20-52RESOLUTION NO. 20-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER,
FLORIDA, FINDING THAT THE NORTH GREENWOOD
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA IS A BLIGHTED
AREA AS DEFINED IN THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1969 AND THAT THE
REHABILITATION, CONSERVATION, OR
REDEVELOPMENT, OR A COMBINATION THEREOF, OF
THIS AREA IS NECESSARY IN THE INTEREST OF THE
PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, AND WELFARE OF
THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY; FINDING THAT THERE
IS A NEED FOR A COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY TO CARRY OUT COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTH GREENWOOD
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA; REQUESTING
THAT THE PINELLAS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS DELEGATE THE REDEVELOPMENT
POWERS ENUMERATED IN THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1969 TO THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER FOR THE NORTH GREENWOOD
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA; REQUESTING
AUTHORITY FROM THE PINELLAS COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ESTABLISH A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT AND A
REDEVELOPMENT TRUST FUND WITHIN THE NORTH
GREENWOOD COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA;
REQUESTING THAT THE CITY ADMINISTRATION
PREPARE A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NORTH
GREENWOOD COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature enacted the Community Redevelopment Act
of 1969 ("the Act"); and
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature has amended the Act from time to time and
the Act is now codified at Part III, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, in counties with home rule charters, all powers arising through the
Act are conferred onto the county and the county is, in turn, authorized to delegate
those powers to municipalities within its boundaries when such municipalities desire to
undertake redevelopment projects within their municipal boundaries pursuant to §
163.410, Fla. Stat.; and,
WHEREAS, Pinellas County has adopted a Home Rule Charter; and
Resolution No. 20-52
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater ("the City") desires to increase the tax based
of all taxing authorities; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that the delegation of the redevelopment powers and
authority enumerated in the Act to the City is an appropriate vehicle through which to
accomplish redevelopment projects in areas within the City's municipal boundaries that
have experienced slum or blight as those terms are defined in the Act, and that such
delegation of redevelopment powers and authority serves the best interest of the public;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater City Council must determine that the North
Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area, as defined herein, is an area of slum or
blight as those terms are defined in the Act before the Pinellas County Board of County
Commissioners may delegate the redevelopment powers and authority enumerated in
the Act to the City; and
WHEREAS, the Pinellas County Government; the Pinellas Planning Council; the
Pinellas County School Board; the Southwest Florida Water Management District; the
Juvenile Welfare Board; and the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, which collectively
are the appropriate taxing authorities that levy ad valorem taxes on taxable real
property contained within the geographic boundaries of the North Greenwood
Community Redevelopment Area, as defined herein, have been notified of this
resolution by registered mail at least fifteen (15) days before the proposed action on the
resolution pursuant to § 163.346, Fla. Stat.; and
WHEREAS, appropriate notice to the public has been given by publication in
accordance with § 166.041(3)(a), Fla. Stat.; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held on the day noticed by said
publication; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That the real property, inclusive of rights-of-way, described and
shown graphically in the attached Exhibit "A" (hereinafter referred to as "the North
Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area") is within the municipal boundaries of the
City of Clearwater, Florida.
Section 2. That the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area is
hereby found and declared to be a blighted area as defined in § 163.340(8), Fla. Stat.,
as supported by the finding of necessity study attached as Exhibit "B" to this resolution,
because the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area has:
A. A substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating buildings;
2 Resolution No. 20-52
B. Conditions, as indicated by government -maintained statistics or other
studies, that endanger life or property or are leading to economic
distress;
C. Incidences of crime higher than in the remainder of the City or in Pinellas
County;
D. Fire and emergency medical service calls proportionately higher than the
remainder of the City or Pinellas County; and
E. A greater number of Florida Building Code violations than in the
remainder of the City or in Pinellas County.
Section 3. That it is hereby found that the rehabilitation, conservation, or
redevelopment, or a combination thereof, of the North Greenwood Community
Redevelopment Area is necessary in the interest of the public health, safety, morals,
and welfare of the City's residents.
Section 4. That based upon the foregoing findings the City of Clearwater City
Council finds that there is a need for a community redevelopment agency to function in
the City to carry out the community redevelopment purposes of the Act in the North
Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area.
Section 5. Requests that the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners
delegate to the City of Clearwater City Council all authority and powers conferred upon
Pinellas County through the Act (Part Ill, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes) for the North
Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area.
Section 6. Requests that the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners
establish a tax increment financing district and a redevelopment trust fund within the
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area to implement needed
improvements that will remedy the stated blighted conditions pursuant to §§ 163.370
and 163.387, Fla. Stat.
Section 7. Requests that the City's administration prepare a redevelopment plan
for the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area pursuant to the
requirements of the Act.
Section 8. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
)4'
day of 661)--10 2020.
Frank V. Hibbard
Mayor
3 Resolution No. 20-52
Approved as to form:
Michael P. Fuino
Assistant City Attorney
Attest:
Rosemarie Call
City Clerk
4 Resolution No. 20-52
EXHIBIT A
Point of Beginning
_Sunset Point Road.—as.
Sunburst Court
Cedar Street
0
a) III
J V
N m
III Seminole
Street ' o :
«L
ti C..
z <,
Palmetto -Street
CSX -.Railway Line
Legend
Proposed CRA Boundary
Unincorporated Pinellas County Enclave
44
CLE WATER
Prepared by:
Engineering Department
Geographic Technology Division
100 S. Myrtle Ave, Clearwater, FL 33756
Ph: (727)562-4750, Fax: (727)526-4755
www.MyClearwater.com
Proposed
North Greenwood CRA Boundary
Map Gen By: JB
Reviewed By: TM Date: 09/25/2020
Page: 1 of 3
N
S
Scale: N.T.S.
Document Path. C VLsa: stJamea_ ; .
odCRA'hc,...
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
Proposed North Greenwood CRA Boundary
BEGIN AT A POINT AT THE CENTER OF THE INTERSECTION with Sunset Point Road and Kings Highway
right-of-way and proceed South along the centerline of Kings Highway right-of-way to its intersection
with the centerline of Palmetto Street right-of-way; thence
Proceed West along the centerline of Palmetto Street right-of-way to its intersection with the northerly
extension of the East line of Block E, New Country Club Addition, as recorded in Plat Book 20, Page 64 of
the Public Records of Pinellas County, FL; thence
Proceed South along the East line of said Block E to its intersection with the centerline of Seminole
Street right-of-way; thence
Proceed East along the centerline of Seminole Street right-of-way to its intersection with the centerline
of North Missouri Avenue right-of-way; thence
Proceed South along the centerline of North Missouri Avenue right-of-way to its intersection with the
North right-of-way line of the CSX Rail Road; thence
Proceed West and Southwest along the North right-of-way line of the CSX Rail Road to its intersection
with the centerline of North Myrtle Avenue right-of-way; thence
Proceed South along the centerline of North Myrtle Avenue right-of-way to its intersection with the
centerline of Jones Street right-of-way; thence
Proceed West along the centerline of Jones Street right-of-way to the seawall or top of bank of
Clearwater Harbor; thence
Proceed meandering generally North along the seawall and top of bank of Clearwater Harbor to its
intersection with the centerline of Cedar Street right-of-way; thence
Proceed East along the centerline of Cedar Street right-of-way to its intersection with the centerline of
North Osceola Avenue right-of-way; thence
Proceed Northeasterly along the centerline of North Osceola Avenue right-of-way to its intersection
with the centerline of Sunburst Court right-of-way; thence
Proceed Southeasterly along the centerline of Sunburst Court right-of-way to its intersection with the
centerline of North Fort Harrison Avenue right-of-way; thence
Proceed North along the centerline of North Fort Harrison Avenue right-of-way to a point on the south
seawall or top of bank of Stevenson Creek; thence
Proceed meandering Southeasterly along the south seawall or top of bank of Stevenson Creek to its
intersection with the East boundary line of the Pinellas Trail; thence
Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
Proposed North Greenwood CRA Boundary
Proceed Northeasterly along the East line of the Pinellas Trail to its intersection with the centerline of
Sunset Point Road right-of-way; thence
Proceed East along the centerline of Sunset Point Road right-of-way to its intersection with the
centerline of Kings Highway right-of-way and THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Less and except all unincorporated Pinellas County enclaves.
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT "B"
North Greenwood Area
Finding of Necessity Study
on the following pages
BRIGHT AND BEAUTIFUL • BAY TO BEACH
North Greenwood Area
Finding of Necessity Study
August 5, 2020
City of Clearwater, Florida
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & HOUSING DEPARTMENT
North Greenwood Area
Finding of Necessity Study
August 5, 2020
Prepared for:
Economic Development and Housing Department
City of Clearwater
One Clearwater Tower
600 Cleveland St., Suite 600
Clearwater, FL 33755
IN'irtiM
Prepared by:
Wade Trim, Inc.
One Tampa City Center
201 N. Franklin St., Suite 1350
Tampa, FL 33602
1
Contents
Introduction 3
CRA Establishment Process 5
Slum and Blight Definition 6
Section 163.340(7), Florida Statutes 6
Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes 6
Major Areas of Analysis 8
Population, Socio -Economic, Housing Analysis 8
Population Characteristics 8
Socio -Economic Characteristics 9
Housing Characteristics 11
Public Safety 19
Existing Land Use and Development 22
Downtown 22
Non Low -Mod Area 25
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 28
North Greenwood Extension 31
North Greenwood Core 34
North Osceola 37
Development Age by Study Area 39
Property Maintenance 41
Taxable Valuation Analysis 42
Conclusion 46
Report Addendum - Analysis of Combination of North Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison, and
Downtown Study Areas into One Unified Study Area
2
Introduction
The City of Clearwater has determined a need to evaluate the potential of creating a community
redevelopment area (CRA), pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, for an area in the northern
portion of the city including the North Greenwood community and surrounding areas. These areas have
notably experienced varying degrees of physical, social and economic decline, and an evaluation is
needed to determine whether the areas qualify as a CRA under the Community Redevelopment Act of
1969, Chapter 163, Part III, Florida Statutes, to eliminate conditions of slum and blight.
The City identified six study areas for analysis. The six study areas are:
1. Downtown. The Downtown study area is situated just north of downtown Clearwater. The
study area is bounded by Jones Street to the south, N. Myrtle Avenue to the east, Cedar Street
to the north, and the Intracoastal Waterway (Clearwater Harbor) to the west.
2. Non Low -Mod Area. The Non Low -Mod Area study area is also situated just north of downtown
Clearwater. The study area is bounded by Drew Street to the south, N. Highland Avenue to the
east, Maple Street/Palmetto Street/Sunset Point Road (boundary jog) to the north, and N.
Myrtle Avenue to the west.
