03/18/2024Monday, March 18, 2024
1:00 PM
City of Clearwater
Main Library - Council Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
Main Library - Council Chambers
Community Redevelopment Agency
Meeting Agenda
March 18, 2024Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Agenda
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 Approve the minutes of the February 12, 2024 CRA Meeting as submitted in
written summation by the City Clerk.
3. Citizens to be Heard Regarding Items Not on the Agenda
4. New Business Items
4.1 Approve a Declaration of Restricted Covenant for property located at 1277
Grove Street, Clearwater, FL 33755, and authorize appropriate officials to
execute same.
4.2 Approve the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) companion grant for
the Gotham residential project on the Bluff and reallocate $750,000 from the
vacancy reduction grant program.
4.3 Approve the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Citizens Advisory
Committee Policy.
5. Director's Report
6. Adjourn
Page 2 City of Clearwater Printed on 3/12/2024
Cover Memo
City of Clearwater Main Library - Council
Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
File Number: ID#24-0242
Agenda Date: 3/18/2024 Status: Agenda ReadyVersion: 1
File Type: MinutesIn Control: Community Redevelopment Agency
Agenda Number: 2.1
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the minutes of the February 12, 2024 CRA Meeting as submitted in written summation
by the City Clerk.
Page 1 City of Clearwater Printed on 3/12/2024
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 1 City of Clearwater
City of Clearwater
Main Library - Council Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 12, 2024
1:00 PM
Main Library - Council Chambers
Community Redevelopment Agency Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 2 City of Clearwater
Roll Call
Present 5 - Chair Brian Aungst Sr., Trustee Mark Bunker, Trustee David Allbritton,
Trustee Kathleen Beckman, and Trustee Lina Teixeira
Also Present: Jennifer Poirrier – City Manager, Michael Delk – Assistant City Manager, Daniel Slaughter – Assistant City Manager, David Margolis
– City Attorney, Rosemarie Call – City Clerk, Nicole Sprague – Deputy
City Clerk, and Jesus Niño – CRA Executive Director
To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
Unapproved 1. Call to Order – Chair Aungst
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 Approve the minutes of the January 16, 2024 CRA meeting as submitted in written
summation by the City Clerk.
Trustee Beckman moved to approve the minutes of the January
16, 2024 CRA meeting as submitted in written summation by the
City Clerk. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
3. Citizens to be Heard Regarding Items Not on the Agenda
Kathy Flaherty expressed concerns with the Festival Core. She said the
area was supposed to be a marketplace in the core of the East Gateway
District. 4. New Business Items
4.1 Approve the Fourth Amendment (Amendment) to Agreement for Development and
Purchase and Sale of Property between the Community Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Clearwater (CRA), the City of Clearwater (City), and Archway Clearwater
Gardens, LLC (Archway); and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same.
Archway Clearwater Gardens, LLC has requested a modified schedule of
various milestones in the Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Property, as Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 3 City of Clearwater
amended (Agreement), between the CRA, the City and Archway. Archway has
been awarded project-based vouchers for this project from the Clearwater
Housing Authority. For consistency with the voucher program, Archway is
required to complete a subsidy analysis with the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). While Archway has submitted all
required documentation, the timing of HUD’s response may require a later
closing date which will require a shift in other milestones as well.
Clearwater Gardens affordable housing development, located at 1250 Cleveland
Street, was selected by Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) for a 9%
Tax Credit award. The project will provide for 52 one-bedroom and 29
two-bedroom units for a total of 81 units. 30 units will be reserved for
households earning up to 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by
HUD, 31 units will be reserved for households earning up to 60% AMI, and 20
units will be reserved for households earning up to 30% AMI. Archway is
coordinating with the Clearwater Housing Authority to receive 20 project-base
vouchers. The developer will continue the operation of the community garden
located on the property.
The First Amendment to the Agreement dated February 14, 2022, provided
Archway additional time to apply for tax credit funding under multiple Florida
Housing Finance Corporation’s housing development programs. The Second
Amendment dated September 19, 2022, provided for an additional $3,000,000
loan from the CRA and it increased the City’s local government contribution
from $75,000 to $610,000, also in the form of a loan. Other accommodations
were made in the Second Amendment assuming Archway would secure 4% tax
credit financing, but this did not occur. The Third Amendment extended several
milestones in the Agreement.
With the Fourth Amendment, staff is recommending many of the same
milestones modified with the Third Amendment to be extended further.
Proposed modifications are outlined below. Archway is optimistic that they will
achieve the modified milestones in advance of what has been proposed and no
further extensions will be necessary.
