Loading...
GULF -TO-BAY BOULEVARD REVITALIZATION PROJECT Pres. #-a. ep.l5-CJ8 GULF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD REVITALIZATION PROJECT .'~'f'~ ;,~. !~'~1 ",-.; ., ,..: ,. j. 2 Clearwater '- u NABORS, GIBLIN Be NICKERSON, P.A. GOVERNMENT SERVICES GROUP, INC. G L A T TIN G JACKSON K E R C HER A NG L I N Lop E Z R I N E H ART, IN C . JUNE 1998 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Clearwater I 5 GULF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD REVITALIZATION PROJECT Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Objectives Summary of Analysis Action Plan Remaining Issues 1. Existing Conditions 2. Redevelopment Issues 3. Redevelopment Objectives 4. Redevelopment Vision 5. Traffic Management Recommendations 6. Aesthetic Enhancement Recommendations 7. Estimate of Construction Costs 8. Funding Alternatives 9. Action Plan Appendices P ., -#:'1 (' e s~ VI-k-h C) V1 d-.... (;-IS'-9B LF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD ~~~~~~~~ ..;.r,...,....."'...~~.~.-.;'-~~I'" I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I I I INTRODUCTION Government Services Group, Inc. ("GSG") specializes in providing management consulting services to local governments utilizing computer based technology and process oriented analysis. GSG is also affiliated with and partially owned by Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A. ("NG&N"), a law fIrm dedicated to the representation of local governments on issues of fmance and taxation. Glatting, Jackson, Kercher, Anglin, Lopez and Rinehart ("GJ") is a consulting fIrm that provides community planning services to local governments especially related to redevelopment activities. GSG and GJ, working under the direction of NG&N, have combined their unique expertise to develop a design plan and funding options for the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard redevelopment effort. , The City of Clearwater (the "City") has entered into a professional services agreement with GSG, NG&N and GJ to provide specialized services in the development of a conceptual fInancing and design plan for the revitalization of Gulf-to- Bay Boulevard (the "Gulf-to-Bay Project"). I I I I II I I The Gulf-to-Bay corridor provides regional access to downtown Clearwater and the beach. As the corridor is used by more than 65,000 vehicles per day including tourists, commuters and residents, the City deemed it important to target corridor enhancements as critical to insuring that this central corridor is attractive and reflective of the City's high quality of life. As such, the Gulf-to-Bay corridor became an integral feature of the City-wide vision for redevelopment titled, "Clearwater - One City. One Future. A Blueprint for the City's Future," adopted by the City Commission in January 1998. OBJECTIVES The primary objectives of the Gulf-to-Bay Project are to develop a preliminary design plan and funding alternatives for the City that will aid in the revitalization of this corridor, and to provide a report ("Report") that contains the results of our information and analysis regarding the policy decisions which need to be made. To this end, GSG, NG&N and GJ have been charged to address the following objectives: · Prepare typical design plans, sections and/or sketches illustrating a design concept for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard reflecting themes and issues established by City staff and offIcials . Prepare a preliminary estimate of the construction costs to implement the design concept illustrated in the sketches . Develop a series of funding options available to the City based on the conceptual presentation of the development options and other issues deemed to be benefIcial to the City's revitalization efforts I I I I I I 2 Clearwater f- I U GULF-TO-BA I I I I I~ I I I I I I I SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS RESULTS To accomplish the objectives of the Gulf-to-Bay Project, a series of charettes were conducted with City, County and State staff members, as well as with other City consultants, to obtain a consensus regarding the role of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard within the context of the City's roadway network and as well as developing a vision for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard in serving the future needs of the City. To develop the Gulf-to-Bay Project, the 6 112 mile long Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard was divided into five (5) distinct districts. From east to west, these include: · Gateway District - 1/2 mile length from the Welcome Center on Courtney Campbell Causeway west to the overpass at McMullen Booth Road (CR 611) · Eastern District -11/4 mile length from McMullen Booth Road to U.S. 19 Overpass Road · Eastern Central District - 1 mile length from U.S. 19 Overpass to Belcher Road · Central District -13/4 mile length from Belcher Road to the split at Highland Avenue · Western District - 2 mile length from Highland Avenue to the foot of Memorial Causeway over Clearwater Harbor (including Court Street) For purposes of this Report, the northern split to Cleveland Street is considered part of the downtown Cleveland Street Corridor and is not included in this analysis. A number of redevelopment issues were identified. Based on these issues, redevelopment objectives were created. The redevelopment objectives were categorized as follows: · Land Use · Traffic Management/Safety · Aesthetic Enhancement Based on the redevelopment objectives, a redevelopment vision for the future Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, "Clearwater's Grand Boulevard," was created. To achieve the redevelopment vision for the future Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, recommendations are provided related to traffic management and aesthetic enhancements. Estimates of costs to construct the improvements have been identified and included in the Report. I I To fund these improvement costs, it is recommended that the City: . Research and apply for all available State and federal grants . Seek a contribution from Pinellas County, Florida Department of Transportation, and Federal Government · Impose special assessments to fund the portion of the cost properly allocable to the property owners · Contribute the portion of the cost that cannot be funded by special assessments from other City funds . Consider constructing a portion of the Gulf-to-Bay Project in one or more demonstration areas · Establish a formal or informal advisory board to assist with developing community consensus I I I I ~ Clearwater f- I U GULF-TO-B ........:: 2 I ACTION PLAN I This section of the Executive Summary provides an overview of the most critical steps included in the redevelopment action plan to implement the recommendations provided within this Report. I 1. Meet with Florida Department of Transportation to verify feasibility. 2. Create a public/private project steering committee. 3. Develop fInal consensus regarding the required improvements to be constructed. 4. Prepare and design construction documents and estimates of costs. 5. Determine fInal budget and viable funding alternative or alternatives. I REMAINING ISSUES I GSG, NG&N and GJ have identified the following issues that require further consideration with respect to the preliminary recommendations and action plan that have been developed and presented within this Report. I Issue 1: Conditions Assumed in Report Conclusions I I The recommendations provided in this Report are predicated on the consensus decisions .of stakeholders reached at this point of the Gulf-to-Bay Project regarding the future vision of the Gulf-to-Bay corridor and redevelopment objectives to be completed. Modifications to the redevelopment objectives or future redevelopment vision may result in alternative recommendations than otherwise provided within this Report. Issue 2: Identification of Projects and Development of Actual Costs I I; I I As discussed in the action plan, the identifIcation of the requisite improvements and actual costs of construction are critical to the successful implementation of the recommended funding alternatives. Such identification of actual projects and their associated costs were not available for purposes of this Report. As a consequence of such incomplete information, the fInal determination and recommendations regarding funding alternatives may differ from recommendations provided within this Report, based on analysis of additional data provided by the stakeholders and consultants. I I I I I I 2 Clearwater I 5 GULF-T 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Clearwater SECTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 ~~~~:~~;~~: :i.~~~~~?':'~~?~~~~~~::-~~:~~~,~:~:,~::~~>:;' :,~ ,~'~.~~, I I I I 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is part of an interconnected network of roads that serves two major functions for Clearwater visitors and residents: · Provides regional access to Clearwater Beach from the Tampa International Airport, Interstates 275, 4 and 75, and the Tampa area · Provides access to local residential areas, businesses and institutions I Besides Gulf-to-Bay, two other major east-west collector roads serve the network: Drew 81. (SR 590), a collector road about 1/2 mile north of Gulf-to-Bay, planned to expand to five (5) lanes, and Druid, a two (2) !lane collector road about 114 mile south. I I I ILL e......( O' p',' . ~,.ri,:earwater I u I I I I I I I I I Vicinity Map -' Q1 I ~I: :n ~ : I'. ~. t ; " . ~. :~.:,; 1;, ,;,.INELLAS ,C"""""'...' PARI(' . ~j ~.(1It..~....~-,., GULF-TO-BAY B 0 U LEV A R D 4 , The 6 1/2 mile long Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard corridor is comprised :::>:E five distinct Districts. 1=<'1'Om east to west, these include: the 1/2 mile long Gateway District, from the Welcome Center on C:ollTtney Campbell Causeway (over Old Tampa Bay) west to the overpass at McMullen Booth Rd. (CR (11); the rnile long Eastern DistricT, fmm McMullen Booth Rd., to the SR 19 overpass; the 1 mile long Eastern Central Distrkl :from the US l~' overpa~s m Belcher Road; the 1 3/4 mile Central District, from Belcher to the "split" at Highland Avenue; and the L: rnLe \"i;;stern District from Highland to the foot of the Memorial Causeway over Clearwater Flarbor (including Ccurt flit:: southel11 "split"). For the purposes of this study, the northern "split" to Cleveland 51. is consiClereci part of rrIe dmvntovifl Cleveland Street Con-idor. l' Il, 1 'I II' 'l Western District Gatewav District l! '.','1 I '\ Fort Harrison Avenue Ii ',',,'Ii I ,; , .--- ) With the exception of the Western Disil'ict, the majority of the Gulf-toDay Boulevard right-.ofvvay (ROW) is 100 feet wide, typically configured as a seven (7) lane road with a central median or turn lane. A foot grass strip and a 5 foot concrete side- walk: extend from the back of curb to the ROW line. Utilities exist above anel below ground v/irl1in 1l1e right-of-way. 1 ',", " I, ! ..... ~ l ...f.l.I....