3. North Fort Harrison/Osceola. The North Fort Harrison/Osceola study area is located north of
the Downtown study area. The study area is bounded by Cedar Street to the south, N. Myrtle
Avenue to the east, Sunburst Court/Apache Trail to the north, and N. Osceola Avenue to the
west.
4. North Greenwood Extension. The North Greenwood Extension study area is located north of
the North Greenwood Core study area. The study area is bounded by Sunset Point Road to the
south, N. Highland Avenue to the east, Union Street to the north, and the Pinellas Trail to the
west.
5. North Greenwood Core. The North Greenwood Core study area is the largest study area and is
located south of the North Greenwood Extension study area and north of the Non -Low -Mod
Area study area. The study area is bounded by Palmetto Street to the south, Kings Highway to
the east, Sunset Point Road to the north, and the N. Myrtle Avenue to the west.
6. North Osceola. The North Osceola study area is a small study area located north of the North
Fort Harrison and Downtown study areas. The study area is bounded by Cedar Street to the
south, N. Osceola Avenue/N. Myrtle Avenue to the east, Venetian Pint Drive to the north, and
the Intracoastal Waterway (Clearwater Harbor) to the west.
See Map 1 for the location of the six study areas.
3
Map 1— Study Area Locations
_COMMODORE Si
GRANADA 51
CHORUS ST
SE AST
? SUNNY DALE UR
' North—
Osceol
6
Downtown -
North Greenwood
Extension
PULLER DR
4
CS-
- f.) cl J""I SANDY LN
5 i
North Greenwood -3
Core
_, North Fort Harrison/
Osceola
aiuMON' -
RARaWOOD 5'
woODEUNE ST
3�
GREENLLIA DR
-f 1
SANDY IN
�.wwooD'DBy.
SMONGDAte ST r
!''BLEB d/-`_
?— 1
3.1
_,g 1r
5c,,,., ST .8 1 LFVFRN$:
BONAIR 5T
/ _ MLMETTOST
WAIN UT ST
ElIMY00D 5*
21�
c
2I j`.
Non Low-Modg - 87-
Area - - n
?NORTH (RUN ()QD
Finding or Necessity Stud
SIU(h ;areas
Roadways
Water Bodies
1 Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
L_J Study Areas
Study Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2014-2018 Ammon
Community Some, 5 -Year Estimates. accessed lune 2020.
If
n
5001.000 2 00
Feet
Currently, the City has an existing Downtown CRA. The existing Downtown CRA abuts the Downtown
and Non Low -Mod study areas included as part of this study. The boundary of the existing Downtown
CRA is shown on Map 2.
Map 2 — Boundary of Existing Downtown Community Redevelopment Area
BOUNDARY MAP
MAP KEY
• • • Downtown CRA Boundary
Pinellas Trail
•
•
•
Source: City of Clearwater CRA
4
This study will analyze the six study areas to determine which of the study areas are eligible for
designation as a CRA under the criteria provided in Section 163.349(7) or (8) and Section 163.355,
Florida Statutes.
CRA Establishment Process
Community redevelopment is an economic development strategy that many local governments are
successfully using to eliminate and prevent negative conditions that harm their community.
The State enacted the Community Redevelopment Act of 1969 as embodied in Chapter 163, Part III,
Florida Statutes, to address growing issues of blight, disinvestment, and other negative conditions that
are injurious to community health, safety and welfare. This legislation provides the means for local
governments to work with the private sector and leverage public investment into a community to
effectuate positive change.
There are four basic steps to be taken to establish a CRA and implement a community redevelopment
plan pursuant to the requirements of the Community Redevelopment Act of 1969, Chapter 163, Part III,
Florida Statutes. They are:
1. Finding of Necessity. A study of a proposed CRA area must be undertaken to document that the
necessary conditions (slum, blight, and/or a shortage of affordable housing) are present and
meet the statutory requirements of establishing a CRA.
2. Creation of the Community Redevelopment Agency. The enacting local government (City of
Clearwater) must create a Community Redevelopment Agency, which will oversee the
implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan and activities within the CRA. The
Agency can have 5 to 7 members. The City Council may itself serve as the Agency or may
appoint members to the Agency. It is anticipated that the City Council will serve as the
Community Redevelopment Agency.
3. Creation of the Community Redevelopment Plan. Consistent with the requirements and
procedures of Section 163.340, Florida Statutes, a community redevelopment plan must be
created for the CRA. This plan will serve as the guiding tool for the redevelopment of the CRA
and all expenditures of tax increment funds must be tied to the implementation of the plan.
The process involves taking a collaborative and holistic approach to identifying public
improvements needed to attract private investment in key catalyst projects. A catalyst project is
one that is supported by the market, is of a scale compatible with existing development,
supports the goals of the plan, and can be expected to stimulate additional redevelopment/
rehabilitation on surrounding sites.
4. Establishment of the Redevelopment Trust Fund and Setting the Property Tax Base. Upon
adoption of the community redevelopment plan, the City Council must adopt an ordinance to
create the Redevelopment Trust Fund. All tax increment funds and revenues generated by the
CRA must be retained within the Trust Fund. Upon creation of the trust fund, the property tax
roll is certified for the purposes of establishing the property tax base. Once the tax base is
established, growth in the tax base is retained by the CRA.
5
This study is directed towards the first step — Finding of Necessity. Conditions within the CRA study
areas have been investigated to determine whether slum or blighted conditions exist. According to
Section 163.355, Florida Statutes, the City must adopt a resolution, supported by data and analysis,
which makes a legislative finding that the conditions in the area meet the criteria for slum and blight as
respectively defined in Section 163.340 (7) or (8), Florida Statutes. Further, the resolution must state:
1. One or more slum or blighted areas, or one or more areas in which there is a shortage of
housing affordable to residents of low or moderate income, including the elderly, exist in such
county or municipality; and
2. The rehabilitation, conservation, or redevelopment, or a combination thereof, of such area or
areas, including, if appropriate, the development of housing which residents of low or moderate
income, including the elderly, can afford, is necessary in the interest of the public health, safety,
morals, or welfare of the residents of such county or municipality.
Slum and Blight Definition
The City must determine that the study areas meet either the criteria to be designated as a "slum area"
as defined in Section 163.340(7), Florida Statutes, or designated as a "blighted area" as defined in
Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes. The statutory criteria for "slum" and "blighted" are provided
below.
Section 163.340(7), Florida Statutes
"Slum area" means an area having physical or economic conditions conducive to disease, infant
mortality, juvenile delinquency, poverty, or crime because there is a predominance of buildings
or improvements, whether residential or nonresidential, which are impaired by reason of
dilapidation, deterioration, age, or obsolescence, and exhibiting one or more of the following
factors:
a. Inadequate provision for ventilation, light, air, sanitation, or open spaces;
b. High density of population, compared to the population density of adjacent areas within
the county or municipality; and overcrowding, as indicated by government -maintained
statistics or other studies and the requirements of the Florida Building Code; or
c. The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes.
Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes
"Blighted area" means an area in which there are a substantial number of deteriorated or
deteriorating structures; in which conditions, as indicated by government -maintained statistics
or other studies, endanger life or property or are leading to economic distress; and in which two
or more of the following factors are present:
a. Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout, parking facilities, roadways,
bridges, or public transportation facilities.
b. Aggregate assessed values of real property in the area for ad valorem tax purposes have
failed to show any appreciable increase over the 5 years prior to the finding of such
conditions.
c. Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness.
6
d. Unsanitary or unsafe conditions.
e. Deterioration of site or other improvements.
f. Inadequate and outdated building density patterns.
g. Falling lease rates per square foot of office, commercial, or industrial space compared to
the remainder of the county or municipality.
h. Tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair value of the land.
i. Residential and commercial vacancy rates higher in the area than in the remainder of
the county or municipality.
j. Incidence of crime in the area higher than in the remainder of the county or
municipality.
k. Fire and emergency medical service calls to the area proportionately higher than in the
remainder of the county or municipality.
I. A greater number of violations of the Florida Building Code in the area than the number
of violations recorded in the remainder of the county or municipality.
m. Diversity of ownership or defective or unusual conditions of title which prevent the free
alienability of land within the deteriorated or hazardous area.
n. Governmentally owned property with adverse environmental conditions caused by a
public or private entity.
o. A substantial number or percentage of properties damaged by sinkhole activity which
have not been adequately repaired or stabilized.
However, the term "blighted area" also means any area in which at least one of the factors
identified in paragraphs (a) through (o) is present and all taxing authorities subject to s.
163.387(2)(a) agree, either by interlocal agreement with the agency or by resolution, that the
area is blighted. Such agreement or resolution must be limited to a determination that the area
is blighted. For purposes of qualifying for the tax credits authorized in chapter 220, "blighted
area" means an area as defined in this subsection.
7
Major Areas of Analysis
This Finding of Necessity Study examines the various physical, social, and economic realms that make up
the six individual study areas. It is organized around the following major areas of analysis:
• Population Characteristics
• Housing Characteristics
• Income Characteristics
• Public Safety Trends
• Existing Land Use and Development
• Property Maintenance
• Taxable Valuation Trends
These areas of analysis will serve as the foundation for redevelopment decisions and will be linked to
Community Redevelopment Plan recommendations as the process unfolds. Importantly for establishing
blight, they reveal keen insights as to the nature and extent of slum or blighted conditions that are a
barrier to redevelopment activity in the area.
The conclusion of this report summarizes the specific findings of slum or blight, consistent with the
statutory definition, that substantiate the need for establishing a CRA within one or more of the study
areas.
Population, Socio -Economic, Housing Analysis
A core component of understanding the underlying conditions and needs of the six study areas is to gain
a basic understanding of the population and socio-economic characteristics of each of the study areas.
The source for the population, socio-economic, and housing characteristics is the United States Census
Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5 -Year Estimates (2014-2018) Block Group and Tract data.
The ACS data is a professionally acceptable data source for the analysis of these characteristics.
Population Characteristics
Based on ACS data, the estimated population of each of the six study areas is provided in the following
table (see Table 1). The table also provides the percentage of the City's total estimated population
(114,015) within each of the six study areas.
Table 1— Study Area Estimated Population
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
• • II •� -. •i • V • •
1,917
2,549
267
3,835
4,903
283
1.7%
2.2%
0.2%
3.4%
4.3%
0.2%
The racial makeup of residents is analyzed to determine the extent of population diversity. According to
ACS data, 79% of the total City population is white, and 21% of the total City population is non-white.
Non-white includes Black or African American, Asian, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Pacific Islander,
8
or another race. As shown in Table 2, the North Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and
Non Low -Mod study areas have a population that is mostly non-white. The majority of the non-white
population is Black or African American. In fact, the disparity between the overall City racial profile and
the racial profile of these three areas is significant and infer a concentration of minority population in
these three areas.