Section Category Current Proposed
4.05(b) Building Permits 3/1/2024 6/1/2024
4.05(c) Commence Construction 4/1/2024 7/1/2024
4.05(d) 50% Construction Completion 1/1/2025 4/1/2025
4.05(e) 100% Construction Completion 10/1/2025 1/1/2026
4.05(f) Begin Pre-Leasing 8/1/2025 11/1/2025
4.05(g) Lease Up Complete 1/1/2025 4/1/2026
6.10 Closing Date 3/15/2024 6/15/2024
7.02(a) Commence Construction 4/1/2024 7/1/2024
7.02(b) Commence Vertical Construction 10/1/24 1/1/2025
Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 4 City of Clearwater
The City is a party to the agreement only as it relates to sections 3.07 and 15.18
of the Agreement. Section 3.07 of the Agreement required Archway to grant
and deliver to the City, its heirs, successors, licensees, or assigns, a perpetual
exclusive easement over the area existing as a community garden, solely for
use as a community garden. The Amendment requires Archway to execute a
declaration of restrictive covenant, instead of a perpetual easement, restricting
the use to a community garden for the benefit, use, and enjoyment of the public.
This change eliminates the need for the City to procure, manage, or contract
with future operators and users of the community garden. Archway will take on
this responsibility. Section 15.18 commits the City to a contribution of $610,000
to the project in the form of a deferred loan. This amount is considered the
Local Government Areas of Opportunity funding commitment and is required for
a project application to receive the maximum amount of basis points. Section
15.18 is not affected by the amendment.
APPROPRIATION CODE AND AMOUNT:
Funds are available and allocated in R2010 Housing- County
In response to questions, CRA Executive Director Jesus Niño said the
item before the Trustees is the timeline by three months. The community
garden is located on property owned by Archway. Archway President Brett
Green said the garden will remain and the Clearwater Community Gardens,
Inc. will continue to operate the garden. He said Clearwater Community
Garden, Inc. will be executing a new lease soon.
One individual spoke in opposition.
Trustee Bunker moved to approve the Fourth Amendment
(Amendment) to Agreement for Development and Purchase and
Sale of Property between the Community Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Clearwater (CRA), the City of Clearwater (City), and
Archway Clearwater Gardens, LLC (Archway); and authorize the
appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
4.2 Approve the transfer of Community Redevelopment Agency tax increment financing (TIF)
funds from CRA project 388-C2105, Mercado-Downtown Gateway of $770,178.63 and
388-C2002, Community Engagement, of $384,583.98 to the City of Clearwater capital
project 315-C2105, Mercado-Downtown Gateway for the completion of the Mercado
capital improvement project and authorize the appropriate official to execute same. Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 5 City of Clearwater
On May 20, 2021, Council approved a contract to Gibbs and Register to
construct the Cleveland Street Streetscape Phase III (16-0003-UT) project. The
Mercado design was not complete, and not included in the contract.
On October 17, 2022, Council approved the shade structure and turf design
concepts for the Mercado public space at the intersection of Cleveland St. and
Gulf to Bay Blvd.
On September 18, 2023, staff presented an overview to the CRA Trustees that
the change order pricing from Gibbs & Register was over budget. Staff
recommended allowing Gibbs & Register to complete the streetscape project
and get new pricing from another firm to construct the Mercado portion.
The City worked with Biltmore Construction under the CMAR, Continuing
Services contract, to bid and construct the Mercado in the amount of $930,929;
pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) #40-20, Construction Manager at
Risk (CMAR).
To reduce overall cost to the City, a PO will be issued directly to USA Shade
who was paid a deposit and designed and provided structure hardware under
the initial Gibbs & Register contract, hence impractical to bid.
APPROPRIATION CODE AND AMOUNT:
A mid-year budget amendment will transfer $770,178.63 from 388-C2105
Mercado-Downtown Gateway and $384,583.98 from 388-R2002, Community
Engagement, to the City of Clearwater capital project 315-C2105,
Mercado-Downtown Gateway to provide funds for the completion of the
Mercado capital improvement.
In response to questions, Mr. Niño said a ribbon cutting event may
coincide with National Hispanic Heritage Month as the project is
expected to be completed in September. City Engineer Tara Kivett said the
"sea walls" will be similar to the edge of Beachwalk, providing seating
areas along the edge of the planters and storage area on the east side. She
said there is no planned seating under the shade area.
One individual spoke in opposition.
Trustee Teixeira moved to approve the transfer of Community
Redevelopment Agency tax increment financing (TIF) funds from
CRA project 388-C2105, Mercado-Downtown Gateway of
$770,178.63 and 388-C2002, Community Engagement, of
$384,583.98 to the City of Clearwater capital project 315-C2105,
Mercado-Downtown Gateway for the completion of the Mercado
capital improvement project and authorize the appropriate official Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 6 City of Clearwater
to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Discussion ensued with comments made that many individuals have
complained about the lack of shade in Coachman Park and one
individual claims no one wants the shade structure in the Mercado area.
