of new town homes and condominiums is also highest in
Pinellas County at $257,000, compared to $170,000 in Hillsborough and $143,000 in
Pasco.
. The average price of an existing single family home in Clearwater increased by over
24 percent (to $233,000) between the second quarter of 2004 and the second
quarter of 2005. For the zip codes that include and surround Downtown Clearwater
the growth has exceeded 26 percent over the same period.
. As of August 2005, six significant residential projects are planned for Downtown
Clearwater, for a total of over a thousand new units. Average pricing for two
bedroom units in Downtown projects already in marketing ranges from $360,000 to
$480,000.
. The Clearwater rental apartment market has an occupancy level of more than 97
percent for all projects, and more than 98 percent for Class B+ projects or better.
The average rent was $764 ($O.79jSF) for an average size unit of 972 square feet.
. While demand for rental product will likely remain strong, the number of new units
delivered to the market in the foreseeable future will be limited due to lack of
appropriately zoned and priced land. This, in combination with high numbers of
condo conversions, will continue to limit rental supply and put upward pressure on
rents.
Retail
. Rents for retail space in Clearwater generally range from $12 to $25 per square foot
(average $13), with add-ons or pass-throughs (common area maintenance, taxes,
and insurance) that range from $2 to $7. Including anchor store space, the market
is roughly 94 percent occupied. In the Downtown core (Cleveland Street), current
asking rents are between $10 and $15 per square feet. Estimated occupancy is less
than 70 percent.
. Market-wide rents and occupancy, as well as the retail demand estimates in Section
4 of this report, indicate that the Downtown core retail market's underperformance
appears to be more related to a lack of quality, modern, and well positioned retail
space and associated close-in amenities (e.g., parking) than it is to either
unfavorable commercial real estate market conditions or lack of demand. Indeed,
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
2
demand for retail will only strengthen as new residential units come online, but the
orientation and mix of current space will have difficulty accommodating this demand.
Office
. The Clearwater office market comprises 5.4 million square feet of office space, 1.2
million of which is in Downtown. The Downtown space is 89 percent occupied.
Class A space commands rents in the range of $16 to $19 per square foot; Class B,
$10 to $17 per square foot; Class C, $8 to $13 per square foot. These rents
represent an average increase of approximately 5 percent over 2003 rates.
Hotel
. The greater Clearwater hotel market comprises nearly 7,000 rooms in a total
of 94 properties.
. Based on a review of secondary sources of information including Smith Travel
Research, occupancy rates in the Beach market dropped from 79 and 80
percent in 1999 and 2000, respectively, to as low as 67 percent in 2002.
Rates in 2003 and 2004 showed some recovery, with occupancy rising closer
to 70 percent. The average daily rate fluctuated between $102 and $118
over the 1999-2004 period.
. Occupancy rates for the non-Beach properties have been consistently lower
than that of beach properties - by as much as 15 percentage points in 2001,
and by 13 percentage points prior to 2001 and since, in 2003. That gap
narrowed in 2004, with the non-Beach properties' average occupancy at 65
percent. The average daily rate fluctuated between $64 and $69 over the
1999-2004 period.
Market Potential
Retail
. Utilizing a variety of data sources, Lambert has built a series of models that
estimates current and future expenditure potential by three principal groups
(residents, visitors, and office employees) and translates this expenditure into
square feet of retail space. We have estimated demand for the current year,
and projected it for 2010. Demand for retail space, by category, is estimated
as follows, with the significant growth in retail demand between 2005 and
2010 being driven by new residential units coming on line and assumed
further investment in the Downtown retail infrastructure that will help attract
a strong mix of retailers and, in turn, more patrons.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
3
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
Total, Supportable SF
61,190
71,898
16,848
149,936
163,172
121,500
47,914
332,586
Office
. Based on employment and office development trends for both the City and
County, Lambert has estimated net new office space demand for Downtown
over the next five years at between 125,000 and 200,000 square feet.
Hotel
. Given visitation trends, Downtown should be able to support a mid-size (125-
175 rooms), limited service (branded) product that is strategically located.
Such a Downtown hotel would be priced above the hotels along US-19 and
US-60 and below Beach product, and will principally serve business and
institutional visitors.
Specific Site Development Recommendations
. The site analysis considers the sites the City/CRA identified as prime
redevelopment parcels as well as additional parcels that Lambert has
identified as having strategic importance to redevelopment efforts. We
focused on the Downtown core, in order to capitalize on the critical mass that
has been established by large-scale planned and under-construction
developments in the core. We recommend:
o A mixed-use condominium or office development on the 400 Block of
Cleveland Street (south side).
o The development of a quality limited service hotel with 125 to 150 rooms
on the Harborview Convention Center parcel. Planning for such a project
should also incorporate a meeting/convention component (within the
hotel), reconfigured space for the Steinmart department store, and
adequate parking for all of these uses and the library.
o A targeted fa<;ade improvements program for the west side of the unit
block of North Fort Harrison Avenue (20-42 N. Fort Harrison and 432
Cleveland).
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
4
Other Recommendations
. Lambert believes that the City of Clearwater could best help position
Downtown for further investment by focusing its efforts on the following
additional, specific initiatives. Specific components to and recommendations
for these initiatives appear in Section 5.
o Creatinq and implementinq a tarqeted parkinq strateqy - One of the key
factors that drive both Downtown retailers and office users to locate
Downtown is adequate, proximate parking. For many of the principal
office and retail nodes in Downtown, our interview with stakeholders
indicates that a prime limitation to attracting tenants has been a lack of
adjacent affordable parking. Given the relative high cost of developing
parking, the City and DDS will likely need to playa role in filling this
need. The strategy in the early stages should also explore how the DDS
and City can utilize a variety of parking strategies to attract specific
restaurant and entertainment establishments Downtown.
o Oraanizina and undertakina a retailer attraction proaram - We have
identified gaps in retail supply and demand. The next steps are to
identify specific merchandise categories in which there are gaps in
supply; identify specific retailers to target; establish working strategies;
and work with Downtown property owners to identify and position
through investment appropriate space for those retailers. While the City
and DDS may need to participate in direct space investment and
improvements, our experience is that the directed attraction of specific
restaurants and retailers is best left in the hands of groups principally
made up of building owners, brokers, and other merchants.
The report that follows further defines and details the above recommendations and
findings.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
5
Section 1: Introduction
Lambert Advisory has completed a Market Study for the City of Clearwater, to achieve
the following goals:
1. Identify Downtown Clearwater's existing economic base;
2. Identify the market potential for future redevelopment within Downtown
Clearwater;
3. Further, identify development projects that could become catalysts for further
development in Downtown Clearwater; and
4. Make recommendations and delineate next steps based on the baseline data
collected.
The organization of this draft report corresponds to the goals above. Section 2
(Demographic and Economic Profile) and Section 3 (Real Estate Market Analysis) identify
and characterize Downtown Clearwater's existing economic base. Section 4 (Market
Potentials) assesses the current and future demand for key real estate uses, including
retail, office, and hotel. Section 5A (Site Analysis) links sites with opportunity programs
to further revitalize Downtown and to attract a broad range of users. Section 58 (Other
Recommendations) highlights key initiatives that the City can undertake in the near-term
to best help position Downtown for further investment.
Each component of this analysis considers broader regional trends, inherent market
strengths and weakness of Downtown, and competitive implications for commercial real
estate activity in and around Clearwater.
Section 2: Demographic & Economic Profile
2A - Introduction
As the basis for evaluating market potentials and opportunities for investment in
Downtown Clearwater, Lambert Advisory (Lambert) examined population, household,
and economic trends and forecasts for several geographic areas - Pinellas County, City
of Clearwater, and Downtown. This profile focuses on those variables that "drive"
demand for housing, retail, and office uses (estimates of which are found in Section 3 of
this report), including population and household growth trends, household income
growth, and employment trends and forecasts.
Lambert has defined Downtown by Census geography, as shown in the map below. The
area is comprised of four Census block groups and encompasses approximately three
quarters of a square mile of land in the core of Clearwater. Also shown in the map
below is the CRA boundary, in blue.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
6
Figure 1: Downtown Census Block Groups and CRA Boundary
Source: us Census, City of Clearwater Planning Department
The figures for 2000 reflect the U.S. decennial Census data; 2005 and 2010 figures are
based on estimates and projections prepared by the Pinellas County Department of
Planning.
2B - PODulation & Households
As illustrated in Figure 2, the population of the downtown Census block groups is
currently 4,500 - or roughly 4 percent of the entire City - in just over 2,000 households.
Unlike past years, which have been characterized by slow Downtown housing demand,
over the next five years, the rate of population growth downtown is expected to far
outpace the rates of both the City and County, at nearly 4 percent annually, adding
nearly 1,400 new residents. This addition of over 600 new households has a number of
positive implications for Downtown, including enhanced demand for new retail.
By comparison, the City of Clearwater is projected to grow at a much slower rate (0.2%
annually), adding only 1,348 residents. It should be noted that the 2004 Census
population estimates showed a net loss (of fewer than 300 residents, or less than 0.1%
annually) in the City population from 2000 to 2004. Lambert Advisory has opted to use
local information - in this case, the Pinellas County Department of Planning estimates
and forecasts - rather than national Census projections, as the basis for our analysis.
Pinellas County- which has 923,229 residents today - is forecast to add nearly 16,000
residents in just over 7,000 households. The new residents forecast for
Downtown will represent nearly ten percent of the County's growth. Aside
from the growth Downtown, the County will see the highest growth rates in
communities to the north and northeast, including Palm Harbor, Tarpon Springs, and
East Lake.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
7
Figure 2: Population and Households, 1990-2010
Sources: Pinellas County Department of Planning, Lambert Advisory
Clearwater
1990
2000
2005
2010
98,784
108,787
110,826
112,174
Rate 90-00
Rate 00-1 0
1.0%
0.2%
Households
1990
2000
2005
2010
44,138
48,449
49,357
49,957
R~e9~00 0.9%
R~eO~10 0.2%
Note: Downtown is defined as Census tract 259.01 and Census block
groups 259.02 (block group 1), and 264 (block groups 1 and 2).
2C - Miaration
In addition to natural increase (birth rate outpacing death rate), migration is a key driver
of population growth. Migration is defined as population movement between Pinellas
County and other locations within the United States. There are two components: in-
migrants that move into Pinellas and out-migrants who move to other counties and/or
states.
More people make short-distance moves than long-distance ones, so it is not surprising
that the highest numbers of in-migrants to Pinellas County came from Hillsborough,
Pasco, Manatee, and Orange Counties (over 6,000 total, or approximately one quarter of
total in-migration). Migration from South Florida also represented a substantial influx;
Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties represented 4 percent of total in-
migration. Florida has historically attracted large numbers of migrants, particularly
retirees, from Northeastern states. While this trend is not yet as pronounced in Pinellas
County as it is in South Florida, the table below shows that C1earwater/Pinellas has
captured considerable demand from Northeastern migrants. The 4,179 migrants that
moved to Pinellas County from the Northeast in 2003 represented a full 16 percent of
total in-migration.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
8
Figure 3: Migration from Northeastern States, 2003
Sources: IRS County-to-County Migration, Lambert Advisory
CT
DC
DE
MA
MD
NJ
NY
PA
RI
Total
Pinellas
308
34
31
625
356
631
1,425
648
121
Palm Beach
1,275
77
85
1,570
823
2,272
7,282
1,341
302
Broward
911
108
124
1,641
838
3,242
8,275
1,375
203
Miami-Dade
448
183
50
1,005
529
2,272
5,173
568
150
4,179
15,027
16,717
10,378
2D - Aae, Gender, and Race
Lambert examined population by age cohort, which is a key barometer of demand for
various retail uses and housing products. At all three geographic levels, there are high
concentrations in the "19 and Under" category. Growth in this group, along with the 20-
24 cohort (currently 4 to 10% at all three levels) may indicate future demand for
housing product (e.g., rental) and retail/entertainment geared toward newly created
households.
Another age group with high percentages at all three levels is that of 45 to 64 year-aids,
the group in its peak earning years. The size and growth of this group may indicate
future demand for differentiated retail and housing products. Research by groups like
the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) and commercial real estate firms
like Jones Lang LaSalle have identified a number of characteristics of "baby boomers,"
including that many place a high priority on "experience" while shopping; value the time
savings associated with one-stop and on-line shopping; and will downsize their housing
into mixed-use developments, in large numbers. Such findings may have implications
for the strategic redevelopment of Downtown - for example, a retailer attraction effort
may have as one of its goals to cluster similar or symbiotic tenants together to achieve a
notion of one-stop or leisure "experience" shopping.
Lambert also compared median ages at the different geography levels. The current
median age of the Downtown Census block groups (29 years) is significantly lower than
both the City and County medians, 42 and 43, respectively.
The population of the Clearwater area encompasses a range of racial and ethnic groups.
The racial composition of Downtown varies from that of the City and County.
Downtown has fewer White residents than either the City or the County, and
approximately the same proportion of Black! African-American residents (in the single
race classification categories). The proportion of the Hispanic/Latino population,
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
9
meanwhile, is more than triple that of Clearwater and six times that of broader Pinellas
County. The preceding demographic characteristics are summarized in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Demographic Snapshot, 2000
Source: US Census, Lambert Advisory
Clearwater
Age
19 and under
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-64
Over 65
21%
6%
13%
15%
24%
21%
Median Age
41.8
Population by Single Race Classification
White Alone
Black or African American Alone
American Indian & Alaska Native Alone
Asian Alone
Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander
Some Other Race Alone
Two or More Races
84%
10%
0%
2%
0%
2%
2%
Hispanic or Latino, of any race
9%
Median Income
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
10
2E - Household Incomes
As part of our demographic and economic profile, Lambert researched household
incomes, which represent a critical element of market demand analysis as they indicate
the amount and nature of expenditure potential in a given market.
The 2000 median household income in Downtown was just over $25,500. This
represents approximately 70 percent of both the City ($36,500) and County ($37,000)
medians. The median household incomes of the Downtown, the City, and the County
represented 66 percent, 94 percent, and 96 percent, respectively, of the 2000 statewide
median household income level of $38,819. Using U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
figures published in the monthly Survey of Current Business, Lambert has estimated
current income figures as follows.