--..... _i 'I' '.', ' -":',"- .-.. ..,--' i ,i ...-- ......... ~ ,Ii ;:" ,I, '1 :,11' ~ Clearwater f- u GULF-TO"BAY B I) U LEV A. R D I; 5 I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater f- u SECTION 2 REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES "'. II ! II 2. REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES II, A number of interrelated issues bave cornpelled the City 1C look at Gulf-to--Bay Boulevard. These include: I . Increasing traffic congestion and frustration of both residents and visitors · Increasing competition for tourists from other beacmront cities I, · Lack of a sense of arrival or a unique sense of place at the end of the Courtney \::;ampbel1 Causeway i ~ · Unattractive appearance of the continuous strip cOlmnercial development, incLUding c1ecJining businesses, poorly designed buildings and signs, poor maintenance and lack of landscaping . Lack of space for landscaping within the ROW, as well as lack of funding for continuous maintenance of limited existing landscaping :,: . Increasing traffic conflicts caused by frequent driveway and median cuts., laCK of turn lanes.. lack of pedestrian crossings and other safety/circulation deficiencies 11 · Lack of safe bicycling paths and/or lanes 'I . Unattractive overhead power lines and poles · Opportunity to enhance "One City, One Future" approach to the of Clearwater and its beaches I I 1 1 ,. ,'II :, I I ~ Clearwater I- 1 u GULF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater SECTION 3 REDEVELOPM ENT OBJECTIVES B ~~~~ :7~:'~;:~:_"~~~~':~~~~.~' ::7~;~~~~~~;~~~:~?~:~_~~~::~:.~:::~ :~< ;..:. '"C':<:: ,,-,:~:.'~> ' I 3. REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES I Redevelopment objectives fall into three (3) categories, as follows: I Land Use · Facilitate redevelopment of adjacent parcels · Maximize flexibility 1 Traffic Management/Safety . Maximize traffic flow · Maximize roadway capacity . Minimize traffic conflicts . Maximize traffic safety · Maximize land use flexibility · Provide safe bicycle and pedestrian access . Optimize level of service for all users I I I Aesthetic Enhancement . Improve the quality of the driving experience . Visually connect the districts . Soften the harshness of the vast paved areas · Create a unique identity and sense of place; reflect community character · Improve "way finding" I I I I I I I I I I, I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D ~~~""'~"'~....c:'" ~'-"....c~-::~_,:::,-,-~,"/.::"./.:"~-,;..:-",:'~~".~:;:'....,<:"..,';:"'~"~: U~::r~~~r'~'''~r~~~::~'~~~~;:'''':~''~'''~:'''' I 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Clearwater f- u SECTION 4 REDEVELOPMENT VISION I 4. REDEVELOPMENT VISION I I Our Vision for the future Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is: "Clearwater's Grand Boulevard" I We envision a divided boulevard comprised of: . Decorative center medians with stately date palms and bold, colorful and exciting monuments, sculptures, fountains and paving patterns . Six lanes of steady, smooth flowing traffic with efficiently distributed turning movements . Wide, 6' - 8' concrete walkways (on both sides of the road) under the shady canopy of a double row of live oaks and Washington palms I I I "~, I "I " )iJ I -> I I I ------ ~~. ------~-~-- --~~;;-~~. I I I I I I LL ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I - ~~~~~~"".,/,.::"_,r"..c",/,:\_,,,,~,,~,,,,c,,,,~;;:,.....,..~""'~;:~~.,..;.::':,..~,:::;,>~,~."..,: U",="'~,~~~r-.;:;~_,,, r'~/~R::;:'r~(,...,,;:~,::A::,"":::?'~~,,,,,,:::,,,,;~;,""-:;~_',,:::::,, 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LL SECTION 5 2 Clearwater TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS [) ~~~~~~::;~:~;~~~.::~~~~:~:~c ;'I-~~~~~~~~~~::.~~,;k.>;~~~:_;;:::::_ :>: '\ :;';:::::". ":. ~ :::~', I I I I 5. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The following traffic recommendations support the conceptual vision of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. These recommendations strive to improve the vehicle flow as well as enhance the safety and aesthetics of the corridor for motorists and pedestrians alike. 5.1 ELIMINATE AND/OR SHARE DRIVEWAYS Encourage that 1) driveways be eliminated wherever side street access is available, and 2) shared joint access driveways be utilized where side street access is not available (e.g. parcels in the middle of a block). Each commercial parcel along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard has been developed with one or more of its own driveways. Over time, this has resulted in hundreds of driveways along both sides of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, with direct access into the through lanes (as opposed to turning lanes or frontage roads). These multiple "conflict points" cause numerous slowdowns and accidents, as drivers frequently pull into and out of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I - ~~~~~~~~~..._r'"_~,_/..."-".:,_::::,,.,,/.;:.,...~.::>,,./::.....:;:~._,,;: . U ~~"...~ ~:;-"-.;:::;~~::::~~R:::;~>'-:g,...:::~~..:::;;;~,~:::~-{:;;;.'-~~~ 9 ......--..,.-.--.-T.--.-T.--.-- i i i I I I ! . ! LEGEND: Hypothetical Property Lines Permitted Driveway Locations == I I 5.2. REQUIRE CROSS-ACCESS CONNECTIONS Require that developers construct aisles and alleys to connect adjacent parcels and parking lots to one another. I I, Once motorists leave Gulf-To-Bay Boulevard, they should be able to complete short trips between adjacent or semi- adjacent parcels without getting back on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Cross access connections, in effect, create a parallel roadway network to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, eliminating needless entrances and exits onto the main thoroughfare. Many of the restaurants across from Clearwater Mall presently exhibit cross-access facilities, making it easy for patrons to travel between properties without using Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Several of these properties also share driveway access. Conversely, several parcels further west, such as the service station next to Albertson's and the car wash next to Burger King, consist of no cross-access facilities, and can thus only be reached from Gulf-to- Bay Boulevard. I I Cross access is one of the key features of the Access Management Plan contained m the upcommg Community Development and Redevelopment codes, along with median openings and driveways. I I I I -'--',-.--'-T'--'-r.--'-- <t-$> <$P<$-1> - L . i I I I I LEGEND: Hypothetical Property Lines -.--.- Required Cross-Access Easements = I I I I g Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I U-~~~~~~~-~~~'~.~~Q~~'~~~~.~~?~~ "~~..~~~.~",~..e.~,\.~~~~"~~~~,;I~~....:I""~\"o-.i".~:~)#,,'~~-""~~~j"".~:~,~,""~.._rP",-\,~:~,~,,~::;?,,...,:~~,J" 10 I 5.3. REQUIRE SIDE-RoAD ACCESS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I oel t ~ . earwa er G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U L E. V A R D I U- .~~~~'~~~~"'~~'-'P'._~--'::"....c-....,""",,-?~',.."";;;"-)':~../":.....,,_."',,,,,;: .~~~~~~~~~MS~~::;:::::::.'~,""~;::~"\:::~".;.:?"....::::::;:::~::.' 11 Encourage that, wherever possible, parcel developers provide driveways onto side streets rather than on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The City can substantially reduce or eliminate the numerous driveway "friction points" along Gulf-to-Bay by encouraging driveway access from side streets rather than directly from Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. This allows motorists to more safely enter and exit Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard at side road intersections rather than at hundreds of driveway access points, and also provides safer and easier vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access to commercial parcels from adjacent neighborhoods. This principle can be supported with a traffic calming program, which would discourage regional traffic from cutting through the adjacent neighborhoods further along these side streets. Candidates for such side road access include all corner parcels. The McDonalds on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is a good example of a property that emphasizes side road access. LEGEND: Hypothetical Property Lines -.--.- Driveways and Cross-Access Easements Accessible Routes from Side Roads via Side Driveways and Cross-Access Easements . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Clearwater G U L F . TO. BAY B 0 U LEV A R D f--~~~ '_~......::::-~~~ "', ....:>, .....~.....I..., ..- .c >"', '''. ,y", .-, r,"", " I U- ~...."'~::""~~~~~~~~::S: I,.~:%::::;:;Z'~':'-~~"';I.~";,,,,""t-:"'""":"'S:""'-:""":>';""e;:~"",.';" ",.,.~-~~~,----=:.~::r"'--"""~~:::'~7V~,,-::r.;:::7'~;r-:::/~::""'~::""':::~"',;;.,,::,,~,::::,,'''''~~''''\:::;;r' 12 5.4. ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY MEDIAN CUTS Median closures can improve the safety of the roadway by minimizing uncontrolled conflict points. Candidates for closure include median cuts that serve individual properties or dead-end streets rather than interconnected local network streets, as well as those that allow only outward left turns from side roads onto Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, and prohibit similar cuts in the future. Over time, median cuts (openings in the center median) have been provided to facilitate left turn movements into and out of side streets and/or mid block driveways. While the side street cuts are necessary to maintain traffic flow across Gulf- to-Bay Boulevard, many of the driveway cuts (some only serving a single parcel) are not necessary. Closure of unnecessary cuts will not only improve traffic flow, but will also improve traffic safety (through the elimination of mid block left turn movements) and aesthetics (through median plantings). The left turn movement from side roads onto Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is considerably more dangerous and disruptive than the left turn movement from Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard onto side roads. In concept, while the latter should be preserved to distribute local traffic through the network, the former should be eliminated because its safety hazards outweigh its local traffic benefits. However, accident data must be thorougWy examined before fmal recommendations can be made regarding median closures. L--J L-..J L-...J S.R.60 A 8 -0----~- ..- ~D~D~D DjD~Dm D!D On"8" n<r::fl. ~n n' fl5,,' ~', Turner c ~ <r:: - In xn 3: .- +-' r::: r::: .