Assistant City Manager Michael Delk said staff worked with the
community and designed a project that included a shade structure. The
item is before the Trustees because additional funds are needed for the
shade structure. He said staff is not spending funds that were allocated to
another project. Staff is looking at a higher level of activation for the
Mercado area. Parks and Recreation is working on an activation plan that
includes two major annual street closures, initially. He said staff
anticipates the project will be completed by Summer. The City Manager
said CRA staff goes out regularly to communicate with the stakeholders
and seek feedback on proposed activities and road closures.
4.3 Approve a Business Lease Contract between the Community Redevelopment Agency
and the Clearwater Community Gardens, Inc for a community garden at 1277 Grove
Street to establish anew lease for the community garden and authorize the appropriate
officials to execute same.
The purpose of this request is to enter a new lease with the Clearwater
Community Gardens, Inc for a period of one year with two one-year renewals.
The Clearwater Community Garden and the Clearwater Community
Redevelopment Agency entered a three-year lease in 2015 for a community
garden in the Downtown Gateway neighborhood. The Clearwater Community
Garden group established and has maintained the community garden on Grove
Street since April 2015.
At the February 2020 CRA Meeting, the board approved a one-year lease with a
one-year renewal.
The lease of the community garden is tied to the development agreement for
Archway Gardens at 1250 Cleveland Street. At the time of closing the lease will
be assigned to Archway Gardens, LLC.
Trustee Allbritton moved to approve a Business Lease Contract
between the Community Redevelopment Agency and the
Clearwater Community Gardens, Inc for a community garden at
1277 Grove Street to establish anew lease for the community Draft
Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes February 12, 2024
Page 7 City of Clearwater
garden and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
5. Director's Report
Mr. Niño reviewed recent interactions with community stakeholders. He
said the Department's community engagement activities will continue.
CRA Sr. Division Manager Anne Lopez said the grand opening for the Food
Hall was postponed in order to firm up the last couple of items; staff will
advise once confirmed. 6. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 1:41 p.m.
Chair
Community Redevelopment Agency
Attest
City Clerk Draft
Cover Memo
City of Clearwater Main Library - Council
Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
File Number: ID#24-0311
Agenda Date: 3/18/2024 Status: Agenda ReadyVersion: 1
File Type: Action ItemIn Control: Community Redevelopment Agency
Agenda Number: 4.1
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a Declaration of Restricted Covenant for property located at 1277 Grove Street, Clearwater, FL
33755, and authorize appropriate officials to execute same.
SUMMARY:
At the February 12, 2024, Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) meeting approved a fourth
amendment to the Agreement for Development and Purchase and Sale to Archway Clearwater Gardens,
LLC. The Amendment requires the execution of a declaration of a restrictive covenant, instead of a
perpetual easement, restricting the use of the community garden site to use as a community garden for
the benefit, use, and enjoyment of the public. This change eliminates the need for the City to procure,
manage, or contract with future operators and users of the community garden. Archway will take on this
responsibility.
The Property shall be used solely as a community garden for a period of 30 years commencing on the
Effective Date of this Declaration and for no other use.
For purposes of this Declaration, community garden shall mean an activity on the property where more
than one person grows produce and/or horticultural plants for their consumption and enjoyment, for the
consumption and enjoyment of friends and relatives, and/or donation to a not-for-profit organization,
generally on a not-for-profit basis.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
Page 1 City of Clearwater Printed on 3/12/2024
1
MIADOCS 27640981 4
Prepared by and return to:
Matthew J. Mytych, Esq.
Assistant City Attorney
City of Clearwater
600 Cleveland Street, Suite 600
Clearwater, Florida 33755
DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
(CLEARWATER GARDENS)
This Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (this “Declaration”), is made this __ day of
March, 2024, by THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, a public body corporate and politic of the State of Florida created
pursuant to Part III, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, hereinafter referred to as "OWNER”.
WHEREAS, OWNER is the fee title owner of that certain real property commonly referred
to as 1277 Grove Street, Clearwater, FL 33755 and legally described in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property"), which is currently utilized as a community garden;
and
WHEREAS, OWNER entered into that certain Agreement for Development and Purchase
and Sale of Property with Archway Partners, LLC dated August 23, 2021 (as amended and
assigned, the “Contract”) with respect to certain real property including the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Contract provides in part that the Property shall be restricted to use as a
community garden; and
WHEREAS, OWNER desires to ensure that the Property is and shall be held, transferred,
sold, conveyed, leased, mortgaged, used, and improved subject to certain covenants, restrictions,
and other requirements, as set forth in this Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, OWNER declares that the Property and any portion thereof shall be
held, transferred, sold, conveyed, leased, mortgaged, used, and improved only subject to these
covenants and restrictions, and other requirements, all as set forth in this Declaration.
1. Recitals. The foregoing recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
herein by this reference.