Figure 5: Household Income, 1999 and 2005
Source: US Census, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Lambert Advisory
Clearwater
Household Income, 1999
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,0000-$49,999
$50,000-$74,999
$75,000-$99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000 or more
17%
15%
15%
18%
18%
8%
6%
4%
Median household income, 1999
Annual growth
$36,494
1%
2005 Estimated median income
$38,654
One caveat to these figures is that, as the planned new units come on-line Downtown,
the household incomes should significantly rise. As detailed in the real estate analysis in
Section 3, Downtown units are selling at price points that are generally affordable to
households with annual incomes of at least $100,000. However, to the extent that
these are second home buyers, they will not be captured in future statistical profiles,
although they will make significant expenditures in the area when in occupancy.
According to Pinellas County population estimates and projections, Clearwater's seasonal
residents are estimated to represent 4.5 percent of total City population, or
approximately 5,000 people, from 2005 to 2010.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
11
2F - EmDlovment and Waaes
Employment growth is a major driver of demand for real estate, including office,
industrial, and residential uses. As illustrated in Figure 6, Pinellas County has added
over 23,000 jobs in the last three years. The total workforce is nearly 450,000 persons,
86 percent of whom are employed in services-providing (versus goods-producing)
industries. The proportion of services-providing jobs has gradually increased each of the
last several years, from 85 percent in 2001. Pinellas County is projected to gain nearly
80,000 new jobs over the next five years, a steady annual growth rate of four percent.
The strongest growth has occurred in the Leisure and Hospitality and Education and
Health Services sectors. Over the 2005-2010 period, the highest growth rate is
projected in the Information sector. However, in terms of sheer numbers, Professional
Business Services (33,000 new jobs); Education and Health Services (11,500 new jobs)
and Other Services (6,000 new jobs) - which includes industrial and household repair
and maintenance services, personal care services, and laundry and dry cleaning services
- rank highest. Employment by industry is shown in Figure 6. Detailed employment
data appears in the appendices to this report.
Figure 6: Pinellas County Employment by Industry, 2001-2010
Source: Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation, Occupational Employment Projections Unit, Lambert
Advisory
100,000
Professional and Business
Services
D Education and Health Services
600,000
500,000
. Trade, Trans portation and utilities
400,000
D Leisure and Hospitality
300,000
. Manufacturing
. Financial Activities
200,000
Public Administration
D Construction
o
D Other Services
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2010
Information
The location of large employers also has an impact on market demand, due to
employees living, shopping, and eating near their place of work. In the county as a
whole, Boca Ground Cover, Modern Business Associates, Southeast Personnel Services,
and Pinellas County are the organizations employing the largest numbers of people.
Within downtown, Pinellas County, City of Clearwater, the Church of Scientology, and
ANECO Electrical Construction account for the largest numbers of employees.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
12
Using 2004 Florida ES-202 data as a basis, Lambert Advisory has estimated the number
of downtown employees. ES-202 data does not capture Church of Scientology
employees, and because the information is reported to the state by address, overstates
government employment (i.e., all of the 3,700 Pinellas County employees and 2,000 City
of Clearwater employees are reported at downtown addresses, although not all of them
work downtown). Adjusting for these factors (i.e., adding Church employment and
reducing government employment), Lambert estimates downtown employment at 8,200.
This figure includes employment in all industry classifications, including retail and
industrial employment. Based on ES-202 industry classification data and an inventory of
office space downtown, Lambert has estimated downtown office employment at 5,900
(including Church and government employees). This figure is the basis for estimates of
retail demand in Section 4 (Market Potential).
The most recent wage data available (charted in Figure 7) shows the average across all
industries at $36,800. The highest paying industries in Pinellas County are Finance
($50,900), Manufacturing ($44,900), and Government ($42,400), which, with the
exception of Manufacturing, are likely to be attracted to a Downtown location. Detailed
wage data appears in the appendices to this report.
Figure 7: Pinellas County Wages by Industry, Fourth Quarter 2004
Source: Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation, ES-202 Data, Lambert Advisory
E] Financial Activities
$60,000
E] Manufacturing
$50,000
E] Public Administration
E] Information
$40,000
E] Education and Health Services
$30,000
II Construction
$20,000
II Professional and Business
Services
E] Trade, Trans portation and utilities
$10,000
$0
II Natural Resources and Mining
E] Leisure and Hospitality
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
13
Section 3: Real Estate Market Analysis
3A: Residential Rental and For-Sale Markets
The residential real estate market in the Tampa Bay Region is at an all-time high in
terms of sales activity and pricing. Lambert has compiled and analyzed data on
residential permits, new home closings, re-sales, new and recent condominium and
townhome developments, proposed residential developments, and the rental apartment
market. Detailed data appear in the appendices to this report; key findings are
highlighted below.
Residential Permits
The total number of residential units permitted in the Tampa Bay Region reached a 15-
year high in 2003, with permits issued for nearly 27,000 units. This number remained
relatively stable in 2004. As of the first quarter of 2005, the region is again on record
pace, with 7,300 residential permits issued, up 28 percent over the same period last
year.
The number of residential permits issued in Pinellas County registered a 15-year high of
nearly 4,400 in 2001, before declining to 15-year low of 2,300 the following year. This
decline can be attributed largely to the impact of 9/11 and the mini-recession that
followed. Permits rebounded to just over 3,500 in 2003 and remained stable in 2004.
Figure 8: Residential Building Permits, Pinellas County and Tampa Bay
Region, 1995-2004
Source: University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Lambert Advisory
25,000
5,000
IIT!I Pinellas
IIT!I TB Region
20,000
15,000
10,000
o
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Pinellas County is essentially built out, as is the City Of Clearwater. Consequently, most
recent residential development has been in-fill, with townhomes and condominiums
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
14
claiming an ever increasing share of new home construction in both the County and
City; this trend is expected to continue in the near-term.
New Home Closings
The lack of developable land in Pinellas County is also reflected in the magnitude and
pricing of new home construction. Annual builder closing trends by County in the
Tampa Bay Region are shown in Figure 9. Detailed closing information for Pinellas
County by submarket appears in the appendices to this report.
Figure 9: Builder Closing and Average Price by County, 2004
Source: Rose Residential Reports, Lambert Advisory
Units Closed
Avg. Price $
Location
Single Family
Hillsborough
Pasco
Pine lias
7,419
5,750
603
13,772
Subtotal
Multi-Family
Hillsborough
Pasco
Pine lias
2,558
992
2,419
5,969
Subtotal
Total
Hillsborough
Pasco
Pine lias
9,977
6,742
3,022
19,741
Subtotal
$246,167
223,896
363,997
$242,028
$169,640
143,263
257,394
$200,820
$226,546
212,032
278,665
$229,568
As seen in the appendices (Geographic Distribution of Pinellas County Builder Closings),
the number of new home closings in Pinellas County more than doubled between 2003
and 2004. This increase was entirely attributable to new multi-family homes which
more than tripled from 688 closings in 2003 to 2,419 closings in 2004.
Due to the lack of available land and the influence of the beaches, the average price of
a new single family home is significantly higher in Pinellas ($364,000), than in Pasco
($224,000) or Hillsborough ($246,000) counties. The average closing price of new
townhomes and condominiums is also highest in Pinellas County at $257,000, compared
to $170,000 in Hillsborough and $143,000 in Pasco.
Note that the closing prices recorded in 2004 reflect the price of a unit sold six to twelve
months earlier for a single family home and as much as 18 months earlier for a
condominium. Consequently, they reflect prices that are lower than the current market.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
15
Figures 10 and 11 show closings by submarket for single family and multi-family
dwellings.
Figure 10: Single Family Closings in Pinellas County by Submarket, 1999-
2004
Source: Rose Residential Reports, Lambert Advisory
1,200
800
1,000
600
400
200
o
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Figure 11: Multi-Family Closings in Pinellas County, by Submarket, 1999-
2004
Source: Rose Residential Reports, Lambert Advisory
3,000
500
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
o
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Most multi-family development is concentrated in south central and south Pinellas
County, which includes Clearwater. In 1999, nearly two-thirds of all new multi-family
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
16
closings were in south and south central Pinellas. By 2003, the share of new multi-
family closings in south central and south Pinellas increased to 86 percent and to 88
percent in 2004.
Closing prices for new single family homes in Pinellas County trended upward over the
1999-2004 period for all submarkets, while the closing prices for multi-family fluctuated,
depending on the product and location. In 2003 and 2004, condominium conversions
also impacted the average closing price of new multi-family homes. Condominium
conversions have become the new "affordable" housing alternative, with over 3,000
units converted in Pinellas County alone in 2003 and 2004.
Re-sales
Over the 12-month period ending June 2005, there were approximately 1,975 sales of
existing single family homes among the five zip codes that comprise the City of
Clearwater. The zip code boundaries are shown in Figure 12; the summary data by zip
code is shown in Figure 13.
Figure 12: Clearwater Zip Codes
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
17
Figure 13: Summary of Clearwater Single Family Re-Sales by Zip Code, Year
Ending Second Quarter 2004 and 2005
Source: Pinellas County MLS
lipll~1
33755 33756 33759 33764 33765 Total
Re-Sale Summary - 2004
Average Size Square Feet 1,371 1,751 1,680 1,724 1,627 1,588
Average Price - 2nd Q 2004 $145,808 $239,320 $189,390 $191,624 $175,410 $186,958
Average $/SF - 2nd Q 2004 $106 $137 $113 $111 $108 $118
Re-Sale Summary - 2005
Average Size Square Feet 1,493 1,712 1,723 1,717 1,696 1,703
Average Price - 2nd Q 2005 $187,599 $295,633 $235,628 $234,678 $213,289 $232,634
Average $/SF - 2nd Q 2005 $126 $173 $137 $137 $126 $137
Sale Price. % Chanqe '04.'05 28.7% 23.5% 24.4% 22.5% 21.6% 24.4%
Sale $/SF. . % Change '04.'05 18.1% 26.4% 21.3% 23.0% 16.6% 16.0%
The greatest number of re-sales were in the two zip codes that encompass downtown
Clearwater: 33755, covering the area north of SR-60, with 574 sales; and 33756,
covering the area south of SR-60, with 623 sales. These two zip codes also have the
lowest and highest prices among the five zip codes analyzed, ranging from an average
of $186,000 in zip code 33755 to a high of $288,000 in zip code 33756, which includes
Harbor Oaks and Belleair.
The average price of an existing family home in Clearwater increased by over 21 percent
between the second quarter of 2004 and the second quarter of 2005.
New and Recent Residential Developments
While Downtown Clearwater has not yet experienced the level of urban redevelopment
that has take place in the sister cities of St. Petersburg and Tampa, Clearwater is clearly
beginning to see its own Downtown renaissance. Several projects have been developed
in the Downtown and several more are in the planning stages. Figure 14 provides a
summary of several new and recent condominium and townhome projects that have
been developed in the downtown market, with comparison for projects in surrounding
neighborhoods and the beaches. A map showing the project locations appears in Figure
15. Detailed data by project is available for the City's review upon request.
All of the product types have been successful to date. Particularly noteworthy is the
absorption pace among condo conversion projects. As noted previously, there have
been over 3,000 condominium conversions (units) in Pinellas County in the past year.
Demand for these projects has been astounding, with investors/speculators contributing
in large part to theses absorption levels.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
18
Figure 14: New and Recent Condominium and Townhome Developments
Source: Lambert Advisory
Mid- and high-rise condos Downtown 1,600-4,000 $670,000-$1,600,000 $300-$500 1-10 units
Island
Mid- and high-rise condos Key/I ntracoastal 1,400-4,600 $600,000-$1,750,000 $300-$600 6 units
Mid- and high-rise condos Gulf Front 1,400-5,200 $600,000-$4,400,000 $400-$800 N/A
Condo conversions Downtown 500-1,100 $100,000-$190,000 $120-$200 16-33 units
Townhomes Downtown 1,100-2,400 $175,000-$350,000 $150-$200 1-6 units
Townhomes Suburban 1,200-1,600 $130,000-$200,000 $100-$130 7 units
Figure 15: New and Planned Condominium and Townhome Developments
. Planned
. New and Recent Condo Projects
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
19
Proposed Projects
Six significant residential projects are planned for downtown Clearwater as of August
2005. The project locations are shown above in Figure 15; project basics appear below
in Figure 16.
Figure 16: Planned Condominium and Townhome Developments
Source: Lambert Advisory
Water's Edge (OPUS Phase 1) 331 Cleveland Street High-rise condos 157 Approved
Harrison Village/Island View 488 N Fort Harrison Mid--rise condos 324 Approved
Acqua 400 Cleveland Street High-rise condos 245 Processing
Station Square 628 Cleveland Street High-rise condos 126 Approved
Under
Mediterranean Village 909 Cleveland Street Townhomes 100 construction
Clearwater Centre 1100 Cleveland Street High-rise condos 71 Processing
1023
Rental Apartment Market
As shown in Figure 17 below, the rental apartment market in Pinellas County is very
tight. As of the first quarter of 2005, the overall occupancy level for the county was over
97 percent and the average rent was at $766 ($0.82jSF), for an average size unit of 927
square feet. Among commercial grade Class B+ or better projects the occupancy level is
at more than 96 percent with an average of $953 ($0.90jSF), for an average size unit of
1,060 square feet.
Figure 17: Pinellas County Rental Apartment Market Summary, Q1 2005
Source: Bay Area Apartment Association, Lambert Advisory
Number Percent Average Average Average
UnitType Units Vacant Occupied Size (SF) Rent $/SF
Studio 799 14 98.2% 484 $512 $1 .06
1-bedroom 18,800 517 97.3% 724 $652 $0.90
2-bedrooms 19,764 667 96.6% 1 ,070 $850 $0.79
3-bedrooms 3,423 148 95.7% 1 ,320 $1 ,000 $0.76
4-bedrooms 129 5 96.1% 1 ,479 $1 ,230 $0.83
All units 42,915 1,351 96.9% 937 $766 $0.82
As shown in Figure 18, the rental apartment market in the Clearwater submarket is
equally as strong with an occupancy level of more than 97 percent for all projects, and
more than 98 percent for Class B+ projects or better. The average rent for all projects
in the Clearwater submarket was $764 ($O.79jSF), for an average size unit of 972
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
20
square feet, and $920 ($0.86/SF), for an average size unit with 1,069 square feet for
Class B+ or better projects.
Figure 18: Clearwater Submarket Rental Apartment Market Summary,
Ql 2005
Source: Bay Area Apartment Association, Lambert Advisory
Number Percent Average Average Average
UnitType Units Vacant Occupied Size(SF) Rent $/SF
Studio 260 5 98.1% 519 $552 $1 .06
1-bedroom 5,589 128 97.7% 728 $640 $0.88
2-bderooms 6,41 1 206 96.8% 1 ,070 $820 $0.77
3-bedrooms 1 ,035 26 97.5% 1 ,340 $970 $0.72
4-bedrooms 34 0 100.0% 1 ,595 $1 ,340 $0.84
All units 13,329 365 97.3% 972 $764 $0.79
There have been only four new significant rental apartment projects, for a total of 947
units, delivered to Pinellas County in the past two years. While demand will likely
remain strong, the number of new units delivered to the market in the foreseeable
future will be limited due to lack of appropriately (for rental development) zoned and
priced land. This, in combination with high numbers of condo conversions, will continue
to limit rental supply and put upward pressure on rents.