- r::: en '> 0 r::: Q) ~ ~ - +-' Q) (!J C/) () ~ en ,g ~ c.. . LEGEND: Potential Median Opening Closures: A: Median Opening serves only dangerous left turn out movement B: Median Opening serves only private driveways, not side roads C: Median Opening has no deceleration lane (not shown) I 5.5. MAINTAIN AND ENHANCE THE NETWORK I I I Maintain and enhance the interconnected network of local streets to allow Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to fulfill its mission of moving large volumes of regional traffic, and to allow for changing land uses. Clearwater's original street layout was comprised of a grid network of interconnected streets and a discernable block structure. This network allowed traffic to disperse in many directions without being forced onto large collector or arterial roads, and allowed for land uses to change over time without disrupting the City's fabric. I I I I I I I In recent years, the City and/or parcel developers have closed off streets or failed to connect the local network, resulting in the disruption of the grid and the need to carry local trips on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Furthermore, many parcels have been combined (and internal streets closed) to accommodate large, single use "pod-type" developments, which are difficult to redevelop as they deteriorate or when changing market conditions dictate a need for smaller sites or multiple land uses. By maintaining the grid and reconnecting or enhancing it wherever possible the City can minimize the number of local trips forced to use Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, thereby eliminating unnecessary traffic, and can also maximize the flexibility of the urban fabric to adapt to changing market conditions and land uses. I I I I I I II loDD ~ DDDDDD O D~n Di5DGUlfliDOBa~BIv:'S:R.60D~D n ~ ~ lJ. ~ ~ j ::- ~ U ODJUDiD DJ[fD - M~jD DODD i D'D Jeffords SI. n ~ I~I ai ~ u c: <'II :2 I z arry LEGEND: Conceptual Configurations of Network Connections = = I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I U-~~~::~~~'=-',~~~~~;'-;8....&.;:.:~~:::,.._~;:;::~:%;::'>"-<:~';"u,-;: ~",""',~::r-, ~~"-r,-~r~,....,.:::,,,,:::'~'~...;~"'\::~"""~''''''~:''''\':;:::''' 13 I 5.6. INITIATE TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM I I Construct traffic circles, bulb-outs, splitter islands, textured pavement and other traffic calming devices on residential streets adjacent and parallel to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. As the City enhances the street network for local trips, traffic calming measures must be taken to offset the temptation for regional cut-through traffic. The City should initiate an appropriate traffic calming program to minimize cut-through traffic and to ensure that all motorists travel through the neighborhoods surrounding Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard at safe speeds. Since many traffic calming devices incorporate brick/concrete pavers, landscaping and street lights, these improvements will also enhance the aesthetics of the residential areas. I I I Traffic calming devices are intended to reduce the effective design speed of local streets. Such reductions in speed will make it more time consuming for regional travelers to cut through on local streets rather than to remain on arterials, and will ensure that all motorists traveling through residential neighborhoods will do so at speeds that are safe for children and pedestrians. ~ L:=J 0 0' bID DID ~D~D1[lDj010rdi;i:OODjD ~ ODj[f.O~DIOtJ~ - M~ID DO DID ! o;n Jeffords 51. n I~I I I I I I I I I I I I :E -- ...- I Barry Dr. - Bulbout Intenectlon Centered Mid-Block Yield Point Bulb-Out Median LEGEND: Conceptual Configurations of Network Connections = = Possible Locations for Traffic-Calming Devices - I Oel . ~ .. earwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R 0 I -U ~~:1;~~::::;~::::&~~~~~:B."/;:~""'&""&;:;;'-'::~:"'~':::;':"~'~;::"_;:::".-;;;:::;,,,,i::: ~~.f~~~'~~~11~~"-"'~~J~:r~~'~~""~~:"~~~~~~~~~F,f~!::-:;"'~'~~~-"~"""~~r~~r'''''~\~~~ 14 I 5.7. DETERMINE OPTIMAL DESIGN SPEED I I I Design and post Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard for the speed which maximizes the flow of vehicles. Studies have shown that arterial roadways with characteristics similar to those of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard will be able to carry more vehicles at lower relative speeds than at higher speeds, due to the ability to maintain a steadier traffic flow. Higher speeds often entail constant acceleration, deceleration and congestion, and do not necessarily improve the capacity of the corridor. A detailed study of the specific traffic characteristics of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard should be performed to determine the roadway's optimal speed. Specific design elements, such as lane widths, traffic signal locations, and placement of street trees, should then be developed for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I - .~~~~~~"-~~=---~~\J:::'~"_'~'\~:~''"~'~;:::..J'''''~-';~::;'',,,,;:~:,...-'':,~,-,('-.."/~ U "'Y'-;::.:"-'~.~"::::~"""" . ~.~:-':::~~~~'::':;""~=~~:~:~?,..::::.;.".::::?~:::,~, 15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater r- u SECTION 6 AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS , :';,,,'~:~, ..,. . ,~", ,. """"- .,'..'....'._i. I 6. AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS I The following recommendations are intended to improve the quality of the driving experience, visually connect the districts along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, create a sense of place, and improve "way finding." I 6.1. ESTABLISH A UNIFORM DESIGN PALETTE I Repeat the same materials in landscaping, signs, transit stops, light fixtures and other design elements to establish a common identity and to create a uniform, continuous appearance along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The City of Clearwater has a rich history and natural environment from which to create an effective palette of materials. These include: I · Trees and Palms: Sabal Palms, Washingtonia Palms, Date Palms, Mangroves, Oaks, Ligustrums . Shrubs and Flowering Plants: Hibiscus, Oleander, India Hawthorne, Annuals . Natural Stone: Coquina boulders . Architecture: Barrel tile roofs, decorative tile, cut coquina blocks, arches, sand colored brick, ornamental iron, stucco, globe light fixtures I I j' . ..". :,1 . >~; . 'fl. . <J\ . , ' . : 1 ,~ .' ,l .:. ..... {':"';.,-:,.\,,)~ r~-~~:~~;t . l ,.} :<;,.f,' ,.' ,,~ '..... -'~. "\::.' .. 4.. .- . '.~' d,' I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Clearwater I 5 . . GULF-TO-BAY 16 ..;~. .., -'* ..., ,'\:i.j....::.;~ 11,' "':'llI ",~.. -. /~~'..:~ .~. :;:::,>",1" ," .. B 0 U LEV A R D I 6.2. MAXIMIZE MEDIANS I Focus aesthetic enhancements on the existing medians and turn lanes along the center of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. I Currently, there is no room at the edges of the ROW to make meaningful aesthetic enhancements to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Improvements to these areas will be accomplished by private parcel developers as individual parcels are redeveloped over the next several decades. Meanwhile the City should focus its efforts on improving the existing medians - or enhancing new medians created by median cut closures - to make immediate improvements to the appearance of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Medians should be curbed to minimize FDOT structural setbacks (trees, monuments, etc) and to maximize the space available for plantings and monuments. Median improvements should incorporate the uniform palette discussed previously. I I I I I I Potential Median Treatment Locations I Western District Highland Aven~ Cr611 I I ~ Fort Harrison Avenue I I I I I I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D 1:= '~../''' "..." .":;',,.....""" ,~~"-'-~.I.-,...... ..-... ...... -..-.~.~ .,-. r~ ..........c' ,-., ..... r' ,""- ,...." J~' ~'''.... .'~"''''',>''', ," I U ....-z.~....''''."......'''...-......''''''.- ..',,'----..-... ----~'~""-'....---- --- ,.........~....................._-",.....::.:%........,'" ~cl"',....."-".-.,...,-"""'.'"''''':\....",.....,..~, 1"'....:--..::"",..,",-' .~~~r"",~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~,-.;~r'..,.I"""',,"";';*'~~~~~\'~~~;'~~~~~.J"X:::","~~"~_:.9;"",=~~~."'~~/1 17 I 6.3. BURY UTILITY LINES I Replace overhead utility lines with underground cables in conduit. I I The overhead utility lines along the north side of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard add to the cluttered, unattractive appearance of the corridor. These should be replaced as opportunities arise, ideally in conjunction with any required road resurfacing or recon- struction project to minimize costs. The right-of-way beneath Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard presently contains numerous utility conduits which must be examined in more detail before further recommendations can be made. Alternate utility corridors should also be considered. I I I I I I I I I I I I I _..r, "1: , ; _ ;~, '_':, ,'t: . ..C,'." ,....: . " .!' M""~'".' :,\'/!Ii; "j ~,' tJj;: ,,~. 11':' If' liIain~iIl6~1itli1 "r:j;l!"Il~ I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I UC= .~~~~::8~~:::~;::'-:8:::::8=,f:'-%~'-:&,;"::~}.:~'"...~~~v~:-"::''''';::';;;.....,/_''::-.4 ~,","~r~,-~~..'-":,;::7"'-,~"'~......-..:::r~J'~ro.:::;r',>_,~:;I,",::.r-;:::;."""",..."':::::;-''''~,I#~~'""'::::I"''';:::;''' 18 I 6.4. ESTABLISH A PATTERN BOOK FOR REDEVELOPMENT I Establish redevelopment standards for various types of land uses showing building setback lines, driveway locations, architectural styles, parking/retention/landscaping locations and requirements, and sidewalk/bike path configurations. I The primary tool for accomplishing our vision of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is through the redevelopment of the commercial parcels on both sides of the road. As markets change, and as parcel owners make new improvements to their property, the City should work with them to establish landscaping/sidewalk easements, close driveways, build sidewalks, plant trees, and re-orient their buildings to the Boulevard in accordance with the standards established in the Gulf-to-Bay Redevelopment Pattern Book. The City should also investigate incentives for voluntary compliance with the new redevelopment patterns, including matching grants, loans and other techniques. I I I I I I I I I I I . Orier1tf"eQilar'lcruicenti3len- tnu :0 f3cl! publiC Hn!I!U arid lidl:W)liu . Erlceu"1.gepedestri:\f1ccnrocr- ;;0'1$ from perkine ;!irl!;lli :obujld- 'nC"""triesacpYblil;.strf'''U . Provide ",sitor drop-off ar..as andofHtrl!l!tparkinlt:upublic . ~:::p::::5tO Ine mar ortnc j building away Itom public. view .Pl"tlVide5tl'e6ttrels:'IIol1goirive- ways, drive aisll:'S ~nd pedestrian connections . Provide a minlmull1 of I tree per 5 parking SQnS . Screen trash /!nciQsuret from pubhclllewwithafenCBandlaflo, scaping . Minimize dri\'~w~ywidth ~nci pe- destrian ,:rossin~ d;st~nC~l ;;~ ';idcw~lk . Provide ,trec. !recs .1lonz p~l.k- ing driveways, drive ~Isle, and connection~ - 5u(~"1l C1'a~h ~nclosl1l'''S fram publicvie:wwith n fence and lawJ. 