2. Restrictive Covenants. The Property shall be used solely as a “community garden” for a
period of thirty (30) years commencing on the Effective Date of this Declaration (as
provided in Section 4 herein) (the “Term”) and for no other use. For purposes of this
Declaration, “community garden” shall mean an activity on property where more than one
person grows produce and/or horticultural plants for their personal consumption and
enjoyment, for the consumptions and enjoyment of friends and relatives and/or donation
to a not-for-profit organization, generally on a not-for-profit basis. This Declaration,
during the Term , shall be for the benefit of the City of Clearwater, Florida, OWNER, and
any successive owners or assigns.
2
MIADOCS 27640981 4
3. Lease. As of the date hereof, the Property has been leased by OWNER to Clearwater
Community Gardens, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, pursuant to that certain
Community Gardens Lease dated February 21, 2024 (the “Lease”). OWNER
acknowledges and agrees that the Lease satisfies, and that any subsequent lease
executed by OWNER with another tenant containing substantially similar use provisions,
or any other use, whether by the owner of the Property or a third party, shall satisfy the
provisions of Section 2 hereof. Any successive lease must comply with this Declaration.
Nothing contained in this Declaration shall prohibit or limit the right of the owner of the
Property from adopting and enforcing reasonable rules and regulations concerning the
use of the Property or maintaining and operating a community garden on the Property in
its own name.
4. Recording. This Declaration shall be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County,
Florida, and shall be effective upon such recordation (the “Effective Date”).
5. Amendment/Termination. This Declaration may only be amended or terminated upon
written instrument duly executed by both the then owner of the Property and the City of
Clearwater, Florida, and recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida.
6. Binding Effect. This Declaration and all the terms, covenants and conditions herein
contained shall be enforceable in a court of competent jurisdiction by the City of
Clearwater, Florida, OWNER, or any successive owners or assigns by means of specific
performance or any other remedy available at law or at equity. Any person, by acceptance
of a deed of conveyance for all or any portion of the Property accepts title to the Property
subject to all terms, covenants and conditions, all of which shall be deemed covenants
running with the land and shall bind any person having at any time, any interest or estate
in the Property.
7. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any dispute concerning the rights and obligations set forth
herein the prevailing party in any action shall be entitled to reimbursement for its
reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs whether incurred at trial or any appealable
proceedings.
8. Governing Law and Venue. The interpretation, construction and enforcement of this
Declaration and all matters related hereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Florida, without application of its conflicts of laws rules. The exclusive venue selected for
any proceeding or suit in law or equity arising from or incident to this Declaration will be in
the Sixth Judicial Circuit for the State of Florida.
9. Invalid or Illegal Provision(s). If any one or more provisions of this Declaration is for any
reason held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, the invalidity, illegality
or unenforceability will not affect any other provision of this Declaration, which will be
construed as if it had not included the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision.
3
MIADOCS 27640981 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER has executed this Declaration as of the day and year
first written above.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, a public body
corporate and politic of the State of Florida
created pursuant to Part III, Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes.
___________________________
Brian J. Aungst, Sr.
Chairperson
Date: ______________________
Approved as to form: Attest:
__________________________ ____________________________
Matthew J. Mytych, Esq. Rosemarie Call
CRA Attorney City Clerk
Date: _____________________ Date: _______________________
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF PINELLAS )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of ☐ physical presence or ☐
online notarization, this ______ day of ______________, 2024, by Brian J. Aungst, Sr., as Chairperson of
the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Clearwater, a body politic and corporate, on behalf
of said entity. Such persons are personally known to me or presented _________________________ as
identification.
________________________________
Notary Public, State of Florida
My Commission Expires:
My Commission Number:
4
MIADOCS 27640981 4
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description – Community Garden Property
LOTS 28, 29, 30 AND 31, RE-SUBDIVISION LOTS 11, 12, 13, 14 & 15 PADGETT’S ESTATE,
ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 12, PAGE
24, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Cover Memo
City of Clearwater Main Library - Council
Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
File Number: ID#24-0269
Agenda Date: 3/18/2024 Status: Agenda ReadyVersion: 1
File Type: Action ItemIn Control: Community Redevelopment Agency
Agenda Number: 4.2
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) companion grant for the Gotham residential project
on the Bluff and reallocate $750,000 from the vacancy reduction grant program.
SUMMARY:
On February 1, 2024, the City Council approved a substantive amendment to the City’s purchase and sale
agreement for the old City Hall site. As it pertains to the CRA, the amendment approved on February 1st
creates a new condition precedent to closing for the Buyers which entitles the Buyers to a CRA grant in
the amount of $2,250,000 upon Substantial Completion of the project. Because these funds are being
allocated from the CRA, only the CRA can give final approval to that portion of the agreement.
As provided in the amendment approved on February 1st, if the Buyers successfully close on the real
estate by March 1, 2026, the CRA grant in the amount of $2,250,000 will be disbursed upon
commencement of construction, instead of being deferred until Substantial Completion. In addition, if the
Buyers successfully close on the real estate by March 1, 2026, the CRA shall disburse an additional
$1,000,000 early closing incentive grant upon commencement of construction.