Residential Market Conclusions
The current housing market in Pinellas County is characterized by rapidly increasing
supply of for-sale multi-family product, rapidly increasing prices, and uncertain depth of
end-user due to heavy investor/speculator participation. The County has a long history
of healthy demand for for-sale multi-family housing (condominiums and townhomes).
The end-user appeal of these units is proven and supply is limited due to lack of
available land. Clearwater Beach has a proven track record of strong demand for new
townhomes and condominiums, while downtown Clearwater is in the midst of
establishing one.
Potential strengths for the downtown market include its proximity to the beach, the
attractive waterfront, its position as a government and employment center, strong
visitor trends, and the presence of the headquarters of the Church of Scientology, which
draws parishioners from around the world. Potential weaknesses include its relative
distance to other major employment nodes in the county and region compared to
downtown Tampa and St. Petersburg, perception of higher crime areas to the north of
Downtown, and investor concerns that the future of Downtown will be driven by the
interests of a small number of major Downtown land owners.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
21
38: Retail Market
Clearwater's retail market comprises an estimated 5.5 million square feet of space. The
mix of retail inventory is broad, with properties ranging from smaller community "strip"
centers to a power center (Clearwater Mall) and major regional mall (Westfield
Shoppingtown Countryside). The two malls combined represent nearly 2 million square
feet of retail space, or slightly less than 40 percent of the area's total inventory.
From the "local" retail service perspective, the Clearwater area is well supplied by both
anchored (grocery) and non-anchored shopping centers, as well as "big box" retailers
including Babies 'R' Us, Best Buy, Super Target, and Linens 'n' Things. Most of the City's
retail complexes have gross leaseable area between 10,000 square feet to 200,000
square feet. In an effort to gauge retail market conditions among shopping centers, we
profiled selected complexes totaling nearly 2 million square feet of space. We limited
this survey to centers over 15,000 square feet, within a 5-mile radius of Downtown.
The property survey is included in the appendices to this report; key findings follow.
Based on the retail survey, rents for space generally range from $12 to $25 per square
foot, with add-ons or pass-throughs (common area maintenance, taxes, and insurance)
that range from $2 to $7. The estimated average rental rate is $12.60, net of add-ons.
Including anchor store space, the market is roughly 94 percent occupied.
The International Council of Shopping Centers breaks down retail centers by center
type, defined by typical anchors and square footage. Characteristics in the Clearwater
market, by center category, include:
· Power Centers (category-dominant anchors, 250,000 SF+, e.g., Clearwater
Mall): triple net rents at $20/SF, $4.73/SF pass-throughs, 98% occupied.
. Community Centers (general merchandise and grocery/convenience,
100,000-300,000 SF, e.g., Clearwater Plaza on Missouri Avenue): triple net
rents at $12-14/SF, average of $3.70/SF pass-throughs, 97% occupied.
· Neighborhood Centers (convenience, 30,000-100,000 SF, e.g., Harbor
Oaks Shopping Center on South Ft. Harrison): triple net rents at $12-25/SF,
average of $3.40/SF pass-throughs, 84% occupied.
Downtown retail is currently concentrated in a few neighborhood centers, and in the
Downtown core along Cleveland Street. Based on data from the Pinellas County
Property Appraiser and interviews with property and business owners, we have
estimated non-centerdowntown retail space in the Downtown core at approximately
280,000 square feet. Current asking rents are between $10 and $15 per square feet.
Estimated occupancy is less than 70 percent. These Downtown core figures contrast
unfavorably with Downtown retail space in shopping centers - Cleveland Plaza (1235
Cleveland Street) is asking similar rental rates ($14/SF gross), but is 93 percent
occupied. The new Publix-anchored Harbor Oaks Shopping Center is commanding
$32/SF gross rents (inclusive of pass-throughs) and is 100 percent occupied.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
22
Market-wide rents and occupancy, as well as the retail demand estimates for in Section
4, indicate that the Downtown retail markets underperformance appears to be
more related to a lack of quality retail space and associated close-in
amenities (e.g., parking) than it is to either unfavorable commercial real estate
market conditions or lack of demand. This was further confirmed by stakeholder
interviews over the course of the downtown market study. These same factors will also
directly affect Downtown's ability to attract retailers going forward.
3C: Office Market
Clearwater is the county seat for Pinellas County and as such, hosts the offices of City
and County government agencies, Downtown. The market for commercial office space
Downtown is growing, but is still modest relative to the broader Pinellas County and
Tampa Bay region. Clearly, continued growth of the Downtown office market will
provide support to any redevelopment initiative. Following are highlights of regional and
Downtown office conditions that will influence prospective office development in
Downtown.
From a regional perspective, the Tampa Bay Metropolitan Area office market is
comprised of more than 67 million square feet of office space. The office development
is scattered among six sub-markets; the North Pinellas sub-market, which includes the
northern part of Clearwater (not including Downtown), is the second smallest sub-
market with 4.4 million square feet of total space, or only 7 percent of the region's total
inventory - in comparison, the largest sub-market is Westshore, with nearly 14 million
square feet, 20 percent of regional inventory. Overall, the region is experiencing 89
percent occupancy, with full-service lease rates for quality Class NB+ properties
generally averaging $20.40 per square foot. There is reportedly more than 100,000
square feet of office space under construction in North Pinellas, none of which is
Downtown.
The City of Clearwater comprises approximately 1 million square feet of Class A product,
with occupancy at 87 percent. The balance of the City's office inventory is comprised of
approximately 2.2 million square feet of Class B office space, with occupancy of 90
percent, and another 2.2 million square feet of Class C space at an occupancy of 93
percent. Generally, full-service lease rates for Class A and B office space are between
$16 and $20 per square foot, while Class C space ranges from $10 to $16 per square
foot.
An inventory and profile of Downtown office space appears in the appendices to this
report. During the past five years, approximately 140,000 square feet of office space
has been delivered to the Downtown market, the bulk of which is owner-occupied
(CRUM building). Approximately one-quarter of the City office inventory (1.2 million
square feet) is Downtown. A third (369,003 SF) of that space is Class A space, 82
percent of which is occupied. Forty percent (474,015 SF) is Class B space, 80 percent of
which is occupied. The balance (30%) of the Downtown inventory is Class C space, with
occupancy of 89 percent. Full-service lease rates for Class A space range from $16 to
$19 per square foot; Class B space from $10 to 17 per square foot; and Class C space
from $8 to $13 per square foot. These rents represent an average increase of
approximately 5 percent over 2003 rates.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
23
Tampa's 1-75 Corridor is currently capturing the bulk of new construction in the broader
market - as of the first quarter of 2005, approximately 400,000 square feet of space
was under construction. This trend is likely to continue in this and other suburban sub-
markets, absent any major changes in Downtown Clearwater, due to the following.
. Accommodating large block users (+10,000 square feet) Downtown is
growing increasingly difficult.
. Parking constraints in the downtown area impact new development, as well
as the ability to attract and maintain large tenants. Notably, Wakely and
Associates, one of Downtown's five largest employers, recently announced its
decision to relocate and cited parking constraints as a primary reason.
. Current lease rates remain at levels below the minimum that would support
new, large-scale development, particularly for more costly high-rise product.
The Downtown Clearwater office market has remained stable during the past several
years. However, the region is experiencing continued employment growth, a portion of
which the Downtown may be positioned to capture as redevelopment proceeds.
Although demand for new, large-scale office may not be warranted immediately, the
possibility to support to office supply could occur within a five-year window.
3D: Hotel Market Overview
Clearwater and the Beaches continue to emerge as a premier vacation destination in the
US. Nearly 925,000 overnight visitors came to Clearwater in 2004, and the area has
seen a steady 1.5 percent annual visitation growth since 2000. Additionally, tourism
expenditures reached almost $600 million last year, an increase of more than 9 percent
over 2003. Visitation to Clearwater and the Beaches recovered quickly from the tourism
impacts caused by the events of September 11th, resuming pre-2001levels by 2003, and
overnight visitation is projected to exceed 1 million annually by 2010.
As shown in Figure 19, the greater Clearwater hotel market comprises nearly 7,000
rooms in a total of 94 properties. Approximately 40 percent is on the Beaches and 30
percent is concentrated just outside the City boundary, near the St. Petersburg-
Clearwater Airport. The remaining market inventory (2,000 rooms) is concentrated
along US-19 and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard.
On Clearwater Beach, there are three full-service properties comprising a total 858
rooms. The remaining balance of beach hotel inventory, or nearly 2,000 rooms, consists
of limited-service and extended stay product. The US-19 and Gulf-to-Bay inventory -
the concentration of non-beach properties closest to downtown - consists entirely of
limited-service and extended stay product, much of which is older and in "fair" condition.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
24
Figure 19: Clearwater Hotel Market Properties
Source: Smith Travel Research, Lambert Advisory
Figure 20 shows trends in occupancy, average daily rate (ADR), and revenue per
available room (RevPAR) for selected Beach properties. Based on historical trends
reported by Smith Travel Research, occupancies in the Beach market dropped from 79
and 80 percent in 1999 and 2000, respectively, to as low as 67 percent in 2002.
Occupancy rates in 2003 and 2004 show some recovery, with rates rising closer to 70
percent.
Figure 20: Clearwater Beach Hotels: Occupancy & Rate Trend (Selected
Properties), 1999-2004
Source: Smith Travel Research, Lambert Advisory
$130.00
$120.00
$110.00
$100.00
$90.00
$80.00
$70.00
$60.00
$50.00
$40.00
82.0%
80.0%
78.0%
76.0%
74.0%
72.0%
70.0%
68.0%
66.0%
64.0%
62.0%
60.0%
c::::::J Rat e
RevP AR
Occupancy
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
25
In terms of ADR, the market has fluctuated between $102 and $118 over the 1999-2004
period. The current level of ADR is reflective of a large portion of supply being older,
limited service product. In our experience, newer full-service product commands ADRs
of at least $130. Nonetheless, the Beach hotels command rates considerably higher
than do the non-Beach hotels.
Figure 21: Clearwater Beach Hotels: Annual Room Night Demand YS.
Occupancy, 1999-2004
Source: Smith Travel Research, Lambert Advisory
300,000
82.0%
80.0%
78.0%
76.0%
74.0%
72.0%
70.0%
68.0%
66.0%
64.0%
62.0%
60.0%
Room Nights
Occupancy
250,000
200,000
150,000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Figure 22 shows trends in occupancy, average daily rate (ADR), and revenue per
available room (RevPAR) for selected properties in the non-Beach market. Occupancy
rates for the non-Beach properties have been consistently lower than that of beach
properties - by as much as 15 percentage points in 2001, and by 13 percentage points
prior to 2001 and since, in 2003. That gap narrowed in 2004, with the non-Beach
properties' average occupancy at 65 percent (a 4 percentage point differential from
Beach occupancy). Notably, occupancy rates among non-Beach properties have started
to approach pre-9j11 levels faster than that of Beach properties.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
26
Figure 22: Clearwater Hotels: Occupancy & Rate Trend (Selected
Properties), 1999-2004
Source: Smith Travel Research, Lambert Advisory
$80.00
80.0%
$70.00
70.0%
$60.00
$50.00
60.0% c:::::::::J Rate
RevP AR
50.0% Occupancy
$40.00
$30.00
40.0%
$20.00
30.0%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
ADRs in the non-Beach market have remained moderate and steady over the past five
years, ranging from $64 to $69. The current level of ADR is reflective of the
predominance of limited-service product in "fair" condition, as well as less-than-optimal
locations along the US-19 corridor.
Figure 23: Clearwater Hotels: Annual Room Night Demand YS. Occupancy,
1999-2004
Source: Smith Travel Research, Lambert Advisory
180,000 80.0%
170,000 70.0%
160,000 60.0%
150,000 50.0%
140,000 40.0% Room Nights
Occupancy
130,000 30.0%
120,000 20.0%
110,000 10.0%
100,000 0.0%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Overall, the Clearwater hotel market would be viewed as moderately stable. However, it
is evident that a considerable amount of product (both on the beach and off) is older, 2-
to 3-star quality product. As discussed in more detail in Section 4, with visitation
projected to grow substantially over the next several years, Downtown Clearwater may
be able to support a new, strategically located, limited service hotel.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
27
Section 4: Market Potentials
4A: Retail Demand
Our retail demand analysis takes into account demand generated by three groups:
1. Downtown Residents - nearly 4,500 people who are in Downtown on a daily
basis, year-round, and do a significant portion of their retail spending close to
home. (Note that the residential model also incorporates a secondary market,
which includes residents of surrounding areas and second home buyers.)
2. Downtown Office Workers - nearly 6,000 people who work Downtown. Office
employees typically spend a portion of their income close to where they work.
3. Visitors to Downtown - nearly 1.5 million hotel visitors, day trippers, people
visiting friends and relatives, business visitors, and visitors to particular
Downtown institutions.
Utilizing a variety of data sources, we have built a series of models that estimates
expenditures by each of these groups and translates it into square feet of retail space.
We have estimated demand for the current year, and projected it for 2010. A summary
of implied demand for retail space, by category, from office workers, visitors, and
residents appears below.
Figure 24: Supportable Downtown Retail Space by Market Segment
Source: Lambert Advisory
2005 2010
Food & Beverage 10,216 58,758 48,541
Shoppers Goods 42,216 64,652 22,437
Convenience Goods 6,766 34,959 28,193
Supportable Retail SF, Residents 59,198 158,369 99,171
Food & Beverage 29,813 77,225
Shoppers Goods 14,341 37,135
Supportable Retail SF, Visitors 44,154 114,360 70,206
Food & Beverage 21,161 27, 190
Shoppers Goods 15,341 19,712
Convenience Goods 10,082 12,955
Supportable Retail SF, Office Employees 46,585 59,857 13,273
Total, Food & Beverage 61,190 163,172
Total, Shoppers Goods 71,898 121,500
Total, Convenience Goods 16,848 47,914
Total, Supportable SF 149,936 332,586 182,650
Downtown Clearwater Market Study 28
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
Note that the Food and Beverage category includes restaurants and bars. The Shoppers
Goods category includes apparel, accessories, and general merchandise (e.g., sporting
goods, books, toys, office supplies, art, fabric/sewing materials, and souvenirs). The
Convenience category includes pharmacy and supermarket spending (e.g., groceries,
cosmetics, prescription drugs, and optical goods).