Table 2— Study Area Racial Profile
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
60%
45%
38%
63%
32%
89%
Non -White'
40%
55%
62%
37%
68%
11%
Based on ACS data, the Hispanic/Latino (any race) composition of the total City population is 18%. As
shown in Table 3, the only study area that exceeds the total City percentage of Hispanic/Latino
population is the North Greenwood Extension (40%). The remaining five study areas are all comprised
of a Hispanic/Latino population of Tess than 18%.
Table 3— Study Area Hispanic/Latino Population
Downtown 13%
Non Low -Mod Area 4%
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 16%
North Greenwood Extension 40%
North Greenwood Core 10%
North Osceola 9%
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
Socio -Economic Characteristics
According to ACS, the total City the percentage of persons living below the Federal poverty level is 16%.
Table 4 shows that all six study areas have a percentage of persons living below the Federal poverty
level that exceeds the total City percentage. The study area with the highest level of poverty is the
North Fort Harrison/Osceola area with a percentage of 40% of persons living below the Federal poverty
level. Notably regarding the poverty data, within the North Greenwood Core study area there is one
area along the southside of Stevenson's Creek where the poverty level is only 7%. This low poverty
percentage skews the overall poverty rate for the North Greenwood Core study area. Outside of the
Stevenson's Creek area, the North Greenwood Core study area's poverty rate is 31%. See Map 3 for the
poverty rate distribution.
9
Map 3— Study Area Poverty Status
dONIM000RE ST
y1/
QI SUNNYDAU DR
GRANADA 51
CHARLES ST
SE�EYA ST
BERMuf)A S1
:Lliwli1
:u_iu G+L
ET417I$Rt:jl
7 1 I%L_
rRA$T"�
ELDRIDGE ST
C2 I KSON RD
1 _
SPRING LN
-1
NAMES LN
IOEL IN
UNKNOWN
-0 EN 51
FAIRMONT 5
e
o- 5
GNEENLYX DR
N, ORM (.111.1; s 001)
Finding of \ecessitc `turfs
1'o\ IN 11L1tIl5 h5 111nIL ,1 rt
GFNTRY
v� �
o r_
N HIBISCUS 5T 9 // L-EVERN
/ RONAIR :TT
2 MAPLE T 1
IIH-� I
Z.
I2
WA NUf ST
ELMW-00057
01
GROVE 5T
LAURA ST
ZI LCVELAND SI
UNKNOWN
5T
% Individuals Below Poverty Level
25% or less
26% to 39%
- 4O% or more
Roadways
Water Bodies
I I♦ Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
L. -J Study Areas
Study Areas
1- Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Ate Snunz. U.S. Ceneua Bureau, 2014-2018 Amenrsm
Com nonny Survey, 5 -Year CsBmatcs, mooned lune 2020.
n
0 5001,000 2,000
v Feet
E�
Table 4— Study Area Poverty Status
Study Area
Persons Below
Poverty Level
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
34%
23%
40%
37%
27%
9%
Median household income was evaluated to compare the study areas to t
ACS, the median household income for the total City is $47,070. Table 5
study area median household income ($44,769) is similar to the total City
The other five study areas are very similar to each other and significantly
household income.
he total City. According to
shows that the North Osceola
median household income.
Tess than the total City median
10
Table 5 — Study Area Median Household Income
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
$34,497
$29,289
$34,496
$37,029
$34,627
$44, 769
It is important to note that socio-economic conditions alone are not sufficient for the findings required
for designation as a CRA. However, the socio-economic conditions are important in supporting the
following analysis related to housing conditions and affordability, which are specific findings to support
designation as a CRA.
Housing Characteristics
Housing characteristics related to value, occupancy, cost/affordability, and housing conditions are
analyzed for the study areas.
Based on ACS data, the median home value for the total City is $191,600. Two of the study areas (North
Fort Harrison/Osceola and North Greenwood Core) are significantly lower than the total City median
home value. The other four study areas are either similar or significantly higher than the total City
median home value. See Table 6 and Map 4.
Table 6 — Study Area Median Home Value
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
$204,100
$177,933
$149,450
$158,200
$132,040
$313,400
11
Map 4 — Study Area Median Home Value
N E
8
—8i
0ELMS
S Iw LNi-1
.i.je000
A—
/<'I
� 1
/GENtLY SI
5
=Q^
1
MRN�ST
\ MCI 'II GRU:E\N 0O1)
I - Hiding u( \ece'sSiltitud�
Medias Value by Block Group
00NAIR S,
wMNUI s,
,wrvt 57
LAURA ST
Median Home Value
$ 132.040.00 - $150.000 00
$150 000.01 - $200.000 00
$200 000.01 - $313.400 00
I Al
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
r Study Areas
Study Areas
1 ' Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
- North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Os . Source, U.S. Cenws &yea., 2014-2018 Naenran
Community Survey, 4 -War taawabs. acceuaa tune MO.
n
0 500 1.000 2,000
0 Feet
The total City housing vacancy rate, based on ACS data, is 19.7% of total housing units. Only one of the
study areas (North Osceola at 30%) significantly exceeds the total City housing vacancy rate. The other
five study areas have a similar or lower vacancy rate than the total City. Notably, the North Osceola
study area has significantly fewer housing units (446) than any of the other five study areas. The other
five study areas range from 619 to 2,243 housing units. See Table 7 and Map 5.
Table 7 -Study Area Housing Vacancy
Downtown 24%
Non Low -Mod Area 7%
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 20%
North Greenwood Extension 8Y6
North Greenwood Core 12%
North Osceola 30%
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
Map 5 - Study Area Vacancy Status
Vacancy Status by Block Group
:..:-. .2.3.(21=1-.1. 1|;
_ ~_p�/_
'
o
�
l - '|
:i
:11
l
:11 ':-.-: t,-
,_ a*"~'�
� '.i
�
«�a, s
'
�
�
Roadways
Water Bodies
VWI Other Incorporated Crti"and Towns
u="=w=teoPinellas County
Study Areas
^"ow=~"
,• Non Low -Mod Area
,' North °w"iso*v=eol^
^ North Greenwood a="m
5'North Greenwood Care
^ North Osceola
Data Source. �Census Bore.. 2014-201Bninenutn
Community Survey. 5 -near Litenetos. emptied Am. /CM.
500 1 /000 2 000
11111111Ci Peel
0024
13
A strong indicator of housing affordability is the percentage of household income that is spent on
housing costs such as mortgage and rent. A standard to evaluate affordability is to spend no more than
30% of household income on housing costs. The ACS provides data that shows the percentage of
households that spend more than 35% of their household income on housing costs, which is a strong
indicator of unaffordable housing conditions.
The total City percentage of households spending more than 35% of household income on housing costs
is 26.9% for owners and 49.1% for renters. Due to the fact that ACS data for housing affordability is only
provided at an aggregated Census Tract level, which spans across study areas, the six study areas show
very similar values for the number of households spending more than 35% of their household income on
housing costs. Based on ACS data, the percentage of households spending more than 35% of their
household income on housing cots ranges from 36% to 44% for owners and 50% to 62% for renters
across the six study areas. This data shows that the six study areas have a significantly higher rates of
unaffordable housing conditions compared to the total City. However, in the Downtown and North Fort
Harrison/Osceola study areas, unaffordable housing conditions are significantly more prevalent (62%)
than the total City. The other four study areas have similar percentages to the total City. See Table 8,
Map 6 and Map 7.
Table 8 — Study Area Households Paying More than 35% of Household Income on Housing Costs
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
,Oyvner
44%
44%
44%
43%
44%
36%
62%
52%
62%
50%
54%
53%
14
Map 6 — Study Area Housing Costs More than 35% of Household Income (Owner)
N_Y
MOWN. S.
L__coAiNt000Rt ST
O! GRAITA ST
CHARLES St
SEOEEW ST
SUNNTOAEE 0R
4'.^511217
LSWi LI:Y
3�+
GREENEEA 0
.aNDR Iii
�11
01
a0feee St
WAINUTSI
INIW W0 SI
�N�N(lVIN
MLA ST :•
NORTH GNI:VW OO
I riding of \eces•it, Sin
Ilousing ( osts (Owner) by Tract
% Owner -Occupied Costs >35%
< 3130-
- 35% - 44%
-> 44%
1 1
I..J
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other incorporated Cites and Towns
Unincorporated Pirellis County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 North Greenwood Ectension
S North Greenwood Core
6 North Osceola
Oats b'eariramm�a+'•M•b Jw MY awnaaaya el oniw.
ouuped uorts and+asn,„w.o. your WA or man
el hwwndd Iowan.
n
0 5001000 2.000
O Feel
15
Map 7 — Study Area Housing Costs More than 35% of Household Income (Renter)
t --I MAAl1a 5
(OMMO(r,:
GRANADA•r
O COACEESST
yii MD,-
,
1
T buy
4oN� LIS
STET sr q f
SNERI04N an , WILSON -11
RD
5
2
MTH GREEN%%(H)I)
inding of 'ect•ssit% ~loth
(lousing t osis (Renter) by Tract
a-5
CEENIEA DO
,1awDOD
!Ij}I
7
GENT 6Y SI
Meir
itON4M Sr
NAlr1D1 S1
AIWOOD Sr
VtSt
_i 114.111.4 ST
% Renter -Occupied Costs >35%
<- 50%
50% 60%
I s
4 60%
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated Cites and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non low -Mod Arra
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 North Greenwood Extension
S • North Greenwood Core
6 North Osceola
LAM141,213111 Anl. MAO LaTIMIAlle.
of MU
r rtlrn.r.•. �.a..d a Noe rata •r nws.a. •rn..rr
aceuprid unin r.Ylre MAT ma iiia MUYry con a5t 0...015
d he...1.AI.. am.
A
0 5001000 2.000
o Feer
Analysis of the prevalence of substandard housing units is an important consideration in the designation
of a CRA. The ACS provides data on the number of housing units that have one or more substandard
conditions (i.e., lack of complete plumbing or kitchen facilities, overcrowding, or cost -burdened, etc.).
The ACS estimates that 28% of total City owner -occupied housing units have one or more substandard
conditions. The ACS shows that only the North Osceola study area has a similar rate of substandard
owner housing units (30%) to the total City. The other five study areas show higher rates of substandard
owner -occupied housing units. The North Greenwood Core, Non -Low Mod Area, and North Greenwood
Extension have disproportionately higher rates. See Table 9 and Map 8.
Table 9 — Study Area Substandard Housing Condition
Study Area Owner
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
36%
41%
36%
41%
39%
30%
16
Map 8 — Study Area Owner -Occupied Households with Substandard Conditions
ARM St
NORTH GREE\1N( 00
H inding of \t ee.%it% Int
Select Conditions (Owner)l) I raft
5
uMEEM1tEA
arrrtr r.