'caplng - MinillluU\ 2-.1,0ry w~1I along public stree"is Plan Plan . Pro~ldeoutdoord;nin:terr'lc~ wilhc.blti.ch.1ir~.andmhtrfur_ ../ Cliwre to bl"int Icti~ity ~o thO! nreet . Er>cour3(tarchilectur.\1 elC;lres- sian ofboildlfl( eflV)' fe.1tllre~ . Provide rooffornu su::h a~ IUDS gJ.cle.s or manl.1lrds . Sceeln me~h.1n'C.11 equipmer.t from ..iew nit\JI'(; to i>ring 'lccivicy to tl1.~ street -lncegrat:c,ignilgcinto.1rchit:ec" turaldasign . M."imum 2-,tor-y building w;al! ;do~public strel!'t~ is required . Prov,<le rcsiderlli~1 emriu or Iobbie, wid1 ~ccen from public nrmlt "-lIfac:ldes . Openbalconie~ for second ilooi office u~"s . Provide roorfot"ms 5uch>1s hip.. gabksorm"n,ards " Screen rnech:lllio.l equlpmem: (romv;l'.w NOTE: also see Mixed-U$e and Commercial Building Section for ~ddiuon~1 guidelines :md Stan" d~rds Axonometric Axonometric I Examples of Pattern Book Source: Calthorpe Associates Southeast Orlando Development Plan Oct. 1997 I I I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I Uf::::: .~~B:::~~~~'-"~::::::::::~~~~...I,3::~.'~;~/,~~;...~",..~~.;:",/.;;:>...j;;~..;::: "'==....~.~~~,'~~-..;::..~'-.,"'"'i~....~::',"~"-.::;r'=.,.>~,,::>"::,'~-,~:-'.~::7""-:::,,-,.:,.- 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater f--- '. " , 0:',,;::::, <;:;': SECTION 7 ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS '.~,~ ..;:,:; ,<': ~.-::., I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7. ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS MEDIANS (within R.O.W.) Item Qty. Unit U nit Cost lotal Demolition: excavate and haul soil from palm pits, 2.5cy per palm 165 cy $6.00 $990.00 Monuments: Sculptural monuments 11 ea $40,000.00 $440,000.00 Pavers: concrete unit pavers in medians, compacted base 205,920 sf $7.50 $ 1,544,400.00 Pavers: concrete unit pavers at intersections, concrete base 67,200 sf $10.00 $672,000.00 Palms: Medjool Palms, 20'ct @ 50'OC; backfill with planting soil 66 ea $6,000.00 $396,000.00 Liahtina: Metal Halide wellliahts, 2 per palm 132 ea $ 1 ,200.00 $ 158,400.00 Irriaation: Bubbler system; eauipment in vaults 198 ea $150.00 $29,700.00 Signs: Fabricated custom directional signs 20 ea $3,000.00 $60,000.00 Curbing: 6" x 16" vertical curb 34,320 If $9.00 $308,880.00 Subtotal $3,610,370.00 10% GC's Overhead, Profit, Bonds 1 Is $361,037.00 10% Survev, Desian, Geotechnical, Enaineerina, Permittina 1 Is $361,037.00 25% Continaency 1 Is $902,592.50 IUIAL , CURBSIDES 1 Item 1 Qty. I Unit I Unit Cost 1 Total 1 Demolition: excavate and haul soil from planting areas, 12" depth 8,000 cy $6.00 $48,000.00 Walkways: 6' wide, colored and scored; 6.5 miles, both sides, less 25% 308 880 ea $5.00 $1,544,400.00 Oaks: Live Oaks, 200 gal,. @ 50'oc 838 sf $800.00 $670,400.00 Palms: Canary Island Date Palms, 1 2'ct @ 100'oc 28 sf $3 600.00 $ 1 00,800.00 Palms: Washington Palms, 18' - 20'ct @ 50'oc 1,030 ea $450.00 $463,500.00 Shrubs: Dwarf varieties, 3 gal. @ 2'oc; 4' avg. width, less 25% 205,920 ea $2.00 $41 1,840.00 Lighting: Street lights with banners @ 100' oc; alternating sides 343 ea $3,800.00 $1,303,400.00 Irrigation, Trees: Bubbler system; equipment in vaults 3,790 ea $75.00 $284,250.00 Irrigation, Shrubs: Spray system, full coverage; equipment in vaults 205,920 If $0.40 $82,368.00 Subtotal $4,908,958.00 10% GC's Overhead Profit, Bonds 1 Is $490,895.80 10% Survey, Desian, Geotechnical, Enaineerina, Permittina 1 Is $490,895.80 25% ContinllenCy 1 Is $1,227,239.50 Underground Utilities (Based on Information provided by City of Clearwater) 1 Is $6,000,000.00 $6,000,000.00 ITOTAL I 1 1 I $13,117,989.101 GRAND TOTAL $18,353,025.60 (Does not include demolition of existing medians or paving, or reconstructing of curbs, aprons, driveways, etc.) I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I f::::: ."'....I,::;........'~.\...~.-"~~~./.-~~.~~::::......;_.~.~t::........::::-.......;__';::,,.....:',,_.::''''~.;::......';.:;.......'.'.''"',.:;:;.,~/:.~',.....j::...'''i: U ~~0~~?:=:~~~~~rl:~.-.:::::;.-~R::'..::s;...,~~,...~:7B.~::::h~"..,~~~ 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater ~" . U :-, SECTION 8 FUNDING ALTERNATIVES I 8. FUNDING ALTERNATIVES I This section of the Report will identify and discuss potential funding alternatives for the Gulf-to-Bay Project. The Gulf- to-Bay Project is a public-private partnership initiative; therefore, it is anticipated that property owners along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard will contribute to funding its construction and maintenance. Since special assessments will be considered as a vehicle to facilitate private landowner funding that would be imposed pursuant to the City's home rule authority, this section of the Report begins with a brief discussion of municipal home rule. Following a summary of the elements and estimated construction cost of the Gulf-to-Bay Project, several potential funding alternatives are described. Based upon a very preliminary analysis, specific funding strategies are identified and discussed. This section ends with a brief discussion of governance alternatives and identification of a recommended governance structure. I I MUNICIPAL HOME RULE I I Municipalities have constitutional and statutory home rule authority to impose special assessments, impact fees, franchise fees and other fees and charges not construed to be taxes under Florida case law. If the fee, assessment or charge is imposed in a manner that the courts construe the charge to be a "tax," the imposition is unconstitutional unless authorized by general law. I I Article VIII, section 2(b), Florida Constitution, grants municipalities the authority to exercise any power for municipal purposes except as prohibited by law. This power is extremely broad as "municipalities are not dependent upon the Legislature for further authorization. . . ; [l]egislative statutes are relevant only to determine limitations of authority." State v. City of Sunrise, 354 So. 2d 1206, 1209 (Fla. 1978). Section 166.021, Florida Statutes, does, however, complete the constitutional design of broad home rule powers for municipalities. See City of Miami Beach v. Forte Towers, Inc. 305 So. 2d 764, 765 (Fla. 1974) (Dekle, J., concurring). I To determine a municipality's home rule power to legislate by ordinance, the search is no longer for specific legislative authorization. The search, rather, is for a general or special law that is inconsistent with the subject matter of the proposed ordinance. Absent an inconsistent law, a municipality has the complete power to legislate by ordinance for any municipal purpose. See Lake Worth Utilities v. City of Lake Worth, 468 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1985) (compares municipal powers under 1885 and 1968 Florida Constitutions). I I The Gulf-to-Bay Project is an innovative public-private partnership initiative. By exercising its home rule powers, the City is not limited by traditional funding options and can craft a solution that corresponds to the unique equities of this particular project. Many of the funding techniques described in this Report can be applied to the Clearwater Beach and downtown redevelopment initiatives. I Gulf-To-Bay Project I The redevelopment vision for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is fully described in a previous section of this Report. The capital improvement portion of the Gulf-to-Bay Project includes a "Median Component" and a "Curbside Component." I I I I I ~ Clearwater . G U L F - T 0 - BAY . . B 0 U LEV. A R D I U- $:'f~, ~:8..*~:~-::~;;~~~"""~~'%~~.8::z::>-:%:~',''/~'':%:~'''';::::''~::::,~::;::-, ...;:::.--::.;:.../,::;:;"",-:,;;;;",,,/ "=~~""":''''~''''"'Y''''',-.~_....r~~-::::'''~..~,:::;r',,::;~,",\::_;r\;~~~/''''''':;,.-'''''::;::''''~::r"'~?"'''~)''''.s'' 21 I TABLE 1 I I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Element Description Cost Estimate Median Component installation of decorative center medians that include palms and sculptural monuments $5,235,000 (1) I Curbside Component installation of wide concrete walkways and a companion canopy of live oaks and palms within an expanded right-of-way $7,120,000 (2) I I I I (1) Estimated construction cost does not include demolition of existing medians or paving. (2) Estimated construction cost assumes donation of the additional right-of-way and does not include removal of overhead power lines or reconstruction of side curbs, aprons, driveways and similar improvements. Since the Curbside Component requires additional right-of-way, only the Median Component is proposed for immediate construction. The Gulf-to-Bay Project is logically divisible into five distinct districts: I I I, District Corridor Gateway District Eastern District Eastern Central District Central District Western District Welcome Center to McMullen Booth overpass McMullen Booth overpass to U.S. 19 overpass U.S. 19 overpass to Belcher Avenue Belcher Avenue to Highland Avenue Highland Avenue to Memorial Causeway (along southern route) I DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES I I Since the Gulf-to-Bay Project is a public-private initiative, it is anticipated that a mixture of public and private sources will be used to fund its construction and maintenance. This section of the Report will provide a general description of potential funding sources for the project. These sources fall into three categories: State and Federal Grants (outside public funds), Special Assessments (private funds) and City Contribution (local public funds). In addition to the funding sources described in this Report, the City may wish to request a contribution from Pinellas County since Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is a major County transportation asset. The next section of the Report will suggest a strategy for funding the Gulf-to-Bay Project, employing several of these revenue sources. I I I I 2 Clearwater G U L F . T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R 0 '= ~",'''' r.::~~~~" ...c~-.~~::::-...."'" /-, ,''>0 '-', r'. ';':', ,/....." k'~"'-::"" """0 ,C'"'. ,'c. "., .oC'-" ,.0 I u ~~:::?"..:...~,S:%:~~~/__~.-_~..::~;~:.::.:;:'~~::-:::~'~:O,~;~.:::%:~:.~::>:;;:~::;,;:~~::::~;:::..:;;%::~~%~~;:;;;:::::::;:;: '~..y ~f" '"," .~"'-" .,..... ~. '-' ~ .....~. '"'" '-" ",-",r ~.. ..........~.... ~r ........." '..6~ .u'"'0'" .......,1 ......~_,_,r .....,r ",,,,..1 '-.,/ '"".~ ""..' ~",r .,.","~ ~~", ,...~;>... 