It is notable that the supportable square footage in 2005 is significantly (130,000 square
feet) less than existing downtown inventory of retail space. Of the 333,000 square feet
of supportable retail space projected for 2010, 130,000 square feet could be absorbed
into existing inventory (given some building and/or fa<;ade improvements). Another
50,000 square feet of new downtown space is supportable in the short-term.
The mix of retail categories (i.e., the proportion of food and beverage space, shoppers
goods space, etc.) implied by these models should be taken into consideration as the
City/CRA formulates and refines its strategic priorities for Downtown, which may include
strengthening and/or expanding offerings in particular categories through targeted
recruitment/retention efforts (see Section 5).
The methodology and key findings for the residential, office worker, and visitor retail
demand models follow.
Retail Demand Generated by Residents
For the purposes of our analysis, the residential trade area was defined as the four
census block groups comprising the CRA, as previously shown in Figure 1.
Local residents' expenditures are a key potential driver of demand for Downtown
retailers in the study area, representing forty percent ofthe total square footage in 2005
and nearly half of the total square footage by 2010. Although it combines large
amounts of information from a variety of sources, the way the retail trade model (the
full detail of which is attached as an appendix to this report) derives the estimated space
demand is actually quite simple. The methodology is described in detail below.
. Total Personal Income - There are approximately 4,500 residents in the
downtown area with per capita income of approximately $18,000 (See
Section 2: Economic and Demographic Profile), which yields $83 million in
total personal income.
. Total Non-Auto Retail Expenditure - An estimate of non-automobile
retail expenditure for the trade area is made by multiplying the Total Income
by the percent of income that is spent on non-auto retail purchases in a
given year. The percent of household income spent on non-auto retail
purchases was derived from the Department of Commerce 2004 Consumer
Expenditure Survey, which is both region- and income cohort-specific.
. Expenditure by Store Type - Non-auto expenditure by store type for the
market area is derived using the percentage of total non-auto store sales by
store type for the State of Florida (as a proportion of total non-auto sales)
based on an analysis of the Census of Retail Trade.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
29
. Primary Market Area Retention - This is estimated based upon fieldwork
and stakeholder interviews, and is an estimate of the degree of leakage
which may occur from Downtown by store type. Certain merchandise
categories such as grocery or pharmacy have very high retention rates
because people typically shop for these goods and services close to home.
For goods such as furniture and hardware, the trade area retention rate is
lower because people will typically travel further to make these purchases
since they are made less frequently, and/or because of a dearth of that type
of retailer Downtown. For most categories, we have assumed this retention
rate will be higher in 2010, due to an improved Downtown and increased
retailer variety.
. Percent Sales Inflow from Secondary Market - While there is resident
expenditure leakage from the trade area there is also inflow from residents
that live outside the bounds of the trade area, as well as from seasonal
residents not otherwise captured in statistical profiles. These inflow rates
vary by type of merchandise, considering existing and potential downtown
retailers, and change over the 2005-2010 period. The improved 2010 inflow
rates assume a well-positioned, quality downtown experience not available in
nearby areas.
. Sales per Square Foot - The sales per square foot figures are estimated
average sales per square foot figures for stores in the trade area based on
interviews and other sources of information, including the Urban Land
Institute's 2002 Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers.
. Warranted Square Feet - Is calculated using the following formula:
Net Sales Potential (by category) / Sales per Square Foot (by category)
. Non-Retail Space - Is calculated assuming that there is an additional 15
percent of "retail" space demanded that is utilized for non-retail uses such as
doctor's offices or other professional services.
As noted, resident expenditures generate approximately 40 percent (60,000 square feet)
and 50 percent (160,000 square feet), respectively, of the total square feet demanded in
2005 and 2010. This methodology is summarized in Figure 25, and as noted, appears in
full detail in the appendices.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
30
Figure 25: Retail Demand Generated by Residents
Sources: us Census, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers; Urban Land Institute, Lambert Advisory
Estimated Population
Per Capita Income
4,498
$18,403
5,886
$19,260
1,387
Total Retail Expenditure Potential
$24,918,191 $34,121,839 $9,203,648
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
$4,086,583 $23,503,123 $19,416,539
$10,982,450 $16,819,345 $5,836,896
$2,427,580 $10,692,897 $8,265,317
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
$400
$260
$378
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
10,216
42,216
6,766
Total Supportable Retail Space
59,198
$400
$260
$378
58,758
64,652
34,959
48,541
22,437
28,193
158,369
99,171
Retail Demand Generated by Office Workers
The office worker demand model summary appears on the following page. This
category of retail demand is derived from employees that work in Downtown office
buildings. To estimate the number of office workers Downtown, we used adjusted State
of Florida ES-202 data. That is, we reduced the number of employees attributed to both
Pinellas County and City of Clearwater, given that not all City/County employees work
Downtown, and added employment figures provided by the Church of Scientology (not
otherwise captured by the ES-202). We also cross-checked this figure against the
amount of estimated leaseable office space downtown, dividing it by industry standard
space-per-office-worker figures. This yielded and verified an estimate of approximately
5,900 office workers in 2005. Using historical trends, County employment projections,
and information from the Church of Scientology, we have estimated this number to
increase by over 1,600 office workers by 2010.
The International Council of Shopping Centers regularly publishes a survey of downtown
and suburban office workers that contains average annual retail expenditures near
workers' offices. Purchases by category (food & beverage, shoppers' goods,
convenience goods) were estimated based on these average annual expenditure figures,
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
31
inflated to 2005 dollars based on actual CPI. Dividing the potential gross spending
figures by annual sales per square foot estimates yields the square footage implied by
office worker demand, approximately 47,000 square feet in 2005 and 60,000 square feet
in 2010 - representing 30 percent and 18 percent of the totals, respectively.
Figure 26: Retail Demand Generated by Office Employees
Sources: ES-202 Employment Data, Church of Scientology, Office Worker Retail Spending Patterns: A
Downtown and Suburban Area Study (ICSC 2003), Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers( Urban Land
Institute 2002), Lambert Advisory
Estimated Downtown Office Employment 5,866 7,537 1,671
Spending per employee
Lunches $1,286 $1,286
Shoppers Goods $785 $785
Convenience Goods $559 $559
Dinner/Drinks after work $157 $157
$2,786 $2,786
Expenditure Potential
Food & Beverage $8,464,380 $10,876,039
Shoppers Goods $4,602,382 $5,913,686
Convenience Goods $3,276,765 $4,210,376
Total Potential Employee Expenditures $16,343,528 $21,000,101 $4,656,573
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
$400
$300
$325
$400
$300
$325
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
Convenience Goods
21,161
15,341
10,082
27, 190
19,712
12,955
6,029
4,371
2,873
Total Supportable Retail Space
46,585
59,857
13,273
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
32
Retail Demand Generated by Visitors
Our estimate of gross retail demand generated by several different types of visitors to
Downtown: Clearwater/Clearwater Beach visitors (including hotel visitors, day trippers,
people visiting friends and relatives, and business visitors), Institutional visitors
(including visitors to the City, County, religious institutions, and Morton Plant Hospital).
The demand estimate is based on numbers of visitors and their average expenditure
rates (from Research Data Services data provided by the City), and estimated capture
rates. Again, the capture rates have been increased from 2005 to 2010, assuming
enhanced retail and restaurant options will be added in Downtown. Dividing the
potential gross spending figures by annual sales per square foot estimates yields the
square footage implied by visitor demand for retail - approximately 44,000 square feet
total in 2005 and 114,000 square feet total in 2010, approximately one-third of total
retail space, in both years.
A summary of the demand generated by visitors appears below. The full model, with
detail by visitor group, appears in the appendices to this report.
Figure 27: Retail Demand Generated by Visitors
Sources: Research Data Services, Morton Plant Hospital, Church of Scientology, Lambert Advisory
2005 2010
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
$11,925,029
$4,302,363
$30,889,805 $18,964,776
$11,140,649 $6,838,286
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
$400
$300
$400
$300
Food & Beverage
Shoppers Goods
29,813
14,341
77,225
37,135
47,412
22,794
Total Supportable Retail Space
44,154
114,360
70,206
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
33
48: Office
Based on employment and office development trends for both the City and County,
Lambert has prepared an estimate of office space demand for Downtown over the next
five years. This considers key assumptions including:
. Pinellas County office employment is projected to increase at an average of 4
percent annually for the next five to ten years; Downtown office employment
is likely to grow at a rate close to or slightly lower than the County rate.
. The Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) estimate of office
space per employee (250 SF per employees), based on a survey of office
developments in Florida.
Figure 28: Demand for Office Space
Sources: ES-202 Employment Data, Building Owners and Managers Association, Lambert Advisory
City of Clearwater Office Employment
Moderate 2.5% 3,895 3,992
Aggressive 4.0% 3,952 4,110
4,092
4,274
4,194
4,445
4,299
4,623
404
671
Estimate Net Absorption - SF (@ 250 SF/employee)
Moderate 973,750 998,094 1,023,046 1,048,622 1,074,838
Aggressive 988,000 1,027,520 1,068,621 1,111,366 1,155,820
Net New
Office Demand
124,838
205,820
It should be noted that these figures exclude City, County, and Church of Scientology
employment, which is why they differ from employment figures quotes elsewhere in this
report. Based on these estimates of employment, Downtown Clearwater is projected to
have total demand for between 125,000 and 200,000 square feet of office space over
the next five years. This figure is net new space demanded; it assumes that some of
the existing vacant space is absorbed and also that the 2010 market will maintain some
level of vacancy.
4C: Hotel
As noted in Section 3, although the Clearwater hotel market is only moderately stable, it
is evident that a considerable amount of product is older, 2- to 3-star quality product.
With visitation projected to grow substantially over the next several years, Downtown
should be able to support a small to mid-size (125-175 rooms), limited service (branded)
product that is strategically located. Such a Downtown hotel would compete primarily
with the hotels along US-19 and US-60, serving business and institutional visitors.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
34
Section 5: Recommendations and Next Steps
Based on the preceding data and analysis, Lambert Advisory has formulated certain
recommendations for a strategic direction the City of Clearwater could take to further
the redevelopment and revitalization of Downtown Clearwater. The recommendations
that follow include strategies for specific sites, as well as general recommendations that
the City, Main Street, Downtown Development Board (DDB), and Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) should take into consideration for ongoing Downtown
redevelopment efforts.
Due to the changing nature of the markets described and projected herein, and so that
these efforts might have the greatest impact possible in the near term, we have focused
our recommendations to a short-term (5- to 7-year) time frame. Additionally, we have
focused our attention on the Downtown core, where a critical mass of new development
and redevelopment is already underway.
SA: Site Analysis
Figure 29 shows the sites the City/CRA identified as prime redevelopment parcels and
the additional parcels Lambert has identified as having strategic importance to
redevelopment efforts. We have focused on the downtown core at this point, in order
to capitalize on the critical mass that has been established by large-scale planned and
under-construction developments in the core.
Figure 29: Redevelopment Parcels
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
A: The Bluff Parcels: The first phase of Opus South Corporation's development of these
South Osceola parcels has been approved. Phase One will be Water's Edge, a 25-story
157-unit condominium and townhome tower with approximately 10,000 square feet of
ground-level retail. The Water's Edge sales office opened in late July 2005. Phase 2
may include redevelopment of the City Hall parcel and, as such, is subject to (an as-yet
unscheduled) referendum.
B: 628 Cleveland Street: Beck Development is planning to build the 13-story, 126-unit
Station Square condominium development, adjacent to existing Station Square Park.
The development will include 10,000 square feet of retail space and at least 100 public
parking spaces.
C: Downtown ''Super Block'~' Acqua at the Downtown Plaza is planned for this 4-acre
parcel across from the Steinmart/ Harborview property and in the heart of downtown.
Acqua will feature a 10-screen movie theater, 35,000 square feet of retail space, 87,800
square feet of office space, and 245 residential units.
D: Southeast Corner of Osceola and Drew (adjacent to ''Super Block"): Colliers Arnold
owns this parcel and is considering a two-tower mixed-use development concept. Uses
under consideration include condominium (+/- 100 units), hotel (+/- 60 rooms), retail,
art gallery/museum space, and public parking.
E: 1100 Cleveland Street: Guy Bonneville plans to renovate this Cleveland Street office
building (Clearwater Centre) and convert it to a mixed-use development with 71
condominiums and 44,300 square feet of retail and office space.
F: 512-534 Cleveland Street: These two parcels (a half-acre total) are key retail parcels
in the heart of downtown. According to Pinellas County Property Appraiser records, 512
Cleveland has approximately 24,000 square feet of retail space, and is currently vacant.
534 Cleveland has approximately 9,000 square feet of office space, and is being used as
such.
Given the available details on the above projects A through F, approximately 700
residential units, 65,000 square feet of retail space, 5,000 net square feet of office space
(planned office space, less the current 118,000 square feet at Clearwater Centre), and
60 hotel rooms could be added in the Downtown core over the next five years. Based
on this, and on the market analysis and demand potentials in previous sections, Lambert
has developed three opportunity programs for the remaining two sites.
G: 400 Block of Cleveland Street (south side): This block lies immediately south
of the Acqua superblock, and currently includes Pat Lokey's, Royalty Theater, and
Starbuck's. Given its location downtown and near the bayfront (affording water views),
Lambert considers this a prime residential and retail location. The recommended
program would include 150 condominium units in a 10-story building, with ground floor
retail (resulting in no net loss of downtown retail on this block). The recommended unit
mix and average unit sizes follow.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
36
. 23 1BR units with an average unit size of 850 square feet
. 60 2BR units with an average unit size of 1,250 square feet
. 45 3BR units with an average unit size of 2,000 square feet
. 23 4BR units with an average unit size of 2,500 square feet
Given current sales activity of comparable product, Lambert estimates pricing for these
units at $290 per square foot, a range of to $250,000 to $725,000.
An alternative to a residential program is an office development that would
accommodate some of the 125,000 to 200,000 square feet of office space projected to
be demanded over the next five years. Lambert recommends a development with
150,000 square feet of Class A office space and ground floor retail (again, resulting in no
net loss of retail on the block). We would expect such a building to command rents on
the upper end of the current rental rate range in the market, $20.00 per square foot.