This item seeks approval to allocate and set aside $3,250,000 in CRA funds for this grant, but no portion of
these funds will be disbursed to the Buyers unless and until the conditions in this item and the Fourth
Amendment to the Contract for Purchase of Real Property, approved the City Council on February 1, 2024,
are met. To fund the $3,250,000, the staff is requesting approval to transfer $750,000 from the vacancy
reduction grant program. To date, none of this allocation has been utilized; nor are there any current
applications in progress. The remaining $2,500,000 is being funded administratively through the use of
City TIF funds already available in the Housing Project of the CRA Budget.
APPROPRIATION CODE AND AMOUNT:
A mid-year budget amendment will provide a transfer of $2,500,000 from capital improvement project
R2009- Housing -City, to capital improvement project R2003, Economic Development-City, to fund this
commitment.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
Page 1 City of Clearwater Printed on 3/12/2024
1
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL
PROPERTY
This FOURTH AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
(this “Amendment”) is entered into this _____ day of January, 2024, by and among THE CITY
OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Florida (“Seller”), and
The DeNunzio Group, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("DeNunzio"), and Gotham Property
Acquisitions, LLC, a New York limited liability company (“Gotham”) (DeNunzio and Gotham shall
be collectively referred to as “Purchaser”).
WHEREAS, Seller and Purchaser entered into that certain Contract for Purchase of Real
Property with an effective date of August 15, 2022, as amended by that certain First Amendment
to Contract for Purchase Real Property with an effective date of January 9, 2023, as amended by
that certain Second Amendment to Contract for Purchase Real Property with an effective date of
August 22, 2023, and as further amended by that certain Third Amendment to Contract for
Purchase Real Estate with an effective date of October 16, 2023 (collectively, the “Agreement”),
concerning the sale from Seller to Purchaser of the property known as the “Old City Hall Site”, as
more particularly defined in the Agreement and Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, Seller and Purchaser desire to amend the Agreement as more particularly set
forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of $1.00 and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and
intending to be legally bound, Purchaser and Seller hereby agree as follows:
1. Capitalized Terms. All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.
2. Purchase Price. Sections 2 and 4 of the Agreement are hereby amended so that the
Purchase Price shall be Three Million Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($3,450,000.00).
3. Conditions Precedent to Buyer’s and Seller’s Obligation to Close. Sections 39 and
40 of the Agreement shall be amended by adding a condition that the Development Agreement as
defined in Section 9 of the Agreement shall have been amended to be consistent with this
Amendment and shall also be amended to address the following prior to Closing:
a. To revise the City Hall Project (as defined in the Development Agreement)
to a multifamily residential project containing 400 dwelling units in a single tower;
b. To revise the minimum required parking ratio to 1:1:1 for 440 parking
spaces;
c. To revise the City Hall Project requirements to provide that 50% of the
parking spaces may be above-ground but not visible from Osceola Avenue (but may be
visible from Coachman Park);
2
d. To clarify that the rate and schedule of impact fees in effect upon the date
of execution of the original Development Agreement will apply to the City Hall Project
and the Harborview Project (as defined in the Development Agreement);
e. To revise the purchase price for the City Hall Site (as defined in the
Development Agreement) to Three Million Four Hundred Fifty and No/100 Thousand
Dollars ($3,450.000.00);
f. To provide up to Two Million Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
($2,250,000.00) in CRA funding at Substantial Completion (as defined in the Development
Agreement), or, if closing under this Agreement occurs no later than March 1, 2026, upon
commencement of construction instead;
g. To provide an additional One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in CRA
funding as an incentive grant for early closing to be paid upon commencement of
construction if closing under this Agreement occurs no later than March 1, 2026;
h. To provide for up to six (6) sixty (60) day closing extensions of this
Agreement at a cost of Two Hundred Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($200,000.00) each;
i. To establish December 31, 2028 as the date of Substantial Completion,
subject to extension for Events of Force Majeure and Governmental Delay (as defined in
the Development Agreement);
j. To provide for liquidated damages in the amount of One Million Dollars
($1,000,000.00) if Substantial Completion is not achieved by December 31, 2028, subject
to extension for Events of Force Majeure and Governmental Delay, which liquidated
damages shall be secured, at Purchaser’s option, by any of the following: cash collateral
from Purchaser or a provision for payment of the same to the City from the contractor
under the Construction Agreement;
k. To provide that the Seller will be an additional insured in insurance policies
for the City Hall Project and the Harborview Project with the same insurance amounts as
Purchaser;
l. To provide for defense, reimbursement, and indemnification of the City in
an amount of up to maximum amount of Five Hundred Thousand and No/100 Dollars
($500,000.00) for any legal challenges related to amendment of the Development
Agreement; and
m. To provide for any other changes necessary to conform the Development
Agreement with the terms and conditions of this Amendment.