22 I State and Federal Grants I ,I I I I Special Assessments I I I I Special Benefit Requirement I I I I I I I, I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D f- ',," "I.' '''', "'!':""..c::...:::. -""' -., ...." ~"'....c-- /'.... ....... -.. -.. ,- 0'." ... ,- ,..,.'" ,,,, ,.... .,'" r " "",,~,"'~I, .. I U- '~JI~~~~~.''''~'''''''''pI~~'~~'~".=''~~.,J;"",\,~""";,-,~,.J.-.:,,...~,.",,~,",,>I~'_'~'''''''~j''''''''''';''~~~' __~""':-""o<fj"~<"',rJ>M'~'''''-j~~''''\''~'''>V'.'''''lo:'''~~<~''''':'''. <f"'}' -~'~'~4.4q,<'r~~ri'~~r-<':~J""~~'''''''~~'~~~'''''''\''t,:~'~~~''''''~:~~f"":~~I~'.>'~~~"~~''''''\~:~r-lI,:'';''''',:::,,,,,,,~:~~,>~,,~~:~""~r-"""'~':5j,.4~~:::;.~~~::~:>~ 23 As the City comes to closure regarding design issues and construction costs for the Gulf-to-Bay Project, a concentration of effort must be put forward regarding the pursuit of outside funding sources for this project. Upon commencing Phase II of this project, the pursuit of State and Federal funding sources will be evaluated to address such components of the project as aesthetic appeal, advancement of the arts, highway safety, pedestrian access and economic development. Each issue as described above will require the City to approach various Federal, State and private foundation funding options. This pursuit, although timely, can prove to be highly beneficial to the City given the nature and costs of the project described in this Report. In addition, upon commencing Phase II of this project, representatives from the City of Clearwater and Pinellas County should convene to begin a dialog regarding the County's financial contribution to this redevelopment effort. Because this roadway is a major arterial network that benefits both the City and County, the County should be looked upon as a partner in this project. Municipalities have the authority to impose special assessments by ordinance pursuant to their home rule powers. See City of Boca Raton v. State, 595 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1992). Case law establishes two requirements for the imposition of a valid special assessment: (1) the property assessed must derive a special benefit from the improvement or service provided, and (2) the assessment must be fairly and reasonably apportioned among the properties which receive the special benefit. Id. at 29. A special assessment may provide funding for either capital expenditures or the operational costs of services, so long as the special assessment meets these two criteria. See Sarasota County v. Sarasota Church of Christ, 667 So. 2d 180, 183 (Fla. 1995). Special assessments not meeting the foregoing requirements will be classified as a tax. Since the Florida Constitution requires that tax sources other than ad valorem taxes be authorized by general law, invalid assessments are void and may give rise to an action for refunds. The benefit required for a valid special assessment can be articulated as an increase in market value of the property, although a special benefit can also include both potential increases in value, and added use and enjoyment, of the property. See Meyer v. City of Oakland Park, 219 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1969). Furthermore, the benefit need not be determined in relation to the existing use of the property. But the benefit must be substantial, certain, and capable of being realized within a reasonable time. See City of Hallandale v. Meekins, 237 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), affd, 245 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 1971)(upholding sewer improvement special assessments imposed against vacant property, not currently using sewage service ). Although not legally required, the persuasiveness of legislative [mdings of both special benefit and fair apportionment have been emphasized by the Supreme Court of Florida in the recent cases of Sarasota County v. Sarasota Church of Christ, Inc., 667 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1995) and Harris v. Wilson, 693 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 1997). The Supreme Court held in Church of Christ that "the legislative determination as to the existence of special benefits and as to the apportionment of the costs of those benefits should be upheld unless the determination is arbitrary." 667 So. 2d at 184. Similarly, in Harris v. Wilson, the Supreme Court noted that the "question of what constitutes special benefit is a matter of judgment that courts should not overturn in the absence of a clear and full showing of arbitrary action or plain abuse." 693 So. 2d at 948 (citing South Trail Fire Control District, Sarasota County v. State, 273 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1973)). Thus, legislative findings should be consid- ered a critical element to any local government assessment program. I, Fair and Reasonable Apportionment Requirement I' I I I I I: I Once a determination has been made that an assessed improvement specially benefits the properties within a district, then the assessment must be "fairly and reasonably apportioned among the benefitted properties." City of Boca Raton v. State, supra; Parrish v. Hillsborough County, 123 So. 830 (Fla. 1929). The manner of the apportionment of the assessment is immaterial and may vary provided that the amount of assessment for each property does not exceed the proportional benefits it receives as compared to other properties. South Trail Fire Control District, Sarasota County v. State, 273 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1973). In determining the reasonableness of the apportionment, the courts generally give deference to the legislative determination of a local government. In Rosche v. City of Hollywood, 55 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1952), the Supreme Court of Florida stated: "The apportionment of assessments is a legislative function and if reasonable men may differ as to whether land assessed was benefitted by the local improvement the determination as to such benefits of the city officials must be sustained." Id. at 913. See also Sarasota County v. Sarasota Church of Christ, 667 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1995). The Florida Supreme Court has upheld as "fair and reasonable" an apportionment of the cost of urban redevelopment based on the assessed value of specially benefitted property in City of Boca Raton v. State, supra. This decision should be considered limited to comparable improvements, i.e., redevelopment and commercial enhancement projects. The decision was predicated upon expert testimony demonstrating that assessed value is an appropriate method of measuring the rela- tive benefit derived by the assessed property. It is generally recommended that a consultant be engaged to prepare a report justifying use of the assessed value and that the bond validation process be used to confirm the apportionment methodology. Collection I I ~ ,t, I I 'I; I I I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I Ut= ~.~:',;>w>;;:~>-"~::'':::::G~:~~~:::~''~~;~~-&8''''''~~:'~%:~>B~.f'::'-'':5:::''<;:;.I~~,.~;;~:v~;;,..,.j;;;;'""~~;~~,,,/;: '~:'.'~:;;~-"~,i'~,';~""\~l,w"'~~"''''''''''''''''~~~'-,''~~~'J,t-~~~\~:.,'''''''1,~:./'>'l~~f'~~~~.~,~I~,x::~.~~~~,.~~~~:~.H~~~/''''"''~:~'~~::::~'J 24 Special assessments that meet the special benefit and fair and reasonable apportionment requirements may be collected on the ad valorem tax bill by the county tax collector. The combined notice of ad valorem taxes and non-ad valorem assessments acts as a lien against the property. Local governments may use the "Tax Bill Collection Method" for collecting special assessments when it follows the complicated, lengthy process prescribed in section 197.3632, Florida Statutes. The initial steps in the statutory process are the publication of notice and the adoption of a resolution by the local government of its intent to use the Tax Bill Collection Method. The adoption of a Resolution of Intent does not obligate the local government to use the method or to impose a special assessment, but it is a prerequisite to using the Tax Bill Collection Method. The Resolution of Intent must be adopted by January 1 for assessments planned to be collected on the tax bill mailed by the Tax Collector the following November. In the event the Property Appraiser and Tax Collector agree, the Resolution may be adopted as late as March 1. Prior to the adoption of the Resolution, the local government must pub- lish notice that the local government will consider it. The published notice must appear in a newspaper once a week for four consecutive weeks preceding the hearing. Upon adoption of the Resolution of Intent, the local government must provide a copy to the Property Appraiser, the Tax Collector and the Florida Department of Revenue by the statutory deadline, which is January 10, unless the Property Appraiser and Tax Collector agreed to the later deadline of March 10. The statute then requires the local government to develop a non-ad valorem assessment roll. The roll is a computerized list that contains the base and rate of the assessment and electronically applies them to each parcel subject to the assessment. The statute requires the assessment roll to utilize the property use code classifications maintained by the property appraiser. This requirement assures that the non-ad valorem assessment roll is compatible with the ad valorem roll and can be merged with it to produce a single bill for the combined charges for ad valorem taxes and non-ad valorem assessments. Collection of the assessments and ad valorem taxes begins in November. Failure to pay the assessments and taxes results in the issuance of a tax certificate and may result in the sale of a tax deed. I City Contribution I I I Ad Valorem Taxes I I I, I Motor Fuel Taxes I, I I I I Public Service Taxes I I I I I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R 0 f-... ""', r', _ ,...... "'-:"--"'::' _ J"~"""~~'''' .-.. __ -. --.~' ,.." ,-, ..."...., /.'''," .... ~""":-. ".... ,e', " .' ,"'" " 1,', u- ~'-'..c~'~'~ ~'~~~;I,'~;;i'::>'''''-':::%:'''''~z'':->::%:'';::;b:-<%~.I.'''''''-:''"^'''''''''''''~....'..,.."