With either scenario, the City will likely need to participate in site acquisition, as the nine
component parcels have as many owners. Additionally, under the office scenario, rents
are not currently at the point where new construction is supported, despite growing
demand, and therefore there may be a need for capital participation to write down the
cost of development.
Note that the historic fa<;ades of these buildings could be preserved in the
redevelopment process and that neither of these proposed scenarios need result in the
loss of retail space or, indeed, any ofthe current, successful tenants.
H: Harborview Conference Center Parcel: The 8-acre Harborview parcel is
adjacent to the new Main Public library and overlooks both the Bayfront and Coachman
Park. Lambert Advisory recommends the development of a quality limited service hotel
(e.g., Hilton Suites, Marriott Courtyard, Starwood Westin) with 125 to 150 rooms on the
parcel.
Based on the hotel market and demand analysis, we estimate that such a hotel would
see occupancy rates of 70 to 75 percent and command an average daily rate of $110.
Planning for such a project should also incorporate a meeting/convention component
(within the hotel), new space for the highly successful Steinmart department store, and
adequate parking for all of these uses and the library.
I: Unit block of North Fort Harrison Avenue: Additionally, Lambert recommends
that the City formulate a targeted fa<;ade improvements program for the west side of
the unit block of North Fort Harrison Avenue (20-42 N. Fort Harrison and 432
Cleveland). These seven parcels under separate ownership (5 owners) account for
approximately 21,000 square feet of retail space in the core of Downtown.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
37
58: Other Recommendations
This downtown market study provides the crucial data and analysis that are needed to
inform the strategic next steps in the effort to further revitalize and redevelop
Downtown. As is usually the case at this point in the process, the market study does
not provide all the answers, but rather frames key questions and delineates specific
areas of focus for the City. Based on the information we have analyzed to date and
beyond specific site recommendations above, Lambert recommends that the City of
Clearwater could best help position Downtown for further investment by focusing its
efforts on two specific initiatives: creating and implementing a targeted parking
strategy and organizing and undertaking a retailer attraction program.
Strategies for and component tasks of these two initiatives follow. Note that the parking
strategy and retailer attraction effort are interrelated, in that the parking strategy will
enable and enhance retailer attraction.
Market-Driven Parking Strategy: Retail and Office
In Section 4, we estimated the amount of retail space that will be demanded by
merchandise category and the amount of office space that could be absorbed in
Downtown over the next several years. We also have a general notion of where, in
Downtown, existing space may be filled and additional space developed.
One of the key factors that drive both downtown retailers and office users to locate
Downtown is adequate, proximate parking. Given the relative cost of developing
parking, the City and DDB can playa role in helping fill this unmet need. Therefore, we
expect that the parking strategy should determine the following:
Office Users
. Market-driven ratios: Determine current market-driven ratios among
major office users in Downtown (i.e., spaces per 1,000 square feet) and how
this relates to existing code;
. Demand vs. supply: If demand exceeds the current supply of parking
given the market opportunity, identify the most likely location where office
space will be filled and where additional parking (either in surface lots or
structures) could be located to serve this demand;
. Strategies utilized by other municipalities: Identify strategies other
municipalities have implemented to encourage the development of parking by
private or quasi-governmental entities in order to fill gaps in office parking
needs in the market;
. Potential revenues: Estimate revenue that could be obtained to off-set
additional cost of parking development;
. Incentives! support provided by other municipalities: Identify
structure of guarantees or fiscal support that other municipalities have
provided in order to service the parking demand of major office tenants and
what is required of those tenants to insure their continued occupancy in
downtown over a reasonable time frame.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
38
Retailers and Restaurant Users
. Level of demand: Determine the total number of spaces that may be
needed given the mix of retailer use and demand estimates provided by
Lambert Advisory;
. Existing inventory: Inventory close-in parking, including information on
the number of spaces, hours of operation open to the public, cost of the
parking, lighting conditions, and perceived safety of the parking;
. Demand vs. supply: Compare the demand for parking to the supply of
reasonably priced parking in close-in locations;
. Cost estimates: Determine the cost of enhancing close in parking access
and conditions in Downtown including an analysis of the cost to the City/DDB
of providing gratis self-parking and/or valet parking for a specified period of
time to major new restaurants who agree locate in the downtown core during
key lunch and dinner hours; and
. Priorities: Determine priorities for phasing in downtown parking over time.
Directed Retailer Attraction Effort
In Section 4, we defined merchandise categories where demand indicates there are
gaps in the near term retail supply. The next stage is to identify specific retailers to
target, establish working strategies, and work with Downtown property owners in order
to identify appropriate space for those retailers. This effort would include:
. An inventory of all ground floor space in downtown by size, square footage,
existing tenant (where applicable), and other features (venting for
restaurants, dedicated parking, etc.) and developing a database of this
information;
. Drafting a targeted list of local and regional retailers/restaurants that may be
able to be attracted to downtown given existing space;
. Based on the mix of space downtown and the survey of the quality of that
space, estimating the investment required to match the existing vacant or
underutilized retail space in Downtown to (and/or rehab the space for)
certain types of retailers and restaurants;
. Determining how much retail could be developed in the downtown that
would be separate and distinct from existing retail space;
. Clearly delineating roles for the Main Street program, DDB, CRA, and City in
tenant attraction, location, and funding the cost and effort required to attract
those retailers;
. Developing the marketing materials and branding program for downtown as
required for tenant attraction; and
. Determining the extent and requirement for outside expertise to assist in the
tenant attraction/retention effort.
Events and Programs
Finally, the scope of work for this study included discussion of events and programs that
would act as regional draws to Downtown Clearwater. Below is a sampling of events
that were or are scheduled for 2005:
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
39
. Farmer's Market . Fun 'n' Sun Illuminated Night Parade
. Main Library Lecture Series . Fourth of July
. The MAIN Thing happy hour series . Chef and a Show
. Chili Extravaganza Challenge . Oh Boy! Oberto Redfish Cup
. Films on the Bluff . Taste of Clearwater
. WildSplash . Clearwater Hispanic Heritage Festival
. Sister Cities Wild Bazaar . Florida Orchestra
. Clearwater Celebrates Neighborhoods Week . Suncoast Cycling Classic
. Ice Cream Social . Clearwater Jazz Holiday
. Clearwater Heritage Day . Christmas Under the Oaks
. Smooth Jazz Fest . Florida Pirate Festival
. Cinco de Mayo . Festival of Trees
We believe that Downtown has a very active and varied event calendar, especially for a
city the size of Clearwater. That said, most of the activities take place in and around
Coachman Park and the Main Public Library. To better leverage the opportunities
created by the above events, the Main Street program, DDB, or (at such time one is
formed) a downtown merchant's association should:
. Plan events and promotions to draw attendees of the existing events into
Downtown before and after event times.
. Coordinate with event programmers to incorporate Downtown retailers into
existing events (e.g., the Chef and a Show series could feature chefs from
Downtown restaurants).
These are key aspects of event leverage incorporated by other Downtown groups
throughout the State of Florida and will enhance the opportunities for local merchants to
participate in these activities.
Additionally, the City should take care that planned developments for the Downtown
core do not limit access between the Library/ Coachman Park and Downtown retailers
and restaurants, and that future streetscape, signage, and parking improvements
encourage movement to and from the primary retail blocks along Cleveland Street.
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
40
Appendices
Pinellas County Employment by Industry, 1999-2010
Pinellas County Wages by Industry, 2004
Pinellas County Residential Building Permits, 1990-2005
Geographic Distribution of Pinellas County Builder Closings, 1999-
2004
Retail Survey
Downtown Office Inventory
Residential Retail Trade Model
Visitor Retail Trade Model
Downtown Clearwater Market Study
DRAFT Final Report - For Discussion Purposes Only
41
o
.....
o
N
o
-
III
I::
o
:;::::;
o
Q)
'0'
...
a..
J::
:t::
$:
<<i
o
o
N
I
.....
o
o
N
III
0-
J::
III
...
Q)
I::
::=
o
<C
>-
-
I::
::::l
o
U
III
..!!!
Qj
I::
a..
ul
Q)
0)
III
$:
-C
I::
<C
-
I::
Q)
E
>-
o
c..
E
w
-
o
III
::::l
III
I::
Q)
U
>-
;::
Q)
-
...
III
::::l
(1
(ij
::::l
I::
I::
<C
(J) 0 00
<001'-
00 I'- C')
~ <0- <0-
OC'\l<O
NLO
..... (J) .....
C'\I(J).....
10000C')
000.....
O'<t<O
N'<t
C') I'- (J)
LO'<t(J)
'<tOC'\l
'<to LO- 0-
C')<O
~'<t
MOOOOLO
0001'-'<t
OLO<OC')
N<oOO
C'\ILO
'<t
N(J)C'\I<O
O<OO'<t
OLOLO'<t
NLO.....
C'\I<O
'<t
01'-0
'<t'<tC'\l
1'-'<tC')
.....00'<t
O'<t<O
~'<t
...
-
III
::::l
-C
I::
Q)
-C
o
U
en
u
<C
z
'<tOO(J)LOO.....'<tLOI'-C'\ILO
.....0 <0<0 1'-0 C')'<t <01'-.....
<OI'-.....'<t 00..... 1'-00 LOC') C'\I
<0- (J)- 0- C'\I- 0- 1'-- <0- <0- 00- 0- 1'--
C'\IC')<OOO.....C')C')(J)'<tC'\lC'\l
'<t
(J)OC'\l(J)LOLOOC')OOOOC')
000 C'\I..... C')LO 000 O'<t I'-
C'\ILOI'-<OOLOI'-C')OO'<t.....
-----------
C')I'-I'-<O(J)C'\IC')LOC')'<tC'\l
C'\IC')OOI'- C')000'<t.....C'\I
C')
LOC')<O.....I'-LO.....LO'<t(J)C')
1'-1'-000..........<0.....0000
<OO'<tLOI'-I'-C'\I.....(J)'<tC'\l
C'\I-I'--LO-LO-OO-..... OO-C')-C'\I-C')-.....
C'\IC')I'-I'- C')(J)00'<t.....C'\I
C')
C'\I..... 0..... 0000 C')I'-<OC'\I I'-
LOOO.....OC')'<tOLOC')(J)(J)
'<tOO(J)OO<OLOLO'<tC'\lLOI'-
.....- <0- 1'-- LO- 0- .....- .....- .....- C'\I- C')- 0-
C'\IC')<OI'-.....C')(J)OO'<t.....C'\I
C')
0<0 I'-C') 1'-00 LO(J) O(J).....
<O(J)<O<O.....'<tC')C'\IC')C')<0
00..... O(J) <0<0 C'\IC'\I OC'\l 00
-----------
.....(J) '<tOO 00 LO..... C'\I'<t 0
C'\IC')<OI'-.....C')0000 '<t.....C'\I
C')
.....1'-C')OOC')O'<t<OC'\I<OC')
(J)C')(J)(J)LO.....'<tOOLOC')C'\I
<O'<tC'\I'<tOOC'\l<OI'-OO'<tI'-
-----------
.....C'\I'<tC'\lC')OLOOOOOC')O
C'\I'<tOOOO.....C')OI'-C').....C'\I
C') .....
0)
I::
I::
:5
-C
I:: I::
'(ij III
E I::
o 0
Cl~
O)t
0),= 8-
I:: I:: 0 III
o ">:: ::::l I:: I::
::::l-C~o
~~e~~
en 'S a.. Q)- E
I:: I:: a'l -g 0
o III ,!:1 '- c
O~>~
...
Q)
en
III
Q)
:E
III
Q)
()
"2: III
Q) Q)
(f) ()
III "2:
III Q)
~(f)
~E
III (]) ~
Q)
:;::;-gI
Slll-C
15 III ~
<C I:: I::
III 0 0
"g ~ ~
lll- ::::l
I:: e -C
LLo...W
~
I::
o
~ ~
Cf) ]2 0
~ "~ "~
":;: E -0
c.-c<(
(E<Ct
~ .~ ~
~ :0 E
6rij
2
"0..
III
o
I
-C
I::
III
~
::::l
"~
Q)
--l
Q)
e
:J
o
en
'<t
o
o
N
...
Q)
-
...
III
::::l
(1
J::
-
...
::::l
o
LL
III
0-
J::
III
...
Q)
I::
::=
o
<C
>-
-
I::
::::l
o
U
III
..!!!
Qj
I::
a..
ul
Q)
0)
III
$:
-C
I::
<C
-
I::
Q)
E
>-
o
c..
E
w
-
o
III
::::l
III
I::
Q)
U
>-
;::
Q)
-
...
III
::::l
(1
(ij
::::l
I::
I::
<C
00000000000000
LOLOLOOOOOLOOOOOLOO
.....(J)C')'<t(J)C'\I'<tC')(J)'<t0000C')'<t
--------------
<O..........I'-'<tLOC').....OLOOOI'-C')C'\I
C')'<tC'\lC')'<tC')C')'<tLOC')C').....C'\I'<t
ytytytytytytytytytytytytytyt
(ij
III ::::l
Q) I::
0)1::
lll<C
$:
Q)
0)
III
...
Q)
>
<C
C')(J) 1'-00 oo'<t 001'-0000 <0<0 1'-00
C'\IC')C'\I'<t(J)O<OC'\I.....OI'-LO<O'<t
>-1'-00 '<tI'-OOI'-<OOO Ol'-I'-C') '<tOO
3i:: yt yt yt yt yt yt yt yt .....- yt yt yt yt yt
Q) yt
Q)
$:
I::~
'(ij -g
... E III
- 0 III
gJ Cl Q)
-C ~
I:: III 0) ::::l
Q) I:: 0
';:: '0 III
- ::::l Q)
III-Cet::
::::l 0
-ga:~
= I ..3
III III III
_ -g Z
(ij 0 ro
0" ro
~ 0
N
Q)o..........C'\IC')C'\I.....C'\IC')'<tLO<OI'-OOO
-C O...............OC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lN
o 000 OOOOOOOOch
U w
en
u
<C
z
0)
I::
I::
:5
-C
I:: I::
'(ij III
E I::
o 0
Cl~
O)t
0),= 8-
I:: I:: 0 III
o ">:: ::::l I:: I::
::::l-C~o
~~e~~
en 'S a.. Q)- E
I:: I:: a'l -g 0
o III ,!:1 '- c
O~>~
...