G[WRY ♦r
--o—
.1VFMM St
w4lNW 11
MW 00051
% Owner -Occupied w/Conditione
30% 35%
36%-40%
41% 45%
r --
1__J
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrnson/Osuaola
4 North Greenwood FMtensson
- North Greenwood Core
6 North Osceola
nau, 2011 rola wmrun,anrr.rn.v
m....d 141,0 Mno ... na a I•.ar ,.,.
Na W 110•51y uonaaawan as tss..y csatnaleto pumb
utlew IaaYu. lwadiry, w ®1 W We, emote, Mon in.
nwNMMla mt .1.
n
0 5001.000 2.000
O Fee
J
17
ACS also provides data on overcrowding in households (i.e., more than 1.0 person per room). The total
City percentage of overcrowded households is 1.4%. The only study area that exceeds the total City
percentage of overcrowded households is the Non Low -Mod Area at 5%. See Table 10 and Map 9.
Table 10 — Study Area Overcrowded Households
Study Area Overcrowded
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
0%
5%
0%
0%
1%
0%
Map 9 — Study Area Households Owner Occupied Overcrowded
18
NORTH (:REE\x%(101)
l inding of \rressit) Stud)
Crow ding 1Ossncr) 12y Block (.ronp
% Owner -Occupied, Crowded
0%-1%
2% - 4%
5% - 7%
Roadways
Water Bodies
$ Other Incorporated Gtles and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
( Study Areas
Study Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non tow -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
a - North Greenwood Fcrension
5 North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Data Source: u.5. Census Bureau. 2014-2018 Ammon
Comawmry Sunn, S Year f (mates, a[ea..ed tuna 1020.
•5A.aed defined as ens ha.ui me,* than 1.0 eanun
n
0 500 1.000 2.000
0 Fee'
f
Public Safety
A critical component in any revitalization strategy is that business districts and residential areas need to
be safe, secure and non -threatening. Even the perception of crime in an area can have negative
repercussions. Whether it be comfort in crossing or strolling the street, letting children out to play, or
merchandizing a business, protection and criminal aversion is essential.
The nature and extent of criminal activity in the study areas was investigated using data provided by the
City of Clearwater Police Department. The crime data covers only crimes occurring in the year 2019.
The crime data was normalized based on the numbers of crimes per 1,000 population within each study
area. Two approaches to the crime analysis are provided. The first approach compares the crime rate
per 1,000 population of each of the study areas to the total citywide crime rate. The second approach
compares the percentage of total crimes within each study area to the percentage of the total citywide
population within each study area.
Based on the Police Department data, the citywide crime rate is 52.9 crimes per 1,000 population.
Table 11 shows the crime rate for each of the study areas.
Table 11— Study Area Crime Rate
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: City of Clearwater Police Department
28.7
64.3
149.8
31.6
125.8
NA
The crime rates in the North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola study areas are
significantly higher than the total citywide crime rate. The other study areas are either similar or lower
than the total citywide crime rate. No crime data was provided for the North Osceola study area.
However, it is not anticipated that the crime rate in the North Osceola study area will be significantly
higher than the total citywide crime rate.
Based on the Police Department data, the percentage of total citywide crimes in each study area
compared to the proportionate share of the City population within each study area is shown in Table 12.
Table 12 — Study Area Crime Rate Proportional Allocation
Ara % of Citywide Climes
% of Citywide
Population
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
1%
3%
1%
2%
10%
NA
1.7%
2.2%
0.2%
3.4%
4.3%
NA
Source: City of Clearwater Police Department (crimes); U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018 (population)
19
The North Greenwood Core has the largest proportional differential between the percentage of
population and the percentage of total citywide crimes. North Greenwood Core has 10% of the total
citywide crimes but only 4.3% of the total City population.
Table 13 provides a comparison of the study area crime rate and crime proportion to the corresponding
citywide data and totals. The study areas that have both a higher crime rate and crime proportion
demonstrate a concerning level of criminal activity compared to the City as a whole (i.e., citywide).
Based on this analysis, the Non -Low Mod Area, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and North Greenwood
Core study areas demonstrate concerning levels of criminal activity compared to the City as a whole.
Table 13 — Study Area Comparison of Crime Rate to Citywide
Study Area
Crime Rate Crime Proportion
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Lower
Higher
Higher
Lower
Higher
NA
Lower
Higher
Higher
Lower
Higher
NA
Fire/EMS service was also evaluated for the study areas based on data provided by the City of
Clearwater FIRE/EMS for the year 2019. The Fire/EMS data was normalized based on the number of
calls for service per 1,000 population within each study area. Two approaches to the Fire/EMS analysis
are provided. The first approach compares the Fire/EMS call rate per 1,000 population of each of the
study areas to the citywide rate. The second approach compares the percentage of total Fire/EMS calls
within each study area to the percentage of the total citywide population within each study area.
Based on the Fire/EMS data, the citywide call rate is 211.2 calls per 1,000 population. Table 14 shows
the Fire/EMS call rate for each of the study areas.
Table 14 — Study Area Fire/EMS Call Rate
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Source: City of Clearwater Fire/EMS
467.4
173.0
876.4
77.4
275.3
NA
The North Fort Harrison/Osceola and Downtown study areas have a significantly higher call rate than
the citywide call rate. In addition, North Greenwood Core has a slightly higher call rate than the
citywide call rate. No Fire/EMS data was provided for the North Osceola study area. However, it is not
anticipated that the Fire/EMS call rate in the North Osceola study area will be significantly higher than
the citywide call rate.
20
Based on the Fire/EMS data, the percentage of total citywide Fire/EMS calls in each study area
compared to the proportionate share of the City population within each study area is shown in Table 15.
Table 15 — Study Area Fire/EMS Calls Proportional Allocation
% of City-wide Calls
% of Citywide
Population
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
4%
2%
1%
1%
6%
NA
Source: City of Clearwater Fire/EMS and U.S. Census ACS 2014-2018
1.7%
2.2%
0.2%
3.4%
4.3%
NA
Both the Downtown and North Greenwood Core study areas had similar and disproportionately higher
rates of Fire/EMS calls compared to their proportional populations. North Fort Harrison/Osceola
showed a slightly higher rate of Fire/EMS calls compared to its proportional population.
Table 16 provides a comparison of the study area Fire/EMS call rate and call proportion to the
corresponding citywide data and totals. The study areas that have both a higher Fire/EMS call rate and
call proportion demonstrate a concerning level of Fire/EMS activity compared to the City as a whole
(i.e., citywide). Based on this analysis, the Downtown, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and North
Greenwood Core study areas demonstrate concerning level of Fire/EMS activity compared to the City as
a whole.
Table 16 — Study Area Comparison of Fire/EMS Calls to Citywide
Study Area
Call Rate Call Proportion
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Higher
Lower
Higher
Lower
Higher
NA
Higher
Lower
Higher
Lower
Higher
NA
Using the findings of the crime and Fire/EMS call analysis, and aggregating the findings to determine the
study areas that experience heightened concern regarding both criminal activity and Fire/EMS calls
compared to the City as a whole; the following three study areas exhibit heightened concern regarding
criminal activity and Fire/EMS calls:
• North Fort Harrison/Osceola
• North Greenwood Core
• Downtown
21
Existing Land Use and Development
The following provides information regarding the general character, existing land uses, and age of
structures (i.e., buildings) in each of the six study areas.
Downtown
The Downtown study area is characterized by a blend of residential and non-residential uses. Key points
of interest include the Seminole Boat Ramp, Clearwater Garden Club, North Ward Elementary,
Clearwater Health Department, and the Pinellas Trail. Multi -family condominiums line the waterfront in
this area; however, several apartment complexes are also located further inland within the study area,
as are single family residential lots. Commercial uses are focused on North Fort Harrison Avenue,
whereas industrial uses front N. Garden Avenue. Institutional uses such as churches and non-profit
charitable organizations are located throughout the study area. The location of existing land uses is
shown in Map 10.
Most parcels are residential multi -family (e.g. apartments and condos) comprising 114 or 47% of parcels.
These properties are most concentrated along the waterfront between N. Osceola Avenue and the
waterfront, although there are several multi -family properties between North Fort Harrison Ave. and
the Pinellas Trail. Additionally, residential vacant (10 or 3% of parcels) or single-family (52 or 17% of
parcels) uses are either west of North Fort Harrison Avenue or east of N. Garden Avenue. Commercial
vacant (55 or 18% of parcels) and developed commercial (20 or 7% of parcels) uses are distributed
throughout the Downtown study area. Industrial (10 or 3% of parcels) and institutional (8 or 3% of
parcels) uses are also present east of N. Osceola Avenue. These uses include the Clearwater Garden
Club and Clearwater Free Clinic, among others. Government use comprises only four (4) or 1% of
parcels; however, these uses are prominent. The heavily utilized Seminole Boat Ramp is located at the
waterfront west of North Fort Harrison Avenue, North Ward Elementary is located just south of Cedar
Street, and the Clearwater Health Department complex is located just east of the Pinellas Trail west of
N. Myrtle Avenue.
The average year built of all structures in the Downtown study area is 1966. Residential, commercial,
and institutional properties have an average year -built in the 1940s; however, most multi -family,
industrial, and government or public use properties were generally constructed later in the 1960s and
1970s.
The percentages of existing land use and average year built are shown in Table 17.
22
Map 10 — Downtown Existing Land Use
I
Exist' ng Land Use
Resleev:al. vacant
%w onnal Single Fanaly or PUO
Resndenaal Malo FamyApanments,CondoaOner
- ReaOenbel. Common Men
Conenercal. vacant
- Comararnat. Cono,av5bree,OncpSeleadR000e
- tbrtmraal. oat Course
tnawrial. Want
- nduaeal. ManufacttsngAVarelrouse?Sbraea
nMOatan 1. Vacant
- natnubonal. ChurcnasPrraato Schools/Non-Prot
- Gowrmment. VannttParkaSchoorsPswn Use
Submerged or Undevoxpee NO Uwt
- Uaptlea. Tranapodabon
m°k,Fu;t
IXOAR Sr
(;REEMN (H)D
l inding of \eeessits Sttt
Existing Land Use (Downtown)
r J
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated titles and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1Downtown
2 - Non low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Oats Source: WwIOs County Property Appra,ser.