4. Closing. Section 13 of the Agreement shall be amended by deleting Section 13 in
its entirety and replacing it with the following:
“Closing Place and Date. The closing of the transaction contemplated under this Contract
(“Closing”) shall be closed in the offices of the designated Closing Agent in Pinellas
3
County, Florida on or before March 1, 2026, unless extended by the time allotted for the
removal of title defects as provided for in Paragraph 8 above, Force Majeure Event,
Governmental Delay, or as provided below in this Section 13 (“Closing Date”). For the
avoidance of doubt, any extension or delay in closing beyond March 1, 2026, shall render
the Buyers ineligible to receive the One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) incentive grant
described in Section 3(h) of this Amendment. The Seller shall designate the closing agent
(“Closing Agent”).
Notwithstanding the previous paragraph, if the Closing does not occur by the Closing Date,
Buyer shall have the option to extend the Closing Date for up to six (6) additional
extensions of sixty (60) days each, by delivering written notice thereof to Seller prior to
the expiration of the Closing Date or the date of the immediately prior exercised extension
period, as applicable, and submitting payment to the Seller in the sum of Two Hundred
Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) for each extension option (each an “Extension Fee”),
which each Extension Fee shall be nonrefundable and not applicable towards the Purchase
Price except in the case of an Event of Default on the part of the Seller.
The Buyer and Seller acknowledge and agree that time shall be of the essence with respect
to the performance by the Buyer of its obligation to pay the Extension Fee. For that reason,
if the Extension Fee is not paid timely, then the Buyer shall have five (5) business days to
cure monetary defaults. If Buyer fails to close or otherwise cure after five (5) business days,
then the Contract shall automatically terminate without penalty or any further action being
required by the Seller.
5. Conditions Precedent to Seller’s Obligation to Close. Section 40(iii) of the
Agreement shall be amended by deleting Section 40(iii) in its entirety and replacing it with the
following:
“iii. Commensurate with Closing, Buyer shall provide the Seller with a copy of a
Construction Agreement. “Construction Agreement” shall be defined as an executed
agreement between a general contractor, licensed in the State of Florida, or construction
manager and the Buyer or the Buyer’s Affiliates or lenders, whereby the Buyer or Buyer’s
Affiliates or lenders provide monetary compensation in exchange for a commitment to
construct or ensure the construction of the improvements described in the Development
Agreement relating to the Land. Additionally, at or prior to Closing, Buyer or Buyer’s
contractor under the Construction Agreement shall have bought out the following “Major
Trades”: (1) sitework, (2) concrete, (3) structural steel, if applicable, (4) HVAC, (5)
electric, (6) plumbing, (7) rough carpentry, and (8) facade. Additionally, to the extent
assignable and at the sole cost of the Seller, Buyer agrees to assign to Seller, subject to
Lender’s approval and subordinate to Lender’s interest in, all of Buyer’s right, title, and
interest in all plans and specifications for the construction of the improvements on the Land
as provided for in the Development Agreement, the Construction Agreement, any
engineer’s agreement related the construction of the improvements on the Land as provided
for in the Development Agreement, and any architect’s agreement related the construction
of the improvements on the Land as provided for in the Development Agreement, which
assignment shall be in a form mutually agreeable between Buyer and Seller.”
4
Additionally, Section 40(iv) shall be added to the Agreement as follows:
“iv. In addition to other remedies provided by this Agreement, Buyer agrees to provide
a comparable completion guaranty as provided to Buyer’s Lender, if applicable, to Seller
subject to the consent of Buyer’s Lender.”
6. Conflict in Terms. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this
Amendment and the Agreement, the terms contained in this Amendment shall supersede and
control.
7. Ratification; Full Force and Effect. Except as expressly modified and amended
herein, the terms of the Agreement are hereby ratified and affirmed and shall remain in full force
and effect.
8. Severability. If any provision of this Amendment shall, for any reason and to any
extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Amendment and the application of such
provision shall not be affected thereby, but rather shall be enforced to the maximum extent
possible.
9. Headings. The captions and headings used throughout this Amendment are for
convenience of reference only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Amendment.
10. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts
and/or counterpart signature pages, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which
shall constitute one and the same instrument. In addition, the parties may execute this Amendment
by pdf of facsimile signature which shall be deemed for all purposes original signatures.
11. Binding Effect. This Amendment shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding
upon each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
12. Entire Agreement. Collectively, the Agreement and this Amendment are the total
agreement of the parties and replaces any prior negotiations, understandings or agreements among
the parties, whether written or oral, pertaining to subject matter hereof. Each of the parties
acknowledges representation by counsel throughout all of the negotiations which preceded
execution of this Amendment, and this Amendment has been executed freely and voluntarily with
the consent of and upon the advice of counsel. Each of the parties acknowledges that it has not
relied on any promise, covenant, representation, or warranty, express or implied, not expressly set
forth in this Amendment.