Q)
en
I::~
'(ij -g
E III
o III
Cl Q)
~
III 0) ::::l
Q) I:: 0
';:: '0 III
- ::::l Q)
III-Cet::
::::l 0
-ga:~
= I ..3
III III III
_ -g Z
(ij 0 ro
0" ro
~ 0
N
O..........C'\IC')C'\I.....C'\IC')'<tLO<OI'-OOO
O...............OC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lC'\lN
000 OOOOOOOOch
W
III
Q)
:E
III
Q)
()
"2: III
Q) Q)
(f) ()
III "2:
III Q)
~(f)
~E
III (]) ~
Q)
:;::;-gI
Slll-C
15 III ~
<C I:: I::
III 0 0
"g ~ ~
lll- ::::l
I:: e -C
LLo...W
~
I::
o
~ ~
Cf) ]2 0
~ "~ "~
":;: E -0
c.-c<(
(E<Ct
~ .~ ~
~ :0 E
6rij
2
"0..
III
o
I
-C
I::
III
~
::::l
"~
Q)
--l
Q)
e
:J
o
en
~
Eo-<
Z
~
00.0
~u
~oo
~<trl
~~o
~~o
~~l"l
z=s~
....~~
~~~
::=z<
~<~
~zo
~OEo-<
:$....00.
Eo-<~'";'
z~~
~~~
s<
oo~
~<
~
<
Eo-<
.... ... :R :R :R :R :R
= IOJ) :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R
... = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" , \C) - C) \C) 0 \C) '" 0\ 0 - - C) '" 0 , \C)
.. '" t'-: C)
"" -= ""I" ;! ;! ~ - 0 "'1" V) '0 ;! 00 t- N - t-
... <; '0 ~ V) ""I" V) N
~ U , ,
'" p
~ V) V) M 0\ M 0\ 0 N - V) 0 '0 00 V) N
Ol = 0\ - 0\ M "'1" 00 0\ 0\ M M 00 0\ N "'1" 00 V) 0
= = 00" t-" - '0" ~ ~ "'1" 0 0" <'! t- M M ~ ~ M -
0 M" N" "'1"" N" "'1"" N" '0 00
~ U M M M M M M M M M
.... ... :R :R
= IOJ) :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R
-; ... = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" , <'1 0 C) "'1: "'1: 0 "'1: \C) 00 0\ 00 0 <'1 t'-: , C)
.... .. "'1: t'-: C)
0 "" -= M M N V) M N 00 - V) 9 00
Eo-< ... - t- - N ";' '0 - - N - - t- N N
~ U , ,
.. ~ t- 0\ t- N M '0 - 0 t- t- "'1" - V)
i:l. .... 0\ '0 t- '0
E ~ '0 00 '0 M 0 t- M M 00 V) 0 0 0\ V) t- '0 V)
... "'1" 0 t- o" ~ t- '0" t-" 00 0\" 00 0\ <'! '0 "'1" '0" N
.. .. 0" 0\" 0\" - M S:l" M V) t-" - t-" 0\" - '0" '0" t-"
Eo-< ~ - - - - - - N - - N N N V)
""" trl
? =
"" = .... l'1 ~ """ trl 1.0 t- oo 0\ = .... l'1 ~ """ ...: -
.. 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = "" ..:
... 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = 0' 0'
>- .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1
.... ....
'" '"
.... ....
.... ... :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R
= IOJ) :R 0 0 :R :R 0 0 0 :R 0 0 0 0 0 :R
... = 0 "'1: C) 0 0 t'-: 0\ "'1: 0 \C) \C) 00 C) 00
'" , C) V) - 00 , 0
.. C)
"" -= c;"' '0 0 c;"' 0\ M M "'1" 00 0 "'1" 0 00 V)
... '9 - '9 N ";' <; ;! t-;- '0 ~ 0
~ U - N M M -
'" p
~ V) 0 - M 0 "'1" 0\ ;! N 0\ "'1"
Ol = M '0 - "'1" S:l V) t- M - N 0 - t- 0\ 00 00
= = 0\" t-" 0\ <'! "'1"" N N 0" "'1"" 00 "'1" 0 00" M" t- t-
o V) -" V) N" 0\ N" t- - -
~ U - - - - - - - -
~
t!,
....... ... :R :R :R :R :R
] 5 IOJ) 0 0 :R :R :R :R :R :R :R 0 :R :R :R 0 0
= 00 \C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <'1 0 0 0 t'-: 00
.. '" .. , C) 00 C) t'-: t'-: C) <'1 00 V) C) ,
r.. ~ -= V) 00 N 0\ M 0 M '0 00 N ""I" 9 - 00 '0
""I" ""I" '0 t- - - M - M ""I" '0 ~ 0
.: ~ u -
~ .. ~
i:l. .... 0 M - 0\ N M N V) "'1" 0\ 0\ - - "'1" - "'1"
~ 0
E ... '0 t- t- V) 0 00 M 0\ 00 N M '0 M "'1" M M
V) "'1" <'! 0 t-" - '0 - - 0\ t-" "'1"" "'1"" t- N 0\ '0"
.. .. t-
Eo-< ~ "'1"" N" - N" M "'1"" "'1"" '0" t-" 0\" V) V) V) 00" '0" -
""" trl
? =
"" = .... l'1 ~ """ trl 1.0 t- oo 0\ = .... l'1 ~ """ ...: -
.. 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = "" ..:
... 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = 0' 0'
>- .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1
.... ....
'" '"
.... ....
.... ... :R :R
= IOJ) :R :R :R :R 0 :R :R :R :R :R :R 0 :R :R :R
... = 0 0 0 \C) 0 0 0 0 0 "'1: 0 0
'" , '" - 00 0 <'1 '" 0 V) '" 0\ 0 '" , '"
.. 0\ '" "'1:
"" -= 9 M t-;- - '1 c;"' - 0 00 - 00
... U M 0 - ";' 00 , - - N M M
~ , ,
'" p
~ 0 V) N 00 0 0\ M 00 S:l - 00 "'1" t- '0 00
Ol = '0 V) 0 0\ N M '0 V) N 0\ 0\ N '0 00 t- N
= = 0\" 0\" '0 M "'1" - 0\" 00" 0 00" t-" 0\" '0" '0" - V) M
0 N" N" N" N" N" N" "'1" '0
~ U - - - - - - - - -
.Q .... ...
Os = IOJ) :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R :R
... = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.. '" , C) "'1: 0 0 "'1: 0 0 - "'1: 0 t'-: 0 0\ - , '"
.. t'-: <'1 00 C) "'1: 00
r.. "" -= S:l 00 S:l S:l S:l 0\ S:l M V)
... V) 0\ "'1" '0 0 0\
... ~ U N , - - -
"SIJ
=
r;j .. ~ t- - 00 '0 t-
i:l. .... t- '0 V) 0 V) 0\ - - M "'1" t- N
~ 0\ N '0 "'1" '0 0 "'1"
E ... 0 - 0\ 00 0 00 0 "'1" '0 0 0 "'1" 00" 0\ N t- N
.. .. 0\" '0 "'1" 0\ 00 V) 0 V) 0" S:l" S:l" ;!" t-" 0" 00 '0"
'0" 00" 00" 0\" 00" 0\" 0\" V) "'1""
Eo-< ~ V) - - - N V)
""" trl
? =
"" = .... l'1 ~ """ trl 1.0 t- oo 0\ = .... l'1 ~ """ ...: -
...:
.. 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = "" ""
... 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ = = = = = 0' 0'
>- .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1 l'1
.... ....
'" '"
.... ....
'0
Q)
Cl
'"
CL
..<::
'"
....
oj
<l)
'"
<l)
~
'"
'"
<l)
:::
"iil
;:l
0:1
'" "0
"~ @
"E
;:l '"
0 z. "s
u "s 0
'" :::
..:::! ~ 0
0) '"
::: "-I
0:: "3 "-'
0
"0 8 g
@ <l) <l)
OJ ....
0 ~ ;:l
'" 0:1
'" ....
oj =0 oj"
p...
"0 "0
..<::" @ "C
bO 0
;:l OJ G:
0
.... "E "-'
0 0
.n <l) .P
= ....
..<:: "iil
t:2 0 ....
.n <l)
;>
'" '" "a
<l) <l)
"0 "0 ::J
;:l ;:l
Q Q ;,;
.s .s '"
....
/""'. 5: ;:l
- 0
'--' r/J
Vl
~
Z
....
Vl
0
~
U
~
~
~
~
....
~
~
>-
Eo-<
Z
~ ~
0 U
U ~
Vl ~
-< ~ "'"
~ ~ Q
~ Q
~ ~ l"1
Z
.... ~ a\
~ > a\
a\
~ ~ ,..,
0 Vl
Z Eo-<
....
0 Z
.... ~
Eo-<
~
~
~
Eo-<
Vl
....
~
U
....
==
~
~
~
0
~
~
0-"'1"(<) I"- o 0 (<) (<) "'1" (<) (<) 00 00 If)
t"-O\\ON 0\ (<)t"-\O"'1" 0\ "'1"t"--0\ \0
"'" "'1"0\1f)- 0\" t"-t"-ON (<) 0\00-- \0
Q \0" 0" \0" 0\" (<) \0" 00" t"-" "'1"" t"-" t"-" 0" 0\" 0" 00
Q \00(<)- \0 If)oot"-(<) If) N"'1"oo(<) t"-
l"1 If) "'1" "'1" N (<) - N N N N (<) (<) N N N
W W W W W W
- t"- 00 t"-
OO 0\ 00 \0 0\ If) (<) - 00 (<) "'1" "'1"
N"'1" - 0\ 0 If) - (<) (<) (<) - N \0 0\ If)
~ Noo-N "'1"" "'1"O\Nt"- 0\ t"-"'1"0\0\ 0
Q If)" "'1"" 0\" \0" If) 00" 00" \0" (<)" "'1"" \0" 00" 0\" If)" "'1"
Q "'1" "'1" \0 0\ - "'1"N\O(<) t"- 0- 00 t"- 0\
l"1 (<) (<) (<) - (<) -NN(<) N (<) (<) N N N
W W W W W W
fA - 0\ 0\ If) \0 0\ "'1" 0 0\ N "'1"t"- N
If) (<) If)
~ O\t"- \0 - N _ - t"- t"- N If) "'1" 00\ 0
(oJ l"1 (<) \0 0\ 0 t"- O(<)t"-(<) (<) 0\ -"'1" N 00
'C Q ..,.."' -.n" ~"' ~"' \0" "'1"" 0\" 00" If)" 00" N" 0\" -" 0\" N
~ Q \00\"'1"0\ 0\ 000\\00 0 N If) \0 If) 0
eSJ l"1 (<) N (<) - N ~ ~ M M (<) (<) N (<) N (<)
,5 w w w w w w
'"
0 -
0 o t"- t"-"'1" (<) t"-t"-N - 0\ 00 N \0 \0 -
N - N If) \0 0\-00 - (<) 00 "'1" \0 \0 0\
~ t"-O\(<)t"- 0" (<)NNt"- t"- 0\ If) (<) N t"-
,.., t"-" N" If)" \0" N" -" (<)" N" \0" 0" \0" (<)" \0"
eSJ Q (<) 0
~ Q N(<)"'1"\O "'1" t"-"'1"000 (<) 0- N N "'1"
:. l"1 (<)NN- N - - N N N (<)NNN N
~ W W W W W W
..
-< -
If) N 0\ "'1" If) (<) "'1" "'1" 0\ If) \0 00 N - 0
If) - "'1"t"- \0 0\0\0\ 00 (<) - (<) "'1" 00 0\
Q 00 (<) 0\ 0 t"- "'1""'1" 0"'1" (<) -t"-(<)If) t"-
Q 0" "'1"" \0" 0" 0\" N" t"-" (<)" 00" 0" 0" -" 0" (<)" 0\
Q O\ONO (<) If) "'1" If) - 0\ t"-O\ot"- If)
l"1 N N N N N ~ ~ M M N N-(<)N N
W W W W W W
- t"-
If) 00 \0 0\ 0\ N (<) 00 - N 0\ N If) 00
t"- "'1" \0 00 (<) 000\0 \0 N \0 "'1" \0 00 "'1"
a\ - - N - N ~\O~~ \0 (<) - (<) If) If)
a\ 0" If)" If)" 0" \0" If)" N" 0\" N" N" 00" N" 0" 0" t"-
a\ 0\ 0 (<) If) (<) "'1" "'1" \0 0 t"- \00\-00 -
,.., N N N- N ~ ~ ~ N - N - N- N
W W W W W W
t"- t"- t"-N (<) (<) If) - 0 0\ ON 00 N N
- - - If) 0 \0 (<) (<) 0\ - 00 If) "'1" "'1" N
"'" - - - N \0 - - "'1"" \0 "'1" N N ~O\ 0
Q N"
Q - - (<)
l"1
- \0 \0 0\ t"-
0\ \0 0\ N \0 00 If) If) \0 00 "'1"
00 \0 - "'1" - "'1" "'1" 0\ 0\ 00 (<) - - (<) 0
~ - - - - \0 (<) - \0 N N If) (<) (<)
Q -
Q
l"1
-
00 - (<) (<) If) 00 000 \0 N \0 - - 0\ t"-
l"1 N (<) - 0\ \0 \0 00 0\ 00 (<) 0\ - - t"- 0\
"0 N - - - \0 N N t"- N N "'1" "'1" (<)
Q -
~ Q
'" l"1
0
0 -
'" 0\ \0 t"- \0 00 00 o t"- - \0 t"- \0 "'1"t"- "'1"
- t"- t"- O t"- (<) If) \0 _ 0\ N (<) (<) N \0 \0
'2 ,.., N N - N 0\ - N If) (<) (<) N If) "'1"
Q
~ Q -
l"1
- o If) 00 0 t"- - N - - t"- \0 0- "'1"
(<)
Q 00 00 (<) 0\ 0\ \0 000\ - If) "'1" \0 (<) 0 "'1"
(<) N - - 0\ - (<) \0 "'1" (<) (<) If) \0
Q -
Q
l"1
- If) "'1" 0\ N t"- - N \0 \0 N If) - 00
0 \0
a\ (<) 00 \0 (<) N t"- 00 00 \0 - 00 t"- - 00
"'1" (<) - - - - - - "'1" If) "'1" N (<) If)
a\ - -
a\
,..,
~ ~ ~
-< -< -<
~~ Eo-< ~~ Eo-< ~~ Eo-<
~~ 0 ~~ 0 ~~ 0
>- Eo-< Eo-< Eo-<
= ~ Eo-< Eo-< ~ >- Eo-< Eo-< ~ Eo-< Eo-<
0 .... Zz ~ ~ Zz ~ Vl Zz
~ ~ ~~ Vl .... ~~ Vl Eo-< ~~
Uu ~ Uu .... Uu
(oJ -< == == '== -< == == '== Z == == '==
0 ~ ~
~ ~ Eo-< Eo-<== Eo-< ~ Eo-<Eo-<==Eo-< Eo-< Eo-<== Eo-<
~~Eo-<~ .... ~~Eo-<~ ~ ~~Eo-<~
~ oo~o Eo-< oo~o -< oo~o
~ ZZ~Vl ~ ZZ~Vl Eo-< ZZ~Vl
Z ~ 0
.... ~~~cb ~ ~~~cb ~~~cb
Vl Eo-<
00
.....
v
6-
~
v
S
0
.J::
0
-
00
.....
v
0-
0
V
..
v
"'0
S
0
<<=:
"'0
v
"'0
v
v
"'0
00
-
..9
"'0
8
~
.9
00
'S:
~
.g
00
v
~
00
.S
v
OIl
ro
...::<:
()
ro
0-
-
..9
--
v
00
;::l
0
.J::
v
OIl
ro
.....
v
~
0
-
"a
;::l
0'
V
V
;::l
"a
..
oS
.~
00
"a
.g
'S:
~ 00
t::
.S 0
0 0-
- . v
"'O:::! ~
vro "a
"'00-
v_ '.0
vo ~
"'0- V
ooV :::!