Parcel Data atceaed May -lune 2020,
0 170 350 700
Feer
23
Table 17 — Downtown Existing Land Use
Land Use Description
Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant 10
Residential, Single Family or PUD 52
Residential, Multi -Family 144
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas 2
Commercial, Vacant 55
Commercial, 20
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
3.28%
17.05%
47.21%
0.66%
18.03%
6.56%
2002
1945
1975
1975
2018
1942
Commercial, Golf Course 0 0.00% No Data
Industrial, Vacant 0 0.00% No Data
Industrial, Light 10 3.28% 1967
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
Institutional, Vacant 0 0.00%
Institutional, Churches/Private 8 2.62%
Schools/Non-Prof
Government,
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped
Utilities, Transportation
4
0
0
TOTAL 305
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
24
1.31%
0.00%
0.00%
No Data
1946
1963
No Data
No Data
100.00%
Non Low -Mod Area
The Non -Low -Mod Area study area is characterized by predominately residential single-family lots,
though the most well-known destination is the Clearwater Country Club golf course just north of Drew
Street. Jack Russell Stadium (south of Palmetto Street) and Kings Highway Elementary School are also
located in the study area. There are fewer multi -family properties within the study area; however, there
are duplex, triplex, or fourplex properties within largely single-family residential neighborhoods.
Commercial uses are focused on Drew Street at the south and Sunset Point Road at the north of the
study area. Some institutional uses such as churches are in the study area. The location of existing land
uses is shown in Map 11.
Most parcels in the Non Low -Mod Area are residential single-family comprising 954 or 82% of parcels.
These properties are developed throughout the study area, although there are some multi -family
properties (121 or 10% of parcels) in the form of duplex, triplex, or fourplex units. Additionally,
residential vacant properties (23 or 2% of parcels) occur as undeveloped platted lots. Commercial
vacant (24 or 2% of parcels) and developed commercial (21 or 2% of parcels) uses are focused on Drew
Street and Sunset Point Road. institutional (8 or 1% of parcels) uses are broadly distributed and are
comprised of churches and other community centers. Government uses comprise less than 1% of
parcels and include Kings Highway Elementary School and Jack Russell Stadium. The largest parcel in the
study area is the Clearwater Country Club golf course, which comprises approximately 100 acres.
The average year built of all structures in the Non -Low -Mod Area study area is 1954. Residential single-
family and multi -family properties were generally built in the 1940s and 1950s, with some residential
properties considered "vacant" having structures built in the 1980s. Most commercial properties were
constructed later with an average year built of 1969. Industrial properties have an average year built of
1941, while institutional and government or public use properties were generally built in the 1960s and
1970s.
The percentages of existing land use and average year built are shown in Table 18.
25
Map 11— Non Low -Mod Area Existing Land Use
26
/ �) / �)`
\)-/1NI1'� l/E�l_k.�N(Mil)
I.ttidttig of \/TPSbI1% SI)t(15
.
. LaiSting Land UseNi
Reeelennel. eeriele
Resennal. &ogle Famlyar PUD
Resdennal Malt Femiy ApartmortUCeneouOMer
Ebelaennel. Common Areas
-. Commerce. Vacant
t•
I
D,
_2.--
-
�EIAIEROR
-r,
o
UNf
�.:1 :v: •.,;
-
---
Cr,'
... --
1. \Isllll 1, l.Allll I st I\,IIl I ott-‘l•Ill ‘rl':11
- Coneneroal. Generau4rores,'0ff 5erc4Repeao
111.COmmerwl Goa count*
F I BlrluwMl. Vaunt
\
Are
S)41.°. SAND, Lb
'Ar �.. _
Roadways
Water Bodies
' Other Incorporated Citron and Town,
Unincorporated Pinellas County
1-r Study Areas
Study Areas
l Downtown
2 Non low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
• - North Greenwood Extension
5 -North Greenwood Core
6- North Osceola
Date Source: Ierlles County Property Appr,xr
ercel Data ere sed M,v.ane 2020
0
0 300 600 ,200
- Ineelnel. -Iglu Menulactuerg.Mereholneelorege
\fge9. 1
MARY l RG
..
' B,aauarul Vaunt
b* I
"N1.1.,...„
`�
iCRRACC RD
- nnmeonal. GwrcheaOrmate SchooerNon.Prol
- GovommMi. VecanVPwke5clmoWPlloec UN
-. _.
('ZAIRE DII� t I _Gi.
5 : falloaOM S ,..
J'T
bm
Submerged or Undeveloped (No eel
�� —�
�- I
uaurre Tnmoortauon
\Ar : ---- ° (
'N,--1
�-
/ MARSHAL! S. ` �
�'-
WOODn
a
___./._j___,_, �a frFAM 51
��0
SPRINGDALE ST a
r -o
pZ a. R; URliDN 51 r
'I
RUSSELL S/
IfIG f SiJ
t" r -
OVERIEA ST 5� IRE. ,..1 -
/
Ii Si"l TANGERINE
`I '�Y` -r^ - L. _
`,
ST I ENGMAN ST
IFNGMYI STI
itFNGSAAII
iQ
1
1 LAVAL ST . IASM V 51 _
_
a ' jr...�
?i PALM RLUri ST
i� ae A011}lM W [Pill^�
31
I
IUaGCNS Si
r=
_
•iIBISCVS ` J
`_
f-tFVERN nn
/
MEl1UST
2 t
` I. r
! 1 SI
llimimpp y
(BONAN
—r.'
, , .
ST
wciorsc,Nsr
tICDQST
,ii
WALNUT sI
SEMINOM ST '_=Z
Li
,NAP*T
_...�1 [kir.t
FIRD[ST
MADIE ST_
T3
�
4E
22,
..
'�T""'
RIwf_�
Lal l
1
I— ^moi
—_
oFeet
26
Table 18 — Non Low -Mod Area Existing Land Use
Land Use Description Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant 23
Residential, Single Family or PUD 954
Residential, Multi -Family 121
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas 3
Commercial, Vacant 24
Commercial, 21
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
1.97%
81.75%
10.37%
0.26%
2.06%
1.80%
1989
1954
1948
1955
2014
1969
Commercial, Golf Course 1 0.09% 2001
Industrial, Vacant 0 0.00% No Data
Industrial, Light 2 0.17% 1941
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
Institutional, Vacant 1 0.09%
Institutional, Churches/Private 8 0.69%
Schools/Non-Prof
Government, 4
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped 5
Utilities, Transportation 0
TOTAL
1,167
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
27
0.34%
0.43%
0.00%
100.00%
No Data
1979
1963
No Data
No Data
North Fort Harriso/Osceola
The study area is characterized by a mix of land uses, including single-family and multi -family residential,
commercial, and institutional uses. There is limited industrial within the study area. Of the multi -family
properties within the study area, most are duplex, triplex, or fourplex properties within single-family
residential neighborhoods. Commercial uses are focused on North Fort Harrison Avenue. There are no
government or public uses within the study area and activity centers are limited to the few commercial
store, office, and restaurant destinations. The locations of existing land uses are shown in Map 12.
Most parcels in the North Fort Harrison/Osceola study area are either residential single-family homes
comprising (78 or 37% of parcels) or multi -family units (42 or 20% of parcels). These properties are
developed throughout the study area as duplex, triplex, or fourplex units or single-family homes on
residential lots. Vacant residential (9 or 4% of parcels) uses exist as undeveloped platted Tots.
Commercial vacant (51 or 24% of parcels) and developed commercial (22 or 10% of parcels) uses are
focused on Fort Harrison Avenue. Industrial (5 or 2% of parcels) uses are limited, as are institutional (5
or 2% of parcels) uses comprised of churches and other non-profit charitable organizations. There are
no government or public uses in the study area. One utility complex is located just north of Eldridge
Street.
The average year built of all structures in the North Fort Harrison/Osceola study area is 1945.
Residential single-family and multi -family properties were generally built in the 1930s and 1940s, with
some residential properties considered "vacant" having structures built as recently as 2019. Most
commercial properties were constructed later with an average year built of 1964, with some commercial
properties considered "vacant" having structures built as recently as 2019. Industrial properties have an
average year built of 1959, while institutional properties have an average year built of 1945. The utility
complex north of Eldridge Street was built in 1964.
The percentages of existing land use and average year built are shown in Table 19.
28
Map 12 — North Fort Harrison/Osceola Existing Land Use
a
Existing Land Use
Re.aeneal vacant
4csdcnndl Smola :erroy w PUD
Rnsdenool Mule Parlay Apartments,Condos. Other
- Reseo rl Common Area.
Commercial Vacant
Commerce! GaneraliSlores'Ofice.Sales 4ecaw
-Commercial icon Course
rWeblel. Vacant
Indublsk Light Manulacturmy^Narehouae.Storeoe
Inoledenal MMam
- InsMotanal. CnurchaaQTMt SonoolaNan-Prot
- Gocnrrwera V.cantRllk,5chnolaMublo Use
SuMsrgod or Undavalop.d LNG Ur)
— Ulllir.. Tranaporueon
NOR III tatt.h \\\(UH)
Finding of \t E t-..it� ~loth
Tislinc I.;md (.c I\ol ih I. Hal ns.nll
L GPANtl' f,NAN_^St
4 – iu,GI14NT ST
l 41 a_
UnItON SI i EAKToN ST -11
/i
FN%+MAN
MEM PuOEF S1
DMA% ST
MEITO ST
Mr±TO ST
hl MEM t*
NICIIULSON SI
MOTTO ST
SEMINOLE S,
ENGMAN St
IISALLE S'
M.tplE
Loa/A ST
,EF ST
t_—J
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6- North Osceola
Dale Source: Nnelles Carta Property Appraser,
earcel Data accessed Man -tiny 2020.
n
0 200 400 800
v Feet
29
Table 19 — North Fort Harrison/Osceola Existing Land Use
Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant 9
Residential, Single Family or PUD 78
Residential, Multi -Family 42
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas 0
Commercial, Vacant 51
Commercial, 22
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
4.23%
36.62%
19.72%
0.00%
23.94%
10.33%
2019
1942
1936
No Data
2019
1964
Commercial, Golf Course 0 0.00% No Data
Industrial, Vacant 0 0.00% No Data
Industrial, Light 5 2.35% 1959
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
Institutional, Vacant 0 0.00%
Institutional, Churches/Private
Schools/Non-Prof
Government,
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped
Utilities, Transportation
TOTAL
5
0
0
1
213
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
30
2.35%
0.00%
0.00%
0.47%
No Data
1945
No Data
No Data
1964
100.00%
North Greenwood Extension
The North Greenwood Extension spans several enclaves of Pinellas County, though most of the
geography is within the City. The North Greenwood Extension study area is characterized by a
predominately single-family residential use. Of the multi -family properties within the study area, most
are duplex, triplex, or fourplex properties within single-family residential neighborhoods; however,
there are several large apartment complexes on Kings Highway south of Union Street. There is very
limited commercial and industrial use within the study area, with some vacant commercial properties on
State Street and north of Sunset Point Road. Institutional uses such as churches and rehabilitation
centers and minor utility complexes are also present. The location of existing land uses is shown in Map
13.