-.,.","",. '~r'':J~''""'V-~'''':~~I'~r~~~,'~,"-"f'~~.....rt~~'''~,.fc",\::..r,~~~~~/''',",~~<~,~::;t""~;;:;.J~~~::;,Jl'~'~~;~j:r"~~:." \ 25 Public bodies typically make a "general fund" contribution to public-private partnership projects. In fact, if special assessments are used in the funding mix, a public contribution is often required to meet the fair and reasonable apportionment requirement. Since the Gulf-to-Bay Project primarily consists of roadway and related improvements, there are a number of City revenue sources that can be applied. Examples of these sources are summarized below. This list is intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive. Ad valorem taxes can be expended for any lawful municipal purpose, which would clearly include the Gulf-to-Bay Project. However, since ad valorem taxes cannot be pledged to the payment of bonds or otherwise committed beyond the fiscal year without referendum approval, their usefulness is impaired if the City elects to fmance the construction. Local Option Infrastructure Surtaxes The Infrastructure Surtax may be levied countywide, with referendum approval, by the governing board of the county or the governing bodies of municipalities representing a majority of the county population. The Infrastructure Surtax is limited in rate to one-half a percent or one percent. The tax proceeds must be shared between cities and counties, pursuant to an interlocal agreement or pursuant to the half-cent sales tax formula provided in section 218.62, Florida Statutes. The surtax may also be shared with the school board. The proceeds of the surtax must be expended to finance, plan, and con- struct infrastructure. The State of Florida has levied a "Municipal Gas Tax," one cent per gallon tax on motor fuel and special fuel for distribution to municipal governments. The statewide Municipal Gas Tax proceeds are distributed among municipalities pursuant to the Municipal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund provisions in chapter 215, Florida Statutes. The revenues may be used for transportation purposes as provided in section 206.605, Florida Statutes. Counties may impose up to twelve cents of local option motor fuel taxes. The statutes divide the twelve cents of optional motor fuel taxes into three categories: the original six cents motor fuel tax authorized by section 336.025(l)(a), Florida Statutes (the "Original Six Cents Gas Tax"); the new five cents authorized by section 336.025(1)(b), Florida Statutes, as created in the Environmental Lands Management--or "ELMS" --legislation, Chapter 93-206, Laws of Florida (the "ELMS Five Cents Gas Tax"); and the penny tax authorized by section 336.021, Florida Statutes, now titled the "Ninth Cent." Only the Ninth Cent is not required to be divided among the county and the municipalities. The Original Six Cents Gas Tax and the ELMS Five Cents Gas Tax must be shared with municipalities with the distribution based upon an interlocal agreement or a formula determined by the respective historical transportation expenditures of each. A municipality may levy a tax on the purchase of electricity, metered or bottled gas, and water service. The tax may only be levied upon purchases within the municipality and cannot exceed ten percent of the payments received by the seller of the taxable item. S 166.23l(l)(a), Fla. Stat. A municipality may not tax a fuel adjustment charge, and such charge is separately stated on each bill. S l66.231(1)(b), Fla. Stat. A municipality may levy a tax on telecommunications service under two separate alternative statutory bases. Under one alternative, a municipality may levy a tax on local telephone service upon purchases within the municipality of local telephone services at a rate not to exceed ten percent of the monthly recurring customer service charge. Under the other alternative, a municipality may tax purchases within the municipality of telecommunications service which originates and terminates in this state, not to exceed seven percent of the total amount charged for any telecommunications service provided within the municipality. S 166.231(9), Fla. Stat. Proceeds of these taxes are available for general municipal purposes. I Half-Cent Sales Tax I I I I, I I I I I, I: The local government half-cent sales tax program returns to municipalities and counties approximately nine percent of all state sales tax proceeds remitted pursuant to Chapter 212, Part I, Florida Statutes. The local government share is based on the sales tax collected in each county. The county's share is determined by dividing the sum of the unincorporated area population plus two-thirds of the incorporated area population by the sum of the total county population plus two-thirds of the incorporated area population. The municipality's share is determined by dividing the population of the municipality by the sum of the total county population plus two-thirds of the incorporated area population. This source may be used for any municipal purpose. State Revenue Sharing The Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for Municipalities includes 32.4 percent state cigarette tax collections, the one cent municipal gas tax collections, and 12.5 percent of the state alternative fuel user decal fee collections, pursuant to section 21O.20(2)(a), 206.605, and 206.879(1), Florida Statutes. A municipality may expend its share ofthe Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for Municipalities on any public purpose. However, it may only pledge the portion of the revenues defIned as the "guaranteed entitlement" to retire bonded indebtedness. Section 218.25, Florida Statutes. The portion of the Trust Fund allocation attributable to the municipal gas tax may be expended for transportation purposes only. Section 206.605, Florida Statutes. Tax Increment Funds Chapter 163, Part III, Florida Statutes, authorizes counties and municipalities to identify areas for redevelopment that are suffering from transportation blight. After adopting a resolution declaring the necessity for improvement, a community redevelopment agency can be appointed to implement a community redevelopment program. In lieu of appointing members of the community, the City Commission may elect to serve as the governing body of the agency. A redevelop- ment plan must be submitted for approval by the affected taxing authorities and adopted by the agency following a public hearing. A redevelopment trust fund is established for each community redevelopment agency. Subject to certain specifIed exceptions, the incremental revenue derived by each taxing authority is deposited annually into the redevelopment trust fund and used to implement the redevelopment plan. I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D f-,~ "', "." ,._, -. ~'" ....... -.. ...-._ _" ,.." _". "" ........ .....,. ~_'. .... .,... ....,,~ ""'-'. ""','_" ,'''. ?,...,,,, ,"'" .1' U- ''''''':,,",''.'~.''~''':--c''''''~ '"";::...-......."--:~'---""'''''--_........--~...........,_......~~-. .._;.:_":),="....~"':;-.:.w..~..,'..~:_,,,...;..~.....;~..~'.-::;:,....~,,,'i'-" '"....;-'".....>.. "'."';',"<~''''~' ~k')~/U"~~I'~~J'-"":::~~~~,~~~~~l\:::r,~.."''''''~~.~''.~'''''''\<::~~I~<~~f"""~::I'~~J,..~::;~,~..'-t::::Jr,,~;:;,ft.'\,~::'"'"""~:~/~'~~::;;r' 26 As an alternative to creating a formal community redevelopment agency, the City may use its home rule authority to iden- tify the tax increment attributable to a redevelopment area and agree to appropriate all or a portion of that amount annual- ly for redevelopment purposes. Although this alternative would exclude the county increment, it would permit the tax increment to be applied outside of the specifIc area and may provide a useful tool for broader redevelopment initiatives. For example, if the City initially invested public funds in a redevelopment program for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (or a district of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard), the beach or downtown and the redevelopment program generated incremental revenue, use of the statutory tax increment would be limited to the community redevelopment area in which the investment was made. Under the home rule alternative, however, the increment derived from an early redevelopment investment could be committed to other redevelopment programs within the City. ApPLICATION OF ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES This section of the Report will suggest a strategy for funding the Median Component of the Gulf-to-Bay Project, employing several of the revenue sources described in the previous section. Obviously, it is in the City's interest to exhaust all potential outside public revenue sources (State, federal and county) before using local private and public funds. The funding approach described in this Report could be applied to any portion of the project cost not funded by these outside sources. This Report is intended only to illustrate a potential funding strategy for the Gulf-to-Bay Project. A detailed analysis of the alternatives selected by the City will be undertaken in the next phase of the project. Although the cost and revenue fIgures included in this section are based upon the best available information, they are included in this Report for illustra- tive purposes only and may differ from the actual cost and revenue fIgures developed during the next phase. The relative public and private contribution toward the Gulf-to-Bay Project is a key element in the funding strategy. Similar projects have varied widely in this respect. To gauge the capacity of the property owners, a preliminary analysis of the property values along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard has been made. The results of this preliminary analysis suggest that the property owners cannot finance the entire project and that a substantial contribution of public funds will be required. If it is determined that the property owners should contribute toward funding the Gulf-to-Bay Project, their equitable share should be determined first. After the private contribution has been ascertained, the balance of the project cost must be funded through a City contribution. The most effective method of collecting a private contribution toward the Gulf-to-Bay Project is through the imposition of special assessments against property located along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. As discussed in the previous section of this report, there are two requirements for the imposition of a valid special assessment: (1) the property assessed must derive a special benefit from the improvement or service provided, and (2) the assessment must be fairly and reasonably apportioned among the properties which receive the special benefit. It has been judicially determined that road and sidewalk improvements provide a special benefit to abutting property. In fact, under certain circumstances the special benefit may accrue to property that does not abut the improvements. Although the extent to which special benefit is provided by the Gulf-to-Bay Project has not been determined, it is clearly provided to property directly abutting Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. If special assessments are used as a funding source, a specific special benefit determination will be made during the next phase of the project. The allocation of cost among parcels of property that are specially benefitted by a project is always the most difficult aspect of a special assessment program. Since the Gulf-to-Bay Project will promote redevelopment and commercial enhance- ment, it is a candidate for the "assessed value" method of apportionment. Under