-.J:: 00
0- ~
-00
oov
~S v
00
;::j"P ~
U"'1"
~-
-ro v
()
v .....
- ;::l
0 0
z Vl
III
0::
w
I-
Z
W
o
...J
~
w
0::
0::
w
I-
~
<(
W
...J
o
U.
o
>-
w
1i:
:J
III
III
c:
o
-6
"'0
<(
....
III
Qj
:t
u.
!!1
1:
Qj
0::
;f<
>-
o
c:
III
o
~
u.
III
u.
III
III
Qj
c:
C:
u.
III
::;
.r::
o
c:
<(
III
::;
.r::
o
c:
<(
:3
C)
Qj
E
III
Z
....
Qj
1:
Qj
o
vi
Qj
.s ~
c:
:2: III
<( :;
() III
LL .~
Cf)"'O
?i c:
I'-- III
'<l'
<h
o
o
ci
N
<h
:R
o
o
N
<0
00
1'--,
N
<0
I{)
o
r--:
N
N
C')
I{)
C')
ro
N
I{)
vi
'~
o
-' Q)
vi Ol
~ m
:.el-
l- Q;
=C g-
III Cf)
c:
Qj vi
c: III
:.:J~
o
o
1ii
o
()
(J)
o
'<t
L!"i
I{)
I'--
.r::
t::
o
Z
(J)
>-
"iijj
:2: .2'
.... I
Qj Cf)
~~
III 0
Qj I{)
U~
o
o
c:i
'"
.,.
CD
CO
.....
'"
.....
CD
It)
o
r--:
'"
'"
M
It)
M
a:i
'"
It)
'"
o
'<t
.n
It)
.....
~
Qj
1:
Qj
o
~
o
a.
"iij
o
:c
:J
III
o
o
C'"i
<.;
o
o
'<l'
<.;
:R
o
~
N
:R
o
o
ci
:R
o
'<l'
o
o
'<t,
N
o
o
o
ro
I{)
'<t
L!"i
C')
C')
t::::
cD
.....
I{)
00
<0
ro
N
(J)
<0
I'--
o
I'--
N
I'--
C')
C'i
o
(J)
o
I'--
L!"i
<0
.~
:n
:J
a.
"'0
Q;
.><
o
W
~
~
"iij
~<3C)
CO .s Q)
1;) If).a
~ f~
III 0 U.
:::> 0:: III
~ .!!1--~
1Il:g~
Qj III ,
:.c lo... If)
III III Qj
[]J:2: .!:
"'0
:;
[]J
'<t
Cii
L!"i
o
I{)
00
o
o
N
N
'<t
(J)
C')
-<i
(J)
"'0
III III
N 0
III 0::
ii: Qj
~~
lIil~
o .
;!(j)
"5~
C)I{)
.r:: .r:: .r::
t:: .... t:: t::
o OJ 0 0
Zt:Z z Q)
5(J)~~~(J) ~
- >-Ol>-~>- <(>
~ ~ ,:: ~.::: ~ ~
"0 ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ .~
o .- 0 .- 0 ._ a. g
....IJ:I()I....(/)
QjCf)IIICf) Cf)Qj~
III :::> '" :::> III :::> III
iO~LO~oiCl)
~~~~~~~~
UNCN5~u
vi
Qj
.s ~
:2: Q;:2: ~
<(j<(~
~"'O ~.!:
Cf) ~ Cf) "'0
i:O en C
<D ~ m
'<l' N
<h <h
vi
Qj
><
.l9
o
o
'<l'
<.;
:R
o
Lri
<0
00
N
L!"i
.....
o
cri
C')
o
o
o
L!"i
<0
.....
o
-<i
o
o
~
N
<.;
:R
o
'<t
to
I{)
N
N
ro
(J)
00
o
C'i
N
(J)
00
-<i
;::
III
o
U)- ii
<5 ~
-'.><
Ol 0
iii 8
:1!!.- ~
"iijI
~ Qj
U)- .a
-c 'c
o :;
~ u.
Qj III
..Q 0
<(-'
Ol
iii
co
(J)
r--:
N
It)
'"
M
.....
.,.
.....
.....
'"
M
'"
M
'<t
CD
'"
M
'"
'"
'<t
.....
en
.....
It)
It)
CO
M
'"
It)
.....
~
'2
:J
E
E
o
o
"iij
o
:c
:J
III
vi
Qj Qj
>< 0
~ ~
:2: ~
(3 .!:
0"'0
o c:
r--: III
<h
o
o
Lri
N
<h
:R
o
o
ci
o
I{)
<0,
.....
I'--
00
00
ro
N
.~
:n
:J
a.
I'--
C')
I{)
o
'<t
....
Qj
1:
Qj
o
Ol .
.:: ~
~'2
,g g
III 'C
III (;;
7ijI
Ou:
::;
-eCf)
III (J)
I<o
o
~
N
<.;
:R
o
o
Lri
<0
:R
o
o
ci
(J)
I{)
0,
~
I'--
<0
.....,
~
o
o
<0
-<i
N
o
o
o
'"
N
III
o
-'
Ol
iii
<(
z
I'--
<0
C'i
<0
o
o
<0
-<i
N
(/)- (/)-
Q) Q) Q) Q)
x 0 x 0
~ ~ ~ ~
:2: :;:2: :;
(3 .~ (3 .~
0""00""0
~ ~ L() ~
N N
<h <h
o
o
r--:
<h
>-
c
00
g E ~
cO ~ N
b9-~Z9-
~
Vl
:R
o
o
ci
o
o
N
L!"i
III
t::
III
a.
, 0
~!
~c?5
III '
~.....
:c m
.r:: Q;
III c:
~~
~
o
o
o
o
o
L!"i
I'--
vi
Qj Qj
>< 0
.l9 c:
III
:2: :;
<( III
() .!:
I{)-g
N III
<h
o 0
~ ~
N N
Z; Z;
:R
o
o
ci
:R
o
(J)
to
?F-
~
.....
?F-
a:>
LO
o 0
I{) 0
'<t N,
L!"i
o
o
o
o
N
C')
<0
C'i
I{)
<0
<0
00,
o
<0
cri
C')
00
'<t
I'--
L!"i
N
Qj
c:
.~
:2:
1ii
~
~-
o
o
~
'E
III
u.
~
()
o
o
o
o
N
.....
Cii
ro
I'--
N
<0
(J)
cD
o
I{)
o
C'i
C')
:R
o
~
N
o
I'--
00
cri
'<t
N
N
(J)
L!"i
C')
.~
:n
:J
a.
N
(J)
I'--
L!"i
00
:R
o
o
ci
III
:.c;
E
:J
o
()
vi
)
o
III
[]J
N
o
r--:
C')
....
:E :E :E~
o 0 0 OJ
Z Z ZO~
(J) Q) Q) Cl m
~ ~ ~l::-1
Q) 1: ~ Q) Q) '0.. ~
>Qj5~.i( .i(Q.Qj
....~c:~:J"U~'U.,gCO
~~~Ig~~~~Z
~CO~CI)"C~~~~~
ou.i~~~IQjI..JT"""
g8~8~~~IDZ'~
~~[]J~J:~0l00~;!
....
Qj
1:
Qj
o ;v-
Ol ~
c: "'0
Q) '8:.= l::
~om~"'C >-
-.r:: Qj (;;"iij ~
~Cf)III~g~:2:>
n:s -g n:s co U) :J U) "'C
n:~~-gQJO~~
"'C~O::m8:~u;~
~i3~-g.,g~W8
~~~i~~!~
"'0
III
o
0::
Qj
.... Qj
III .r::
:J 0
0"-
III Qj
[]J
"iij .
'i:: (j)
Qj N
Q.(J)
~;!
o 0
I'-- 0
00 00
o cri
C') I{)
Q)
'x
o
c
c:
~
C
III
o
~
N
<0
(J)
cD
C')
I'--
'<t
L!"i
I'--
:R
o
o
ci
N
00
I'--
L!"i
C')
C')
00
C'i
C')
~
III C
E III
m ::;
.r:: III
a. 1ii
,Ill Qj
QjO::
.r:: III
o '>-
~ ::l
.~- ~
:n
:J
a.
I{)
<0
cri
'<t
.....
It)
N
.....
.,.
'<t
M
.....
a:i
CO
'<t
'<t
'<to
.....
CO
'"
o
CD
o
r--:
M
'"
'"
It)
.....
r--:
CD
It)
"'0
o
o
.r::
::;
..c
.r::
Ol
'ijj
Z
"iij
o
:c
:J
III
.....
M
'<t
.n
'"
.....
M
'<t
.....
:;
.....
It)
It)
.....
.n
CO
"'.
M
It)
'"
-<i
.....
o
'"
..:..i
~
o
I-
It)
M
o
M
CO
'"
ui
Q)
""
1:
Q)
1:
Q)
E:
Q)
Ol
.,
s:::
.,
E:
....
~
s:::
.,
~
Q)
~
o
t
Q)
Q.
e
Q.
:S
.~
~
Q)
.~
~
.S
.,
'S
C
o
.~
"
q:
t::
Q) ....
..Q .,
E: ~
., ....
-.J Q)
S Q.
" C5
~ ~
., ~
" .,
g. ~ 5-
C~ '"
~ ~ a
~ Ol ~
Ci .& ~
~ ~ ~
s::: -<:: .,
<3~~
0)0'0
.[ g ~
Q. :;, '"
.g 0 ~
CIJ O't::
CI) en 0..
-~ .~ ~
~ en uj
::s E Q)
~~~
~ ,s ~
al E: ~
~~~
0:: ~ .~
~ ~ E
~ ~ m
<: " .,
E: ~ 15
.g ai E:
s::: 0 E:
~ ~8
co 'a II
E Q.::;;:
.e..gq:
,sCIJO
~
.!<2
,.
"0
'"
~
.Q
E
'"
-J
~
S
o
(J)
:s
Qj
1ii
E
~
!!!.
....
Qj
~
III
Qj
U
c:
:=
o
~
o
o
a> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f'-. C\I
- 0 I[) 0 I[) 0 I[) 0 I[) 0 0 0
III f'-. (J) OJ I[) CO OJ I[) C'\I ~ 0 C'\I .0
0::: ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....
a> ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ- ffJ-
If) ZZZZ Z ZZ Z ZZ Z
III
a>
...J
::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ::R ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a> 0 0 0 0 0 0 (J) f'-. 0 f'-. 0 0 "<t 0 OJ 0 0 OJ OJ 0 C') ....
- C'\I C'\I CO "<t ....
III
0:::
:>.
u
s:::
III o "'r"'"" f'.. 0 CO 0 o OJ (J) OJ Q)
U , ('\J ('l") "r'""" 0 , f'-. CO , o C') C'\I , CO
~ (J)OJC'\IO OJ I[) Of'-. C'\I C'\I "'-
- - - -
OJ C'\I C'\I C'\I "<t C') (J) ~ I[) ....
u.. C') C'\I C') M
(J) ....
OCOC')OC')O"<tC'\lOOOOCOO(J)OO"<tC')OJOI[) M
O(J)C'\IO(J)I[)C')OOOOI[)(J)OC')I[)Of'-.~OJOO ....
Of'-."<tO~~COC')I[)OO"<tOOC')C'\IOCO~OJOC') ....
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ..j'
~ OJ"<tI[)COC')"<t"<t OJC'\ICOI[)OCOf'-.C'\I"<tC'\lOC'\lOJ
u.. ~ C'\I"<t~(J)C'\IC')C') C'\I ~ ('\J('\JOCO"'=t('l")('l")"r'"""('\J"r'""""r'"""('l") ",
~ ....
(J)
Q)
o
III
0-
UJ
Q)
o
==
o
s:::
::=
o
-
s:::
::=
o
c
-
J::
Cl
'Qj
:I:
(/) (/)
Cla>
C .C
'6.8
(/)
EI[)
C'\I
(/) (/) (/) (/) Q) (/)
a> a> a> a> a> a>
.~ .~ .~ .~ ~ .~
WWWWLOW
C'\I ~ C'\I "<t I[)
~
--
Q)
a>
-
"<t
OJ
"<t f'-.
C'\I I[)
~.~ ~ ~
1i5 0 .~ .~
WWW
"<t C'\I C')
(/) (/)
a> Cl
.~ 06
1iJ
C'\I
:::l
..0
~
o
1f
~
"<t
:::
::::l
al
O(J)OJC')I[)OJI[)I[)OJC'\IC'\I~~OI[)f'-."<tCOC')C')OC'\l
C')(J)COOJCOI[)OJf'-.OJf'-.COOJ(J)"<tOJOJOJ(J)COf'-.OOJ
(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)(J)O(J)
~ C'\I
OJ
C'\I
(J)
...
III
a>
>-
If)
If)
III
U
al~Oalalal~~alalOal~alalOalOOalalO
-
a>
a>
...