Most parcels in the North Greenwood Extension study area are either residential single-family homes
comprising (622 or 72% of parcels) or multi -family units (142 or 16% of parcels). These properties are
developed throughout the study area as duplex, triplex, or fourplex units or single-family homes on
residential lots. There are several larger apartment complexes concentrated on Kings Highway south of
Union Street. Vacant residential (81 or 9% of parcels) uses exist as undeveloped platted lots south of
Idlewild Drive in the center of the study area. Commercial vacant (4 or less than 1% of parcels) and
developed commercial (1 or less than 1% of parcels) uses are very limited and concentrated on State
Street and north of Sunset Point Road. Industrial (1 or less than 1% of parcels) uses are also very
limited, as are institutional (2 or less than 1% of parcels) uses comprised of churches, rehabilitation
centers, and minor utility complexes (5 or less than 1% of parcels). There are no government or public
uses in the study area.
The average year built of all structures in the North Greenwood Extension study area is 1962.
Residential single-family and multi -family properties were generally built in the 1960s and 1970s, with
some residential properties considered "vacant" having structures built as recently as 1996. Most
commercial properties were constructed earlier with an average year built of 1957. Industrial properties
have an average year built of 1965, while institutional properties have an average year built of 1960.
The percentages of existing land use and average year built are shown in Table 20.
31
Map 13 — North Greenwood Extension Existing Land Use
y
Extstlny Land Use
Revdennl JKant
ReadOntnl Smy.,eny. or PUO
Resew -ow Mule-PernSt Apartments/ContbetOthee
- ieedennt Common Areae
Cement.cet. Vacant
- Cemnamal. GeneraVSeotooDflooSoloogeodr
- Coarwcul GM Ceurce
erduamat. L ht ManutacturmpWareleun/Etaaye
• InYWlional. Vacant
- InfYWaonel. Churehn.'Privam Schoole/Non•Prof
- Goverment. Vesantr'VNeSceoola,PudK Ore
Su omOryao Or Undevubpad l NO Lou!
- Jhl;cea. Ti39ee0Vut.On
City of Dunedin
i
32
NOKIA H GREE\% 0(1)
Finding of \t- is il% Slott
I. xottnp I_ nd 1 .r N•.rth Crern,torl f tt.l
1
t �
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated °ties and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 • Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
- North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
La ]w me. P. netters [Duet, Property Appru rr..
net ata steamed May -tune 2020.
0 250 500 1.000
evoituFeet
Table 20 — North Greenwood Extension Existing Land Use
Land Use Description Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant
Residential, Single Family or PUD
Residential, Multi -Family
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas
Commercial, Vacant
Commercial,
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
Commercial, Golf Course
Industrial, Vacant
81
622
142
5
4
1
9.36%
71.91%
16.42%
1996
1960
1973
0.58% No Data
0.46% No Data
0.12% 1957
0 0.00% No Data
0 0.00% No Data
1965
Industrial, Light
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
1 0.12%
Institutional, Vacant
0
Institutional, Churches/Private
Schools/Non-Prof
2
Government,
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped
Utilities, Transportation
0
2
5
0.00% No Data
0.23% 1960
0.00%
0.23%
0.58%
No Data
No Data
No Data
TOTAL 865
100.00%
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
33
North Greenwood Core
The North Greenwood Core also spans several enclaves of Pinellas County, though most of the
geography is within the City. Stevenson Creek also runs through the study area. The North Greenwood
Core study area is characterized by predominately single-family residential use. Of the multi -family
properties within the study area, most are duplex, triplex, or fourplex properties within single-family
residential neighborhoods; however, there are several large apartment complexes (e.g. Palmetto Park)
in the study area. There is very limited commercial and industrial use within the study area. Institutional
uses such as churches, lodges (e.g. Elks Lodge), and non-profit charitable organizations (e.g. Willa Carson
Health Resource Center, Homeless Empowerment Program/HEP, etc.) are distributed throughout the
southern half of the study area. The most prominent uses are government or public facilities, which
include the North Greenwood Recreation Center, Clearwater North Greenwood Library, Clearwater
Intermediate School, Sandy Lane Elementary School, Calvin A. Hunsinger School, Cherry Harris Park,
Overbrook Park, fire/police stations, and other civic facilities. The location of existing land uses is shown
in Map 14.
Most parcels in the North Greenwood Core study area are either residential single-family homes (1,211
or 70% of parcels) or multi -family units (141 or 8% of parcels). These properties are developed
throughout the study area as duplex, triplex, or fourplex units or single-family homes on residential lots.
There are several larger apartment complexes concentrated on Palmetto Street and between Pineland
Drive and N. Betty Lane. Vacant residential (190 or 11% of parcels) uses exist as undeveloped platted
Tots throughout the study area. Commercial vacant (59 or 3% of parcels) and developed commercial (20
or 1% of parcels) uses are very limited and concentrated on N. Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. Vacant
industrial (3 or less than 1% of parcels) and developed industrial (31 or 2% of parcels) uses are also very
limited and concentrated in the southern half of the study area along Eldridge Street and N. Myrtle
Street. Vacant institutional (7 or less than 1% of parcels) and developed institutional (31 or 2% of
parcels) uses as churches and non-profit charitable organizations are widespread. Major utility
complexes (5 or less than 1% of parcels) are located north of Maple Street and north of Russell Street,
with a wastewater treatment facility located at Marshall Street. There are also major government or
public facilities (13 or 1% of parcels) within the study area, including several public schools, a public
recreation center and library complex, several public parks, police/fire stations, and other civic facilities.
The average year built of all structures in the North Greenwood Core study area is 1960. Residential
single-family and multi -family properties were generally built in the 1950s, with some residential
properties considered "vacant" having structures built as recently as 2008. Most commercial properties
were constructed later with an average year built of 1967. Industrial properties have an average year
built of 1965, while institutional properties have an average year built of 1966. Government or public
use properties have an average year built of 1973. Utilities have an average year built of 1954.
The percentages of existing land use and average year built are shown in Table 21.
34
Map 14— North Greenwood Core Existing Land Use
Existing Land Use
%aaenas! Vacant
aa:dannal singe ,ar.ny or PUD
Re Nd,Nal Mu1h.Famay Aeartmenta:Conda.Caher
- W Wanaal Con men Meas
GatmCtccat Vacant
- Commercial GenaralSteree%Onrca'SaNSRapam
- Commermal GAS Course
Industrial. Vacant
- macsew. Light Manu tacturmg,Ware oust Storage
— aracubanai. Vacant
- Mscmawal. ChurelmaPrivale Schoola'Non-prof
- Government VacantIParkeSclwroaTUWK Use
Submerged or Undevobped 1Na Use)
- Jnirbaa. Tie,aortrmen
GnAR S1
a/ On
}Q.
SUNNVOAEE Da
•
'Ot, W 5U DA
SEDLEVA CHIN 4
SrieTf SI
p i
2
_0•'
OR"III GRE:F:\‘‘0011
Finding of Sect yoi.% sI
I nnll I .r ♦r,rth S,rernour I
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated Cites and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
I j Study Areas
Study Areas
1 Downtown
2 Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Jaa Sartre. V.n.lo Cauray P apeoy Apncarse,
brrei Data axeaed May.lur. 1020.
n
375 750 '500
w,Peet
35
Table 21— North Greenwood Core Existing Land Use
Land Use Description
Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant
Residential, Single Family or PUD
Residential, Multi -Family
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas
Commercial, Vacant
Commercial,
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
Commercial, Golf Course
Industrial, Vacant
Industrial, Light
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
Institutional, Vacant
Institutional, Churches/Private
Schools/Non-Prof
Government,
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped
Utilities, Transportation
190
1,211
141
4
59
20
11%
70%
8%
2008
1959
1953
0% No Data
3% No Data
1% 1967
0 0% No Data
3 0% No Data
1965
31
7
31
13
6
5
2%
0% No Data
2%
1%
0%
0%
TOTAL 1,721 100%
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
36
1966
1973
No Data
1954
North Osceola
The North Osceola study area is characterized by predominately single-family residential use. Of the
multi -family properties within the study area, most are duplex, triplex, or fourplex properties and multi-
unit condominium complexes. There is very limited commercial use within the study area, which is
concentrated along N. Myrtle Avenue north of Sunburst Court in the form of hotel/motel and restaurant
establishments. There are no industrial, institutional, or government uses or major activity centers or
destinations within the study area. The location of existing land uses is shown in Map 15.
Most parcels in the North Osceola study area are either residential single-family homes (148 or 56% of
parcels) or multi -family units (74 or 28% of parcels). These properties are developed throughout the
study area as duplex, triplex, or fourplex units, large condominium complexes, or single-family homes on
residential lots. Vacant residential (23 or 9% of parcels) uses exist as undeveloped platted lots
throughout the study area. Developed commercial (12 or 5% of parcels) uses are very limited and
concentrated in the form of hotels/motels and restaurants on N. Myrtle Avenue north of Sunburst
Court. There are no industrial, institutional, or government uses within the study area.
The average year built of all structures in the North Osceola study area is 1955. Residential single-family
and multi -family properties were generally built in the 1950s and 1960s, respectively, with some
residential properties considered "vacant" having structures built as recently as 2013. Most commercial
properties were constructed earlier with an average year built of 1944.
The percentages of existing of land use and average year built are shown in Table 22.
37
Map 15 — North Osceola Existing Larid Use
Existing Land Use
Re Ytlentlal decant
Re edonrol Single lrermly oe PUD
Resdenaal Mum Feeney Aoanmenls:Condee,OOner
- Residential Cormon Aosta
Ccmmercul vacart
- Commercial Cenerol,Stcro6'Onlce,Sales Repair
', Commercial 0011 coarse
Industrial. vacant
- teduslnal. Light Manulactunng Werenoune,Storage
Ineetutoeal Vacant
- Instmleonal. Cnvrceas.Pnvala Solestu Non -Prot
oenerrtn ni Vader/parse SCnoOM'm1OIK Ute
Suomargod or Undevelopod t No Use)
- -doilies Tran•pomtron
38
'ORI II (.RF.F N\OOl
Minding of \t 1•r„its
F.y Isl1 :till I St I \or1L ( )srrnlaj
1
r"--1
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated Cltles and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Study Areas
Study Areas
1 Downtown
2 Non Low -Moo Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4- North Greenwood Extension
5 • North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Date Source. anedes Lounry Property Appraiser.
arcel pats accexed May -lune 2020.