[Signature Pages Follow]
5
PURCHASER SIGNATURE PAGE FOR FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Purchaser have executed this Amendment as of
the date and year first written above.
THE DENUNZIO GROUP, LLC,
a Florida limited liability company
Date: January 22, 2024 By:
Name: Dustin J. DeNunzio
Title: Manager
GOTHAM PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS LLC,
a New York limited liability company
Date: January_____, 2024 By: ________________________________
Name: ______________________________
Title: _______________________________
23rd
6
19093796v8
SELLER SIGNATURE PAGE FOR FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
Countersigned: CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
A Florida municipal corporation.
By: _________________________________ By: ________________________________
Brian J. Aungst, Sr. Jennifer Poirrier
Mayor City Manager
Approved as to form: Attest:
_________________________________ _________________________________
David Margolis Rosemarie Call
City Attorney City Clerk
APPRAISAL REPORT OF
FORMER CITY HALL SITE
112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33756-5103
URS File Number – 232098
FOR
Mr. David Margolis, Esq.
City of Clearwater Attorney
City of Clearwater Economic Development and Housing
600 Cleveland Street Suite 600
Clearwater, Florida 33755
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal ..........................................................................................................................
Certification .................................................................................................................................... 8
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 10
Subject Maps and Photographs ....................................................................................................... 5
Purpose, Intended Use and Date of Appraisal .............................................................................. 14
Scope of Appraisal ........................................................................................................................ 15
Valuation Definitions .................................................................................................................... 16
Legal Description .......................................................................................................................... 19
Ownership and Five-Year History of Subject Property ................................................................ 20
Market Area: Location, Description and Trend ............................................................................ 22
Real Property Assessments and Taxes .......................................................................................... 38
Land Use and Zoning Classification ............................................................................................. 39
Concurrency and Impact Fees ....................................................................................................... 42
Site Description ............................................................................................................................. 43
Improvement Description ............................................................................................................. 50
Marketability and Estimated Marketing Period ............................................................................ 51
Multi-Family Real Estate Market ............................................................................................. 55
Highest and Best Use Analysis ..................................................................................................... 66
Introduction to the Appraisal Process ........................................................................................... 71
Sales Comparison Approach ......................................................................................................... 73
Comparable Land Sales ............................................................................................................ 75
Analysis of Comparable Land Sales ....................................................................................... 118
Summary of Sales Comparison Approach .............................................................................. 121
Disposition Value.................................................................................................................... 124
Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate .................................................................................... 126
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ....................................................................................... 127
Appraiser Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 131
November 16, 2023
Mr. David Margolis
City of Clearwater Attorney
City of Clearwater Economic Development and Housing
600 Cleveland Street Suite 600
Clearwater, Florida 33755
RE: Former City Hall Site
112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Florida, 33756-5103
Dear Mr. Margolis:
As requested, a detailed investigation, analysis and appraisal have been made of the market value
of the fee simple estate of the referenced property, in as-is condition as of the appraisal date.
The subject property is a 2.60-acre portion of the parent tract known as Imagine Clearwater and
Coachman Park, a public waterfront development in downtown Clearwater. The parent tract
area is approximately 23 acres including Coachman Park and with a bayfront shoreline on the
Intracoastal Waterway at Clearwater Harbor with a marina providing wet slips.
The subject address is 112 South Osceola Avenue, a non-waterfront site lying at the northwest
corner of Pierce Street and South Osceola Avenue. The subject site was formerly occupied by
the City Hall building which has been demolished. The site has good elevation, situated on a
bluff approximately 30 feet above Clearwater Harbor, and offers expansive views across the bay.
The subject site is presently proposed for a high-rise rental apartment development with
approximately 400 units by Gotham Property Acquisitions, LLC and The DeNunzio Group,
LLC.
The City of Clearwater previously issued an RFP for the development of a rental apartment
tower and retail development on the site. As a result, Gotham and DeNunzio submitted a
proposal to develop two residential towers totaling 600 rental units and retail responding to the
City RFP. However, after having preliminary plans drawn and obtaining cost estimates, Gotham
determined that, due to the combination of increasing construction costs and rising interest rates,
the development as planned was no longer economically feasible.
As a result and in order to move forward with development, Gotham has proposed downsizing
the development to one tower of 400 units plus a reduced retail component. They also requested
a reduction in the purchase price and other changes, but promising to proceed with development
if the City was agreeable.
November 16, 2023
Mr. David Margolis
Page two
Stepping back, due to the shutdown of businesses in 2020 and the desire to help Americans
recover following the Covid pandemic, substantial aid packages were passed and interest rates
were reduced to historic low levels. As a result, developers rushed to obtain low interest rate
financing and commence projects as quickly as possible. Those able to acquire sites and
commence construction as quickly as possible did so, but supply chain and other issues led to a
rapid increase in construction costs, forcing developers to increase loan amounts or equity
contributions and to increase rental rates to historic highs. Many of these developments are now
under construction.