-
(J)
a>
>
~
...
a>
..0
E
::::l
Z
.C
C :::l
a> 0
"E (/)
Cll .!!1
(92:
zuj
C') 0
C') 0
~
~
C'\I
-0 Cll
-gffi-g""6-g-g
Cll J:: Cll ~ Cll Cll
Qj .~ Qj (/) Qj Qj
iii I iii 0 iii iii
OujOZOO
I[)OO 0
I[)OOC'\lOO
C'\I C') "<t CO CO
C Z (/) a>
5l a> a> >
.~ -g -g & ~ -g -g ~ ~ ~
I~~~~~~t~~~Qjt~
u.. > >-..... >-E:::l >(9 (/) E:::l2:
+-' .!!! .!!! ::i Cll .!!! 0 o.!!! .!!1:::l 0
(/)00(9(90000Z2:I--O(/)
I[)OO(J)C')C') C'\IO~"<t I[)O
COOC')(J)C')OO~I[)O~C'\IC')C')
"'=t"r'""""r'""""'=t LO"'=t('\J"r'""" ('l")('\J(()C'\J
~ ~ ~
a>
E
III
Z
Cl
s:::
'5
::::l
al
2:
:J
0:::
~2-
cClCl
~ C C
~'6'6
C :::l :::l
~alal
Co .C "'C
(9 ~ ffi
(/)Qj
Z.!!1 >
C')2:a>
C') 0
~(/)I[)
~OLO
C'\I 0 C'\I
Qj
0>(/)10
C a> :;"
-o'61OC
C -; .0 ~
~al5lo
Cl J:: ~ 10
i:"S
o -0 E
g (/) ""6 .~
C')EE_
~~~
2
C
a>
O~:::l
:::l Qj Cl ro Co al
al.......o Cco...~c
2E2Q5 0
~ a> C Cll C 5 ~ .w a> ~
..... Co a> J:: .0 0 :::l (/) U
.;;; :::l 0 0 0... I-- al 2 lI::O- ro
E rr ~ ~ ~ ~ cae
<((/)2222 coO:::"E 0
_ ..... Cll Cll Cll Cll E Cll ~
o .cu ~ ~ ~ ~ J:: ~ -E' Z
~~~~~~~~~~
alalOOOOOOOi.L
Cl
C
'6
Cl
C
'6
2
C
a>
5 0
152 (/)~
We ~~
a>a> ~u
:::l 0 0 ~
~~~roW
>:.+:::iCOCC
~30o(/)-5l
C a> C 0..
~X""6~E
CoWg'Oo
(9~:.:J0::~
If)
a>
Cl
III
...
a>
>
~
If)
(ij
-
o
I-
l!)
o
o
C\l
C3
o
CIl
.s;
'tl
<::(
1:::
Q)
-Q
E
co
-J
'tl'
o
E
<::(
~
Q)
"6
o
1:::'
o
Q.
Q)
a::
~
'tl
'tl
co
~
Q)'
'tl
.S
(9
_CIl
~
(j
co
Cii
Ui
Q)
f2
::J
o
C/)
<ESIDENT EXPENDITURES FORECAST, BY MAJOR CATEGORY, Downtown Clearwater Census Tract:
2005 - 2010
2005 2010
TOTAL POPULATION 4,498 5,886
PER CAP IT A INCOME $18,403 $19,260
TOTAL INCOME $82,784,688 $113,361,591
TOTAL NON-AUTO RETAIL EXPENDITURES $24,918,191 $34,121,839
% OF TOTAL INCOME 30.10% 30.10%
2005 2010
EXPENDITURES BY STORE TYPE:
TOTAL $24,918,191 $34,121,839
GENERAL MERCHANDISE $5,521,871 $7,561,399
DEPT STORE $2,451,950 $3,357,589
MISC GEN MDSE $3,069,921 $4,203,811
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES $3,054,970 $4,183,337
MENS & BOYS CLOTHING $142,034 $194,494
WOMENS READY TO WEAR $451,019 $617,605
CHILDREN'S CLOTHING $47,345 $64,831
FAMILY CLOTHING $996,728 $1,364,874
CLOTHING ACCESSORIES STORES $717,644 $982,709
SHOES $438,560 $600,544
OTHER APPAREL NEC $261,641 $358,279
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT $1,161,188 $1,590,078
FURNITURE STORES $234,231 $320,745
HOME FURNISHINGS $226,756 $310,509
HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES $64,787 $88,717
RADIO & TV $231,739 $317,333
COMPUTER AND SOFTWARE STORES $246,690 $337,806
MUSIC STORES $156,985 $214,968
HARDWARE $142,034 $194,494
MISCELLANEOUS S-G $2,982,707 $4,084,384
USED MERCHANDISE $47,345 $64,831
SPORTING GOODS, BICYCLE $328,920 $450,408
BOOK STORES $236,723 $324,157
OFFICE SUPPLIES, STATIONERY STORES $169,444 $232,029
JEWELRY STORES $814,825 $1,115,784
HOBBY, TOYS, GAMES $152,001 $208,143
CAMERA, PHOTO SUPPLIES $17,443 $23,885
GIFT, SOUVENIR STORES $493,380 $675,612
LUGGAGE, LEATHER $276,592 $378,752
SE\I\i1NG, NEEDLEWORK $14,951 $20,473
FLORIST $99,673 $136,487
ART DEALERS $142,034 $194,494
NEWS DEALERS $29,902 $40,946
MISC NEC $159,476 $218,380
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOTAL $12,862,770 $17,613,693
FOOD STORES $4,627,308 $6,336,425
GROCERY STORES $3,805,008 $5,210,405
CONVENIENCE STORES $630,430 $863,283
OTHER FOODS NEC $191,870 $262,738
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS $4,086,583 $5,595,982
RESTAURANT, LUNCH, CAFETERIA $2,379,687 $3,258,636
FAST FOOD $1,547,420 $2,118,966
Lambert Advisory LLC
RETENTION AND SALES INFLOW FACTORS
RESIDENT EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL 2005 2010
GENERAL MERCHANDISE $5,521,871 $7,561,399
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES $3,054,970 $4,183,337
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT $1,161,188 $1,590,078
HARDWARE $142,034 $194,494
MISCELLANEOUS S-G $2,982,707 $4,084,384
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOTAL $12,862,770 $17,613,693
FOOD STORES $4,627,308 $6,336,425
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS $4,086,583 $5,595,982
DRUG $1,572,338 $2,153,088
LIQUOR $79,738 $109,190
CONVENIENCE GOODS/SUBTOTAL $10,602,690 $14,518,842
BUILDING MATERIALS $1,457,714 $1,996,128
PRIMARY MARKET AREA RETENTION
GENERAL MERCHANDISE 50.00% 50.00%
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES 10.00% 12.50%
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT 5.00% 7.50%
HARDWARE 5.00% 5.00%
MISCELLANEOUS S-G 40.00% 45.00%
FOOD STORES 10.00% 80.00%
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 40.00% 60.00%
DRUG 90.00% 90.00%
LIQUOR 90.00% 90.00%
BUILDING MATERIALS 10.00% 10.00%
PERCENT SALES INFLOW FROM SECONDARY MARKET
GENERAL MERCHANDISE 200.00% 200.00%
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES 75.00% 125.00%
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT 20.00% 30.00%
HARDWARE 5.00% 5.00%
MISCELLANEOUS S-G 75.00% 125.00%
FOOD STORES 10.00% 40.00%
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS 150.00% 600.00%
DRUG 30.00% 80.00%
LIQUOR 10.00% 10.00%
BUILDING MATERIALS 5.00% 5.00%
NET SALES POTENTIAL
GENERAL MERCHANDISE $8,282,807 $11,342,099
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES $534,620 $1,176,564
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT $69,671 $155,033
HARDWARE $7,457 $10,211
MISCELLANEOUS S-G $2,087,895 $4,135,439
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOTAL $10,982,450 $16,819,345
FOOD STORES $509,004 $7,096,797
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS $4,086,583 $23,503,123
DRUG $1,839,635 $3,488,003
LIQUOR $78,941 $108,098
CONVENIENCE GOODS/SUBTOTAL $6,514,163 $34,196,020
BUILDING MATERIALS $153,060 $209,593
Lambert Advisory LLC
<ESIDENT EXPENDITURES FORECAST, BY MAJOR CATEGORY, Downtown Clearwater Census Tract:
2005 - 2010
WARRANTED SPACE BY STORE GROUP
TOTAL SALES POTENTIAL
2005
GENERAL MERCHANDISE
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT
HARDWARE
MISCELLANEOUS S-G
$8,282,807
$534,620
$69,671
$7,457
$2,087,895
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOT AL
$10,982,450
$509,004
$4,086,583
$1,839,635
$78,941
FOOD STORES
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS
DRUG
LIQUOR
CONVENI ENCE GOODS/SUBTOT AL
$6,514,163
$153,060
BUILDING MATERIALS
TOTAL SALES POTENTIAL
$17,649,673
2005
$250
$300
$225
$225
~
$260
SALES PER SQUARE FOOT:
GENERAL MERCHANDISE
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT
HARDWARE
MISCELLANEOUS SHOPPER GOODS
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOT AL
FOOD STORES
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS
DRUG
LIQUOR
CONVENI ENCE GOODS/SUBTOT AL
$275
$400
$400
~
$384
BUILDING MATERIALS
$115
AVERAGE
$292
WARRANTED SQUARE FEET:
GENERAL MERCHANDISE
APPAREL & ACCESSORIES
FURNITURE & HOME EQUIPMENT
HARDWARE
MISCELLANEOUS SHOPPER GOODS
33,131
1,782
310
33
6,960
42,216
SHOPPER GOODS/SUBTOT AL
FOOD STORES
EATING & DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS
DRUG
LIQUOR
1,851
10,216
4,599
316
CONVENI ENCE GOODS/SUBTOT AL
16,982
1,331
BUILDING MATERIALS
TOTAL WARRANTED RETAIL SPACE
NON-RETAIL SPACE
NON RETAIL PERCENT
60,529
10,682
15.00%
TOTAL
ANNUAL NET NEW DEMAND
CUMULATIVE NET NEW DEMAND
71,210
Lambert Advisory LLC
2010
$11,342,099
$1,176,564
$155,033
$10,211
$4,135,439
$16,819,345
$7,096,797
$23,503,123
$3,488,003
$108,098
$34,196,020
$209,593
$51,224,958
2010
$250
$300
$225
$225
~
$260
$275
$400
$400
~
$384
$115
$292
45,368
3,922
689
45
13,785
63,809
25,807
58,758
8,720
432
93,717
1,823
159,349
28,120
15.00%
187,469
23,252
116,259
Estimated Annual Retail Expenditures, Visitors
2005 2010
Clearwaterl Clearwater Beach Visitors (hotel, VFR, and business visitors)
Number of Visitors 937,411 1,004,632
Change
67,222
Expenditure Potential
Food & Beverage $217,518,801 $260,741,371
Shoppers Goods $77,697,560 $93,136,631
Downtown Capture Rate 5% 10%
Food & Beverage Expenditures $10,875,940 $26,074,137 $15,198,197
Shoppers Goods Expenditures $3,884,878 $9,313,663 $5,428,785
Expenditures, Downtown Visitors $14,760,818 $35,387,800 $20,626,982
Visitor Days 260,000 663,000 403,000
Daily Food and Beverage Expenditure $33 $33
Daily Shoppers Good Expenditure $12 $12
Expenditure Potential
Food & Beverage $8,659,050 $22,080,577 $13,421 ,527
Shoppers Goods $3,093,006 $7,887,166 $4,794,160
Downtown Capture Rate 10% 20%
Food & Beverage Expenditures $865,905 $4,416,115 $3,550,210
Shoppers Goods Expenditures $309,301 $1,577,433 $1,268,133
Expenditures, Institutional Visitors $ 1,175,206 $ 5,993,549 $ 4,818,343
Visitor Days 300,000 300,000
Daily Food and Beverage Expenditure $10 $10
Daily Shoppers Good Expenditure $5 $5
Expenditure Potential
Food & Beverage $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $0
Shoppers Goods $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0
Downtown Capture Rate 5% 10%
Food & Beverage Expenditures $150,000 $300,000 $150,000
Shoppers Goods Expenditures $75,000 $150,000 $75,000
Expenditures, Day Visitors $ 225,000 $ 450,000 $ 225,000
Inpatient Admission Days 107,902 107,902
Inpatient Visitors (.5 per inpatient) 15,415 15,415
Outpatients 9,421 9,421
Estimated MPH-Related Visitors 132,737 132,737
Food and Beverage Expenditure $5 $5
Shoppers Good Expenditure $5 $5
Expenditure Potential
Food & Beverage $663,685 $663,685
Shoppers Goods $663,685 $663,685
Downtown Capture Rate 5% 15%
Food & Beverage Expenditures $33,184 $99,553
Shoppers Goods Expenditures $33,184 $99,553
Expenditures, MPH Visitors $66,369 $199,106 $132,737
0) COco N-.:t CD
U ...- (J) 0
ro Q) 1'-00 -.:t_ 1'-_ C\!,
Cl I'-_N
c.. s::: -.:t - I'-N 0
Cf) III CO 00 -.:tN .....
J: 0)(")
U _ 00
ro 00 -
...-CO
-- tF7tF7
0)
0:: 1.0 0) 0 1.0 1.0 0 L[)
C O-.:t 0 N(,,) CD 0
00 CO (") N...- M 0
$: tF7 N
0 0) 0 I'- I'- ..;-
0 ..... OO-.:t I'- (") ..... ~
-- 0 00 ...- ..... 0
C N en
$: 0...- ":;
(") ...- ""0
0 tF7 tF7 <(
0 Qj
0) 0 ..Q
0) (") (") ...- 'Ot E
..c NCO 0 ...--.:t II) III
0(") (") 00 (") ..... --'
ro tF7 ..;- >;
-- II) I.ON O)-.:t
l.... 0 NO N...- 'Ot Ol
0 0 0) (") ..Q
c.. N 0
...--.:t c
c.. ...- tF7 Q)
:::::l tF7 "0
Cf) CI)
.....
"'C 0
.r::
C ()
ro ::;
.r::
C/) U
0) 2
l....
:::::l "0..
-- en
"'C 0
I
C C
0) ..!!!
c.. 0...
>< c
W Q) .8
0 0
III
ro 0- :2:
-- C/) en-
0) Q)
0:: III ()
Q) CI) Q) CI) Q) CI) - "2:
ro Q) Q)
0)-0 0)-0 0)-0 e:::: CI)
:::::l ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ III
C Q) 0 Q) 0 Q) 0 ro
c >0 >0 >0 .c 0
<( Q) CI) Q) CI) Q) CI) III .r::
a:l ..... a:l ..... a:l ..... t:: e
"'C 06 Q) 06 Q) 06 Q) 0 III
0) C. C. C. 0- Q)
-0 C. -0 C. -0 C. 0- en
-- Q)
ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::::l 0:::
E OJ: OJ: OJ: C/)
LLC/) LLC/) LLC/) Q)
:;::; iii e
C/) - :J
W 0 0
I- CI)