A
�r�
CY
Table 22 — North Greenwood Core Existing Land Use
Land Use Description Number of Parcels Percentage Avg. Year Built
Residential, Vacant 23
Residential, Single Family or PUD 148
Residential, Multi -Family 74
Apartments/Condos/Other
Residential, Common Areas 5
Commercial, Vacant 1
Commercial, 12
General/Stores/Office/Sales/Repair
8.7%
56.1%
28.0%
2013
1950
1964
1.9% No Data
0.4% No Data
4.5% 1944
Commercial, Golf Course 0 0.0% No Data
Industrial, Vacant 0 0.0% No Data
Industrial, Light 0 0.0% No Data
Manufacturing/Warehouse/Storage
Institutional, Vacant 0 0.0%
Institutional, Churches/Private 0 0.0%
Schools/Non-Prof
Government,
Vacant/Parks/Schools/Public Use
Submerged or Undeveloped
Utilities, Transportation
0
1
0
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
TOTAL
264 100.0%
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
Development Age by Study Area
The distribution of average year built by study area is shown in Table 23 and Map 16. Structures built
before 1980 (i.e., more than 40 years old) are generally assumed to have more housing problems and a
higher risk of lead-based paint. All six of the study areas have an average year built earlier than 1980,
with the North Fort Harrison/Osceola study area having the earliest average year built and the Downton
study area having latest average year built. In general, all six study areas are characterized by a high
prevalence of aging structures.
Table 23 — Study Area Age of Structures (Year Built)
Study Area
Avg. Year Built Avg. Age of Structures
Downtown 1966
Non Low -Mod Area 1954
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 1945
North Greenwood Extension 1962
North Greenwood Core 1960
North Osceola 1955
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020
39
54
66
75
58
60
65
Map 16 — Study Area Age of Structures (Year Built)
Clearwater
Harbor
Cny of Ouned In
(1121 .11 (.321 F\Nl(1OI)
Findutk of \t•cIS.tt. stud)
Irl•
ol . ti ucturcs (lvar Built)
Ln -LA URI
d"!♦ ^ 'tib•
a
iikt
,ai=1itt 11� $
=Mg.. ZUNI
a ig ire
Pinellas County Property Appraiser
Age of Structures (Year Built)
- Before 1940
Mill 1941-1960
1961 - 1980
- 1981-2000
- After 2000
4
Roadways
Water Bodies
Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Stud A
V reas
Slutly Areas
1 - Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 North Greenwood Extension
5 - North Greenwood Core
6 • North Osceola
Dili source. COunty P opertv Appraiser
erceI D.t. eeceaed May h ne 2010
n
0
'MO ' OOr
40
Property Maintenance
The condition of properties within the six study areas is evaluated through an analysis of City code
enforcement activity and from observations during a field site visit to the study areas.
The City's Planning and Development Department provided code enforcement data for the year 2019
for the total citywide and within each of the six study areas. The code enforcement data included
property maintenance and building code violations. The data was compared to determine the
proportional relationship of the percentage of code enforcement cases within each study area and the
percentage of code enforcement cases citywide; and the proportional relationship of the percentage of
each of the study areas' size to the total city size. This evaluation identifies if a study area has a
disproportionate number of code enforcement cases related to the size of the study area. Table 24
provides the proportional calculation of code enforcement cases within the study areas.
Table 24 — Study Area Code Enforcement Proportional Allocation
Study Area
% of Total Code % of Citywide Area
Enforcement Cases
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
4.3%
3.4%
3.3%
2.2%
11.1%
1.9%
Source: City of Clearwater Planning & Development and U.S. Census
0.5%
0.3%
0.9%
2.2%
3.0%
1.2%
The analysis shows the proportionate allocation of code enforcement cases in the North Greenwood
Core study area is significantly and disproportionately higher than the percentage of its comparative
size. The North Greenwood Extension and North Osceola study areas show a proportionate allocation of
code enforcement cases that are proportionately similar to their comparative size. The Downtown, Non
Low -Mod Area, and North Fort Harrison study areas show a proportionately higher percentage of code
enforcement cases to their comparative size.
41
Taxable Valuation Analysis
The taxable value of properties within the six study areas was analyzed over the period of 2015 to 2019
(five tax years). The 2019 taxable value data was obtained from the Pinellas County Property Appraiser.
The 2015 taxable value data was obtained form the Florida Department of Revenue. For the purposes
of this analysis, the taxable value assessed for non -school district taxes is analyzed.
As a point of comparison, from the City's FY 2015/2016 and FY 2019/2020 budgets, the citywide taxable
value increased from $8.7 billion in 2015 to $11.9 billion in 2019. This is an increase of 37%. Also, the
citywide 2019 taxable value per acre is $531,250. Table 25 provides the change in taxable value and the
2019 taxable value per acre for each of the six study areas. Map 17 and Map 18 show the distribution of
absolute taxable value change and percentage change of taxable value, respectively.
Table 25 — Study Area 2015 to 2019 Taxable Value
Study Area
2105 Taxable 2019 Taxable
Value Value
(millions) (millions)
2019
2015 to 2019 Taxable
2019 Taxable Value per
Percent Value per Acre
Change Acre Difference
to City
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort
Harrison/Osceola
$35.9
$70.2
$12.9
$60.3
$99.0
$16.8
68%
41%
30%
$489,448
$197,071
$273,195
-8%
- 63%
- 49%
North Greenwood $52.2 $81.7 57% $293,343 -45%
Extension
North Greenwood Core $72.5 $96.2 33% $138,933 -74%
North Osceola $55.8 $73.1 31% $362,884 -32%
Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Database, March 2020; Florida Department of Revenue
42
Map 17 — Absolute Taxable Value Change 2015-2019
Clearwater
Harbor
1____407000Rt ST
GRANADA ST
OIARIAS SI
SEOEEW ST
suNNYDALE OP
City of Dunedin
AIONNW
1L [DAY pr,
N
t7w00001'
•61 �a
r.4r rum
J. —_
LASAUE �i t
LAURA
LALIIIA SI
ELEVELAN9 ST
RONAIR S1
A'MNUT ST
1S O) ST
8
LAURA ST
1 t.
-Iaxahlc AOC ( Amount ( hang()
Taxable Value (Amount Change)
- Lost more than -5250,000.00
-5250,000 - $0.00
50.01 5250.000.00
— 5250.000.01- 5500,000.00
- Gamed more than $500,000.00
Roadways
Water Bolles
Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
JStudy Areas
Study Areas
1 Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4 - North Greenwood Extension
5 North Greenwood Core
6 North Osceola
Ow 50(1173e: Pinellas Counts Prnpesty Appral set.
Parcel Data ...tossed Mary -lune 2000.
n
0 50C 1.000 2. DOC
O Feet
43
Map 18 — Percent Taxable Value Change 2015-2019
Clearwater
Harbor
City of Dunedin
—t CLEVELAND ST
44
)R1 II (jai -A\►O(-)I)
ditlti or 1t•rt,001 Ys utI
Ia thlc ahtc (-r- ( Paan cl
Taxable Value (*1- Change)
- Lost Value I-)
No Change
— Gained Value I*I
c --a Roadways
3 3t Water Bodies
ARNICA ON ' Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
Wa>D Study Areas
/4 _ 1- Downtown
%Y— 2 Non Low -Mod Area
---4— 3 - North Ft Harrison/Osceola
4- 4 - North Greenwood Extension
c[N1Py LI 5 - North Greenwood Core
6 - North Osceola
Bolan >
1--J r 1 Study Areas
W*Utllt ST DNA Siorce. Panels, County Property APPr•Lec
I Mp coo st Parcel pate Noessed Mw -Eine 2100.
n
J 50C 1 0D0 2 GOC
v Feet
Table 26 compares the taxable value growth and difference in taxable value per acre to the citywide
taxable value growth and taxable value per acre. The study areas that have a lower taxable value
growth rate, and 45% or higher difference in the taxable value per acre compared to the city overall,
demonstrate a disproportionate restriction on taxable value growth. A study area that has a lower
taxable value growth rate and higher than 45% difference in taxable value per acre compared to the city
overall is considered to be significantly lagging behind the citywide tax value growth. Based on this
analysis, the North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola are the only study areas that
demonstrate a lower growth rate in taxable value and higher than 45% difference in taxable value per
acre compared to the city overall.
Table 26 — Study Area Comparison of Taxable Value to Citywide
Study Area
% Tax Value Change Taxable Value per
Acre 45% Difference
Downtown
Non Low -Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Extension
North Greenwood Core
North Osceola
Higher
Higher
Lower
Higher
Lower
Lower
Lower
Higher
Higher
Higher
Higher
Lower
45
Conclusion
The purpose and intent of this study is to provide documentation that supports the City's designation of
one or more of the six study areas as a community redevelopment area (CRA) pursuant to Section
163.355, Florida Statutes. The six study areas are:
1. Downtown
2. Non Low -Mod Area
3. North Fort Harrison/Osceola
4. North Greenwood Extension
5. North Greenwood Core
6. North Osceola
See Map 19 for the location of the six study areas.
Map 19 — Study Area Location
North
Osceola
6
4
North Greenwood
Extension
NUE.
•
SAW>. IN
tai e
u,aEae..-- Q -----
North Greenwood
Core
North Fort Harrison/
Osceola
Non Low -Mod
Area
NOR I II (.RF }- VA111111)
Finding ut \t'et ssit% Studd
tinnl arc:
Roadways
Water Bodies
I 14 Other Incorporated Cities and Towns
Unincorporated Pinellas County
LJ Study Areas
Study Areas
_ca 1 - Downtown
2 - Non Low -Mod Area
3 - North Ft Hamson/Osceola
TivNINET 1- North Greenwood Extension
o woa sr S - North Greenwood Core
remind St = 6 -North Osceola
WALNUT tS1 pay Sow.. U.S. Cemin 2014201a&nem.
....., Co.n.Nronr Swwrp 5.5.0, E¢.not. , wnn5M hon. 1020.
n
C 500 1,000 2,000
�� Feet
Otast
The analysis of the six study areas focused on data that support the finding of slum or blighted
conditions. To focus the study, the following 10 topics of analysis for each study area were compiled
and analyzed:
• Poverty
• Household Income
46
• Median Home Value
• Housing Vacancy
• Housing Affordability
• Housing Condition
• Housing Crowding
• Crime and Fire/EMS Calls for Service
• Code Enforcement Activity
• Taxable Values
As required by Florida Statutes for the finding of slum and blight, the FON is based on the consideration
of significant deviations from the average citywide characteristics for each of the 10 topics of analysis.
In addition, the analysis includes a comparative consideration between each of the six study areas to
identify the study areas that are most impacted by slum and blight conditions relative to the other study
areas.