this method, the contribution of each par- cel of property is proportional to its assessed value for ad valorem tax purposes. This method is generally considered fair by the property owners since the more profitable business generally have a greater assessed value and bear a greater share of the cost. Information was obtained from the ad valorem tax roll files maintained by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser for all properties within one mile north and south of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The files obtained included the name, address and legal file, the master appraisal file and a file from the County's geographic information system ("GIS") which provided an electronic map of the area. Using the GIS files, boundaries of the Gateway District, Eastern District, East Central District and Western District were established. Once these geographic boundaries were developed, parcels of property directly abutting Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard within each district were identified. The parcel identification number for each parcel of property identified on the GIS file was then correlated to the ad valorem tax roll database files to obtain information regarding property owner name and address, the use of the property as assigned by the Property Appraiser for ad valorem purposes, and the taxable value of the property. Since the Gulf-to-Bay Project will promote redevelopment and commercial enhancement, the preliminary analysis excludes property classified as residential in the Property Appraiser's system. A summary of the various property uses abutting Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is attached to this report as Appendix A. As previously noted, this preliminary analysis assumes that the special assessment against each parcel of property will be proportional to its value for ad valorem tax purposes. Using this approach, the assessment rate each year will be similar to a millage rate. If the City imposes special assessments and issues bonds to fund the property owner's contribution, the assessment rate must be sufficient to pay debt service on the bonds. For simplicity of presentation in this Report, the assessment rate will be expressed in terms of millage. I I I I Ii I I I I I I, I I I ,I I I I 2 Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I f::::,~ ;'.~""~~ ~-". ,....,~.."".~~ ~~~."'), r~~'"./.'~' ",".r, ,....".'. ,"", /'. r", /', ,", ;,' U ~,'~":;::,~~~::;::::;:::;:::"~~~~~~~~:::S:::~P:""C:::;;:..,:~;;;;;'-':;,::;:::::::,:::;;~:::::,;~:::~~;;:,,~:::-::'~:;:::::;;;::;;~,:::~:.:;;.~~,::;~; .....~ "I",.,~~ "-""" ~r """ ..,.,....' ",,-,.r ",-..- ',,,, ,..,.,.. ""-'" "'-"" .........., ......,. ",-.r ........,..'ltt.u; ",-' ".....- '".--,," ""'dl ",.,._ ..,,,, ...._ '~..I \..,,' "'1.,," -~"', -,,~r "'t,';' ",_~,.. 28 The City Charter requires that revenue bonds for projects in excess of $1,000,000 be put to public referendum with the exception ofrevenue bonds for public health, safety or industrial development. Special assessment bonds to fund the Gulf- to-Bay Project would be similar to industrial development bonds for two reasons: fIrst, the bonds would be payable from revenue derived from the persons benefItted by the project, and second, the goal of the project is to stimulate economic development. The City may wish to consider filing a validation proceeding to determine if bonds issued to fund this project would be exempt from the referendum requirement. In order to determine the percentage of the project cost that could be funded by special assessments along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, the amount that would be generated by special assessments imposed at various rates was compared to the estimated annual debt service necessary to fund the project. The property values used were taken from the current ad valorem tax roll and include only abutting commercial property. The amount and value of property subject to the proposed assessment is likely to change when the actual special benefIt determination is made during the next phase of the project. For purposes of this Report, the annual debt service necessary to fund the project was estimated to be $500,000. This is a very rough estimate. The actual debt service cannot be determined at this time and may be greater or less than the amount assumed. Since the Gulf-to-Bay Project is divisible into fIve distinct districts, the value for each district was determined separately and the project cost was allocated to the districts. For purposes of this allocation, the entire project cost for the Median Component (other than monuments) was prorated on the basis of project length within each district. The cost of each individual monument was allocated to the district in which it is located. This cost allocation methodology will be reviewed during the next phase of the project and may be revised. The following table computes the percentage of the project cost for the Median Component allocable to each district that could be funded from special assessments imposed at the rate of one mill per year. This analysis does not include debt service coverage factors or collection cost associated with the special assessments. If special assessments are used as a funding source, these factors will be developed and included in the report generated during the next phase of the project. TABLE 2 PROJECT COSTS MEDIAN COMPONENT District Allocated Project Cost Allocated Debt Sevice Taxable Value Assessment Proceeds (per Mil) Percent Funded (per Mil) Gateway Eastern East Central Central Western $ 323,548 1,031,974 761,670 1,444,850 1,672,991 $ 30,902 98,564 72,747 137,998 159,787 $ 1,350,100 81,428,200 29,758,200 40,835,100 18,452,680 $ 1,350 81,428 29,758 40,835 18,452 4.37% 82.61 % 40.91 % 29.59% 11.55% Total Proj. $5,235,036 $500,000 $171,824,280 $171,824 17.18% As evidenced by the foregoing table, an assessment rate equivalent to one mill funds slightly more than 17 percent of the total project cost for the Median Component. If, for example, the City imposed special assessments at a rate equivalent to two mills, that would leave approximately 65 percent of the project cost unfunded, requiring a City contribution of approximately $3,400,000. I In lieu of constructing the Median Component along all of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, the City may wish to consider one or more districts as demonstration areas. The required City contribution at various assessment rates for any district or combination of districts can be computed easily from the information set forth in the foregoing table. Although this table includes the best current information, it is subject to change for the reasons described above. I \1 I Although the final determinations of special benefit and fair allocation of cost would not be made until the next phase of the project, it is likely that no politically practical assessment rate will exceed the share of the Project cost for the Median Component that is properly attributable to the property owners. Accordingly, the specific assessment rate to be applied will be a policy issue to be determined by the City Commission. The following factors should be among those considered by the City Commission in determining the appropriate assessment rate. I I I I I I I, I I I I I I 1. Many of the property owners may be asked to provide additional right-of-way for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to complete the Curbside Component of the project. 2. The City may wish to consider a special assessment against the same property to provide for maintenance of landscaping included in the Curbside Component of the project. 3. The City may wish to consider funding the monuments from local public funds. This would be justifiable since the monuments will enhance the image of the entire City. This approach would also avoid placing a larger burden on property owners in the Western District, in which monuments are placed more closely together. The lowest ratio of value to allocated cost occurs in the Gateway District, in which an assessment rate equivalent to 20 mills would not fund the allocated project cost for the Median Component. Fortunately, this is the area that may justify a larger contribution of local public funds since it creates the visitors' initial impression of the City. Governance If special assessments are to be used as a funding source, it will be important that the landowners support construction of the project and believe their share of the cost to be fair and equitable. As the Gulf-to-Bay Project evolves, the City will need to build community consensus for both the project and the proposed funding strategy. Although the City could establish a special district to develop and fund the project, the extent to which the City will be required to contribute funds and the need to integrate the Gulf-to-Bay Project with other elements of the One City - One Future program make this an undesirable alternative. It would be more appropriate for the City to develop and fund the project with the assistance of a formal or informal advisory board. This approach has been used successfully with similar projects. Using this approach, the landowners can become involved with the project and provide valuable input regarding its design and fmancing, but the City can control the level of its contribution and ensure that the Gulf-to-Bay Project is coordinated with other elements of the One City - One Future program. I ~ Clearwater G U L F - T 0 - BAY B 0 U LEV A R D I r--.... ~~'. I"~ .-'" ,;F,-" ....., ...... ..." ........ "":'. '", '" Y', "'"'" ...... /-'''' .,..... ,""'~' ..'" ,'''. ,... ,,, ".. ,h .".p", ""', y. ",. ...., , . U- ~,-~~",~,?-'>"-J";--~~--'~'~"'~~S:"""'-":-""''''''' ~-"."""""':"=-=.\:::J.,....~n.~~~lW"/:~""P;fI~<l-I"'<'~~;,"'_%;" ...".~~..,:..."" ~'" '~'''~..'''''~~'.>;<>'"'''''\'''';f;''''''~''''':i. """~'l."",)~ ~t~~~'~~~",,=~,J"""'~~I"'~~~~':'~"'~~~_r,.,.r1""'~.../"""~:{~."'''''~~'''\~~'!'..'f::,F"~:~r~.:~~ ,.....,~;:::P""">:~~~,'~'-~~.:.~~I'~...,-,.~~:f;,f;~~::':i,...,~'\~d 29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' 2 Clearwater 5::<;;~: < < SECTION 9 ACTION PLAN I 9. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ Clearwater f- I U ACTION PLAN Several actions have already been taken to implement the design concepts discussed in this report. These include: . Rich Baier has been assigned as the City's Project Manager, with full responsibility for implementation . Two (2) meetings have been held with FDOT District 7 to review design concepts and to discuss the review/approval process for median cut closures and median redesign . A pilot project area has been identified from the US 19 overpass to Old Coachman Road The following actions are proposed within the next fifteen (15) months to implement the proposed improvements within the existing right-of-way: o - 3 Months . Determine the budget and funding planes) for proposed initial improvements . Design and replace street signs and posts . Design and install new landscaping at the Wastewater Treatment Plant and at the Welcome Center . Design new signal mast arms . Design graphics for the McMullen-Booth and US 19 Box Beam . Design new pennant banners . Plan and initiate the International Design Competition for the Gulf-to-Bay monuments/sculptures . Conduct a topographic survey of the Pilot Project Are . Conduct required traffic studies for the Pilot Project Area, possibly including Accident/Collision Analysis and Sight Distance Analysis Studies . Form a Gulf-to-Bay Steering Committee of local residents, business and property owners, and community leaders . Develop design and construction documents for the Pilot Project Area (except for monuments) . Develop Court Street (West of Missouri) design and landscaping plan 3 - 6 Months . Secure permits, bid and break ground on the proposed Pilot Project Area improvements . Determine the budget and funding source(s) for remaining corridor improvements . Conduct a topographic survey of the remaining corridor . Conduct required traffic studies for the remainder of the corridor, possibly including Accident/Collision Analysis and Sight Distance Analysis Studies . Develop design and construction documents for the remainder of the corridor . Install pennant banners along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard 6 - 9 Months . Complete construction on the Pilot Project Area . Conduct a post-construction evaluation of the Pilot Project Area . Secure permits, bid and break ground on the reminder of the corridor . Commence Installation of new mast arms within corridor 9 - 24 Months . Complete construction on the remainder of the corridor . Hold a Grand Opening celebration! In addition to the actions outlined above to implement the proposed right-of-way improvements, the following actions are proposed to facilitate the revitalization of adjacent properties: o - 3 Months . Develop incentives to encourage voluntary redevelopment of existing properties . Identify necessary revisions to existing codes . Initiate a traffic calming program 3 - 9 Months . Develop District Land Use Plans and Site Development Pattern Books to direct the redevelopment of properties along Gulf-to-Bay . Revise codes and ordinances to incorporate new standards GULF-TO-BAY B 0 U LEV A R D 30 I I I I I ,I I I I: I I I I II I 'I I I I 1\ 2 Clearwater r-, ,." , u ~~, _::':~~::::,i.:::,:~" ~';.:~: ApPENDICES I APPENDIX A WESTERN DISTRICT I SUM OF PARCEL I DESCRIPTION CATEGORY TAXABLE VALUE COUNT , Vacant Commercial Land Vacant $694,800.00 20 II Vacant Commercial Land w/XFSB Vacant $115,900.00 3 Single Building Store - Free Standing Commercial $821,300.00 7 Strip Store - 2 or more not including major food Commercial $543,200.00 3 I stores Convenience Store Commercial $311,300.00 1 General Office - Non-Professional One Story Commercial $4,232,800.00 25 I' General Office Bldg - Multi-Story Office Bldg Commercial $2,847,600.00 6 Professional Office Bldg - Single & Multi-Story Commercial $945,400.00 7 Financial Institution Commercial $1,340,600.00 2 I Insurance Company Office - Single or Multi-Story Commercial $86,900.00 1 Commercial Laundry & Dry Cleaner Commercial $185,700.00 1 Service Station Commercial $347,300.00 2 II Auto Garage - General Repair Commercial $953,800.00 5 Auto Service Center Commercial $1,053,900.00 4 I Car Wash Commercial $305,700.00 1 Hotels and Motels (10-49 units) Commercial $603,700.00 1 General Warehouse I ndustrial/Warehouse $299,800.00 1 I Light Manufacturing, Small Equipment Mfg. Plant, I ndustrial/Warehouse $554,300.00 2 Electronic, Small Machine Shop, Instrument Mfg., Printing & Newspaper Plant I Religious Schools Educational $0.00 1 Homes for Aged, ALF(Non-profit) Nursing Home $0.00 1 Non-Profit charitable service Institutional $6,600.00 1 I Hospital (Non-Profit, exempt) Institutional $0.00 1 County Government Government $0.00 12 City Government Government $0.00 13 I Leasehold Interest - City Government $2,129,880.00 2 Radio & TV Stations, Cable TV Reception Station Industrial/Warehouse $72,200.00 1 Total Western District Included In Analysis $18,452,680.00 I I; ."..- Vacant Residential 'I Condo Rec Area Assn Own - open/green space (939) Single Family Home Single Family $211,300.00 3 I, Condo Rec Area Assn Own - w/improvements (939) Not Used $0.00 1 Single Family (more than 1 house/parcel Single Family $93,200.00 2 Duplex-Triplex Multi Family $43,200.00 1 Ii Apartment-Boarding House (4-9 units) Multi Family $110,500.00 1 Store w/ Office or Apartment Mixed Use $35,300.00 1 Total Western District Excluded From Analysis $622,000.00 'I I I, II I I I I I, I I I ,I I I, I, 'I I Ii II I APPENDIX A CENTRAL DISTRICT SUM OF PARCEL DESCRIPTION CATEGORY TAXABLE VALUE COUNT Vacant Commercial Land Vacant $185,900.00 3 Vacant Commercial Land w/XFSB Vacant $177,900.00 2 Single Building Store - Free Standing Commercial $5,216,700.00 11 Strip Store - 2 or more not including major food Commercial $3,224,900.00 10 stores Convenience Store Commercial $1,110,400.00 3 Supermarkets and Superstores Commercial $7,129,200.00 2 Community Shopping Center - One or more Commercial $2,228,800.00 1 major non-fast stores with strip stores General Office Bldg - Multi-Story Office Bldg Commercial $1,030,200.00 2 Professional Office Bldg - Single & Multi-Story Commercial $452,800.00 1 Restaurant, Cafeterias Commercial $3,894,500.00 11 Fast Food Restaurant - drive-in, Diner Commercial $3,164,800.00 9 Financial Institution Commercial $2,093,100.00 2 Service Station Commercial $1,720,600.00 6 Automobile Rental Agency, Used Car Lot, Commercial $979,000.00 2 Trailer Rental, Truck & Van Rental Automobile, Motorcycle, Farm Machinery, Commercial $3,930,900.00 3 Tractor Trailer Dealership Auto Garage - General Repair Commercial $472,600.00 3 Auto Service Center Commercial $479,000.00 2 Car Wash Commercial $169,400.00 1 Hotels and Motels (10-49 units) Commercial $3,174,400.00 6 Church (incl. Salvation Army), Church owned Church $0.00 1 bldg Public Schools Educational $0.00 1 County Government Government $0.00 1 City Government Government $0.00 1 Total Central District Included In Analysis $40,835,100.00 IIBIJ~W1! .CI1!U ' ~:::'::::':~--<:>:,:,:::::~::::;:Jki~~",,~~, 1-o._.-_o_v._ ,~~":,:,,,':~<,_,,__,,_v~,:: , :, "~:_"'" Single Family Home Store wI Office or Apartment Mobile Home Parks Single Family Total Central District Excluded From Analysis $123,400.00 $1,585,200.00 $4,068,300.00 $5,776,900.00 I I I II I \1 I I I: I I I II I: 'I t- I Ii 1\ APPENDIX A EAST CENTRAL DISTRICT SUM OF PARCEL DESCRIPTION CATEGORY TAXABLE VALUE COUNT Vacant Commercial Land Vacant $484,900.00 3 Vacant Marine Terminal Vacant $262,000.00 1 Single Building Store - Free Standing Commercial $586,900.00 2 Strip Store - 2 or more not including major food Commercial $839,900.00 3 stores Supermarkets and Superstores Commercial $6,843,700.00 2 Community Shopping Center - One or more major Commercial $4,359,700.00 1 non-fast stores with strip stores General Office - Non-Professional One Story Commercial $794,400.00 2 General Office Bldg - Multi-Story Office Bldg Commercial $910,100.00 1 Professional Office Bldg - Single & Multi-Story Commercial $164,600.00 1 Restaurant, Cafeterias Commercial $3,264,200.00 7 Fast Food Restaurant - drive-in, Diner Commercial $1,038,400.00 2 Financial Institution Commercial $930,500.00 1 Service Station Commercial $633,100.00 2 Automobile Rental Agency, Used Car Lot, Trailer Commercial $241,700.00 1 Rental, Truck & Van Rental Automobile, Motorcycle, Farm Machinery, Tractor Commercial $4,133,200.00 5 Trailer Dealership Auto Service Center Commercial $280,400.00 1 Bar, Liquor Store wi Lounge, Cocktail Lounge, Night Commercial $1,488,300.00 2 Club Hotels and Motels (50 units or more) Commercial $1,346,800.00 1 Hotels and Motels (10-49 units) Commercial $1,141,800.00 2 State Government Government $0.00 1 Electric Power Company (Florida Power, Tampa I ndustriallWarehouse $13,600.00 3 Elec.) Easement, Office & Sub-station Total East Central District Included In Analysis $29,758,200.00 \1a8i~1l'I\\.\..~lt. ...\.... ~I!U,QE *'<~_"'__,_~c_c____,c_,__~. __ .,<, "_Y~_-___P___"'""~;'" Duplex-Triplex Mobile Home Parks Single Family Total East Central District Excluded From Analysis $142,800.00 $8,372,400.00 $8,515,200.00 'I 'I 'I I I: I I I I I I I 'I I II I I I II APPENDIX A EASTERN DISTRICT SUM OF PARCEL DESCRIPTION CATEGORY TAXABLE VALUE COUNT ":111 Vacant Commercial Land Vacant $2,071,100.00 12 Single Building Store - Free Standing Commercial $1,487,900.00 3 Strip Store - 2 or more not including major food Commercial $2,834,700.00 4 stores Convenience Store Commercial $458,200.00 1 Enclosed Mall Commercial $57,118,200.00 2 General Office - Non-Professional One Story Commercial $769,300.00 1 General Office Bldg - Multi-Story Office Bldg Commercial $2,651,200.00 2 Restaurant, Cafeterias Commercial $7,595,000.00 14 Fast Food Restaurant - drive-in, Diner Commercial $468,500.00 1 Service Station Commercial $79,800.00 1 Automobile, Motorcycle, Farm Machinery, Tractor Commercial $566,100.00 2 Trailer Dealership Auto Garage - General Repair Commercial $164,100.00 2 Bar, Liquor Store wi Lounge, Cocktail Lounge, Night Commercial $51,400.00 1 Club Hotels and Motels (50 units or more) Commercial $2,399,100.00 2 Church (incl. Salvation Army), Church owned bldg Church $0.00 1 Homes for Aged, ALF(Non-profit) Nursing Home $2,713,600.00 1 City Government Government $0.00 2 Total Eastern District Included In Analysis $81,428,200.00 Jiil" tOllJa ~,~" :.:',,' "~3_,':,'",,,:, :.:<.'< ~", -, ,"'~"'~ Vacant Residential Vacant $354,600.00 1 Single Family Home Single Family $32,500.00 1 Apartments (50 units or more) Multi Family $4,519,600.00 1 Mobile Home Co-Op Single Family $0.00 1 Mobile Home Parks Single Family $2,806,400.00 2 Campground - Travel Trailer Park Single Family $420,300.00 1 Submerged Land - River, Lake Not Used $1,400.00 1 Total Eastern District Excluded From Analysis $8,134,800.00 I 'I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: APPENDIX A GA TEWA Y DISTRICT DESCRIPTION CATEGORY SUM OF PARCEL TAXABLE VALUE COUNT Convenience Store General Office - Non-Professional One Story General Office Bldg - Multi-Story Office Bldg Service Station Charitable/Fraternal Clubs, Lodges, etc. State Government City Government Total Gateway District Included In Analysis Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Institutional Government Government $331,800.00 1 $96,900.00 1 $726,100.00 1 $195,300.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 2 $1,350,100.00 State Park and Recreational Area Total Gateway District Excluded From Analysis