To support this analysis, a matrix was developed that identifies each of the six study areas and each of
the 10 topics of analysis. The matrix identifies if the result of the analysis provided in the FON
demonstrates a significant deviation from citywide averages. In the matrix, those cells with a label of
"Yes" and shaded green signify that the FON analysis identified a significant deviation and was
supportive of a finding of slum and blight. Those cells in the matrix that are labeled "No" and shaded
red signify that the FON analysis did not identify a significant deviation and was not supportive of a
finding of slum and blight. The matrix is provided below:
Table 27 — Matrix of Blighted Conditions
Study Areas
North
Greenwood
Core
Household Home Housing Housing
Poverty
Housing
Crowding
Safety
Code
Taxable
Total
Finding
9
Income Value
lIYes Yes
Vacancy
Affordability
Y
Conditions
Yes
Yes
a
Value
+«s,. ,
No
No
North Ft.
Harrison/
Osceola
Yes Yes Yes
Y
es Yes
8
Downtown
Non Low -
Mod Areas
Yes ;',Yes No Yes Yes
es
Yes No
es
7
North
Greenwood
Extension
Yes Yes Yes No
w
=
o o
Oscoeoha rt
No No No
Ye "' No
o "
No :
N
o No 1
North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola
As shown in the matrix, North Greenwood Core demonstrates 9 of the 10 indicators of slum and blight,
and North Fort Harrison/Osceola demonstrated 8 of the 10 indicators of slum and blight. This significant
alignment with the indicators of slum and blight strongly supports the designation of these two areas as
a community redevelopment area.
Downtown
The matrix shows that Downtown has similar characteristics to the North Greenwood Core and North
Fort Harrison/Osceola for the indicators of slum and blight. However, a difference with Downtown is
47
that the median home value is slightly higher than the citywide average. In addition, the taxable values
within the Downtown have grown at a higher rate than citywide, and the taxable value per acre of
property within Downtown is similar to the citywide taxable value per acre. In addition, similar to North
Osceola, Downtown's median home values and taxable values are significantly higher than the other five
study areas. This strong data related to median home values and taxable value growth indicate the
absence of significant slum and blight conditions.
Table 288 — Downtown Summary
Median Home Value
Taxable Value Growth
Downtown
$204,000 $192,000
68% 37%
Taxable Value per Acre
$489,000
$531,000
Non Low -Mod Area
The matrix demonstrates that for the Non -Low Mod Area, 5 of the 10 indicators do not support a finding
of slum and blight. These 5 indicators are median home value, housing vacancy, safety (crime and
Fire/EMS), and taxable value growth. These 5 indicators are either similar to or better than citywide.
This data indicates the absence of significant slum and blight conditions.
Table 299 — Non Low -Mod Area Summary
Indicator
Non Low -Mod Area Citywide
Median Home Value
Taxable Value Growth
Housing Vacancy
Fire/EMS Calls per 1,000 Population
$178,000
41%
7%
173
$192,000
37%
20%
211
Crime Rate per 1,000 Population
64
53
North Greenwood Extension
The matrix demonstrates that for the North Greenwood Extension, 6 of the 10 indicators do not support
a finding of slum and blight. Key indicators such as safety (crime and Fire/EMS), code enforcement, and
taxable value growth do not indicate slum and blight. These 6 indicators are either similar to or better
than citywide. This data indicates the absence of significant slum and blight conditions.
Table 30 — North Greenwood Extension Summary
Indicator
North Greenwood Extension Citywide
Fire/EMS Calls per 1,000 Population
77
211
Crime Rate per 1,000 Population
31
53
Code Enforcement
Number of code cases
proportionate to size (area) of
study area.
NA
Taxable Value Growth
57%
37%
North Osceola
As shown in the matrix, North Osceola only exhibits 1 of the 10 indicators of slum and blight. The other
indicators are either similar to or better than citywide data. It is also important to note that both the
median home value and the taxable value per acre are significantly higher than 8 of the other study
areas. This is similar to the Downtown study area. This strong data for poverty rate, median home
value, and taxable value indicate the absence of significant slum and blight conditions.
48
Table 31— North Osceola Summary
Indicator
North Osceola Citywide
Poverty
Household Income
Median Home Value
Substandard Housing
Code Enforcement
Overcrowded Housing
Taxable Value Growth
Taxable Value per Acre
9% 16%
$44,880 $47,000
$313,000 $192,000
30% 28%
Number of code cases NA
proportionate to size (area) of
study area.
0% 1.4%
31% 37%
$363,000 $531,000
As fully described at the beginning of this study, the study areas must be analyzed to determine if the
conditions in the study area meet the criteria for slum or blight as respectively defined in Section
163.340 (7) or (8), Florida Statutes.
Based on the analysis of the study areas, it is found that the North Greenwood Core and North Fort
Harrison/Osceola study areas meet the statutory requirement as blighted areas as provided in Section
163.340(8), Florida Statutes. The statute requires that at least two of the qualifying conditions within
Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes, must be present and documented within the study area. The
specific major findings consistent with Section 163.340(8), Florida Statues, for the North Greenwood
Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola study areas are provided in Table 32.
49
Table 32 — Findings of Blighted Conditions North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola
Qualifying Blight Condition North Greenwood Core North Fort
Harrison/Osceola
Aggregate assessed values of real
property in the area for ad valorem tax
purposes have failed to show any
appreciable increase over the 5 years
prior to the finding of such conditions.
Incidence of crime in the area higher
than in the remainder of the county or
municipality.
The taxable assessed values
have increased at a lower
rate than the City, and the
taxable assessed value per
acre is significantly less than
the City. (See Taxable
Valuation Analysis)
The crime rate and
proportionate allocation of
citywide crime is
disproportionately higher in
the study area. (See Public
Safety Analysis)
The taxable assessed values
have increased at a lower
rate than the City, and the
taxable assessed value per
acre is significantly less than
the City. (See Taxable
Valuation Analysis)
The crime rate and
proportionate allocation of
citywide crime is
disproportionately higher in
the study area. (See Public
Safety Analysis)
Fire and emergency medical service
calls to the area proportionately higher
than in the remainder of the county or
municipality.
The Fire/EMS call rate and
proportionate allocation of
citywide calls is
disproportionately higher in
the study area. (See Public
Safety Analysis)
The Fire/EMS call rate and
proportionate allocation of
citywide calls is
disproportionately higher in
the study area. (See Public
Safety Analysis
A greater number of violations of the
Florida Building Code in the area than
the number of violations recorded in
the remainder of the county or
municipality.
The number of code
violations is
disproportionately greater
than the relative size of the
study area. (See Property
Maintenance Analysis)
The number of code
violations is
disproportionately greater
than the relative size of the
study area. (See Property
Maintenance Analysis)
In addition to the specific findings of blight, the Population/Socio-Economic/Housing Analysis indicates
that the North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola study areas also exhibit, compared to
the city overall, a higher prevalence of:
• Poverty;
• Vacant housing units;
• Households spending 35% or more of household income on housing costs; and
• Housing with substandard conditions.
Also, the household income and median home values are significantly lower, compared to the city
overall, in the North Greenwood Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola Study areas.
These factors support a finding of blight for the implementation of a CRA within the North Greenwood
Core and North Fort Harrison/Osceola study areas. Signs of distress and blight are becoming
increasingly evident as other parts of the city prosper. Public intervention is needed in conjunction with
private sector participation to treat the negative influences and foster a healthier social and economic
environment.
50
ARW/TSR
BRIGHT AND BEAUTIFUL• BAY TO BEACH
North Greenwood Area
Finding of Necessity Study
Report Addendum
Analysis of Combination of North Greenwood
Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and
Downtown Study Areas into One Unified Study
Area
City of Clearwater, Florida
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & HOUSING DEPARTMENT
re WADE
Wei TRIM
Memorandum
To: Chuck Lane, Assistant Director
City of Clearwater Economic Development & Housing Department
From: Brad Cornelius, AICP
Date: July 23, 2020
Subject: North Greenwood Area Finding of Necessity Study - Analysis of
Combination of North Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola,
and Downtown Study Areas into one Unified Study Area
As requested, the following provides an analysis of the findings of slum or blight as a result of
combining the study areas of North Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and
Downtown into one unified study area. Table 1 provides the results of combining the data from
the three study areas for each of the slum or blight indicators provided in the full Finding of
Necessity Study. The table text shown in red identifies indicators that support a finding of slum
or blight in the unified study area.
Table 1— Analysis of Slum or Blighted Conditions for Unified Study Area
Indicator
Unified Study Area Citywide
Poverty
Median Household Income
Median Household Value
Housing Vacancy
Affordable Constrained Housing
Payments (Owner)
Substandard Housing Conditions
Overcrowded Housing Conditions
Crime (Incidents per 1,000 population)
Fire/EMS (Calls per 1,000 population)
Code Enforcement (Percent of All Cases)
Taxable Property Value Growth
29%
$34,540
$159,100
18%
44%
3.7%
0.3%
100.5
285.7
16%
$47,070
$191,600
19.7%
27%
2.8%
1.4%
52.9
211.2
18.7% in 4.4% of Total City Area
43% 37%
Based on the analysis of the unified study area, it is found that the combination of the North
Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and Downtown study areas meet the statutory
requirement as blighted areas as provided in Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes. The statute
requires that at least two of the qualifying conditions within Section 163.340(8), Florida Statutes,
must be present and documented within the study area. The specific major findings consistent
with Section 163.340(8), Florida Statues, for the unified study area of North Greenwood Core,
North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and Downtown are provided in Table 2.
1 of 2
Table 2 — Findings of Blighted Conditions of Unified Study Area
Qualifying Blight Condition
Incidence of crime in the area higher
than in the remainder of the county or
municipality.
Fire and emergency medical service
calls to the area proportionately
higher than in the remainder of the
county or municipality.
A greater number of violations of the
Florida Building Code in the area than
the number of violations recorded in
the remainder of the county or
municipality.
Unified Study Area (North G
Core/North Fort Harrison/Osceola/
•
The crime rate is disproportionately higher in the
unified study area compared to the citywide
crime rate.
The Fire/EMS call rate is disproportionately
higher in the unified study area compared to the
citywide Fire/EMS call rate.
The percentage of code violations within the
unified study area is disproportionately greater
than the relative size of the combined study area.
In addition to the specific findings of blight, the unified study area also exhibits, compared to the
city overall, a higher prevalence of:
• Poverty;
• Households spending 35% or more of household income on housing costs; and
• Housing with substandard conditions.
Also, the household income and median home values are significantly lower, compared to the
city overall, in the unified study area.
These factors support a finding of blight for the implementation of a CRA within the unified study
area of North Greenwood Core, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and Downtown. Signs of distress
and blight are becoming increasingly evident as other parts of the city prosper. Public
intervention is needed in conjunction with private sector participation to treat the negative
influences and foster a healthier social and economic environment.
2 of 2