The multi-family development market has experienced particularly challenging influences over
the past year. The cost of construction labor and materials continued to increase, albeit at a
lower rate of increase. The rapid increase of interest rates is a significant impediment, but a
larger issue is that lenders have tightened their lending criteria, so a 50% or 60% loan is now
common, rather than a 70% to 80% loan. New units coming online plus declining economic
conditions have led to a general flattening of rental rates. Further, insurance costs for completed
apartment units have significantly increased, up 50% or more. Also, there is a fairly substantial
pipeline of new rental apartment construction in the Tampa area due to the low interest rates of
2020 to mid-2022 and these units will be coming to market in 2024 and 2025.
Our survey of developers and brokers found that none plan to acquire a development site in the
foreseeable future. With buyers and capital on the sidelines, a marketing period for development
sites may today stretch into a few years.
While demand for housing in general continues to increase, much of that demand is by those
unable to financially afford to buy or rent newer single-family homes or condominium units. As
demand slows, in some cases new apartment developments are experiencing slow absorption,
offering concessions and reducing or at least not increasing rental rates. Historically low interest
rates in 2021 and the first part of 2022 spoiled consumers for housing ownership and led
developers to hurriedly commence land acquisitions for new projects.
Our research into sales of land for apartment development reveals numerous sales each year until
2023, and the few land sales this year are those negotiated when interest rates were lower. The
dilemma for an appraiser is that sales closing today are based on economic conditions from
recent better times. Developers queried have no plans to commence development until interest
rates decline and economic conditions improve, and most do not believe that will occur in 2024.
Money Supply M2 is reportedly down an unprecedented 4.0%, signaling consumer spending
problems in the near term. The US savings rate is now lower, repayment of college loans may
cut into many consumer budgets, the unemployment rate has ticked upward, credit card debt is at
an all-time high, and lenders could tighten real estate loan criteria even further.
November 16, 2023
Mr. David Margolis
Page three
Our research reveals the land prices paid per apartment unit varied among the comparable sales
based on dates of recorded sale, downtown versus other urban or suburban locations, and the
number of apartment units to develop. Consideration of the current multi-family market and the
many challenges facing developers and investors have caused reluctance to begin new
developments.
Based on our review of the market and of comparable sales data, we estimate value of the subject
site based on approximately 400 rental units for the subject land. Considering the prominent
waterview location of the subject and the progress of developing the surrounding parks, but
recognizing that a marketing period for the land could be three years, it is our opinion that
$30,000 per developable apartment unit best represents market value for the subject 2.60 acres as
a 400 unit rental apartment development site with complementary retail and possibly office use.
This calculates to $12,000,000 ($30,000 x 400). This value is based on recent market activity,
but economic conditions foreshadow an unpredictable future for rental apartment development in
Tampa Bay. Land owners often remove their property from the market rather than selling at a
distressed price.
As the City is desirous of a quick sale, and again noting that a current marketing period could be
two to three years, we fall back on discounts utilized in the past. In previous periods of
economic slowdowns, when marketing periods were projected to be multiple years, investors and
lenders often kept reducing prices to a level that would attract land investors and speculators.
The eventual price was referred to as a Disposition Value. Our review of those transactions led
to a general observation that a discount of 30% to 40% is often necessary in order to entice an
investor to acquire a site. Utilizing a discount of 30%, the following disposition value is
indicated. This discount would provide an investor a return of approximately 12% per annum, as
discussed later in the report.
Market Value $12,000,000
Less 30% Discount $ 3,600,000
Disposition Value $ 8,400,000
It is our opinion that a discount to a sale price in the range of $8,400,000 or less will be
necessary to attract a qualified buyer to acquire the subject site in the near term. This discounted
value is unlikely to offset the increased construction and capital costs, and additional concessions
may be necessary to entice a buyer to commence the construction process immediately. The
budgets and rents discussed in the Gotham proposal appear reasonable, and there is clearly a
shortfall. It is unlikely the City could identify another developer willing to move forward, and
continued negotiations with Gotham are expected.
November 16, 2023
Mr. David Margolis
Page three
Gotham submitted a summary of its findings during its due diligence period in a report titled The
Bluffs on April 17, 2023. Gotham states they worked with their architect and contractor and
obtained the following.
• Comprehensive hard cost estimates from two of the most reputable general
contractors in Florida (for the original and subsequent plan estimates)
• Updated residential market study from Gensler to reflect the current residential
leasing climate
• Detailed operating expense budget from Greystar, one of the largest and most
reputable property managers both in Florida and the nation
• Detailed construction and property insurance budget from Custom House Risk
Advisors
• Civil engineering due diligence study / memo from Stantec
• Gas and electric capacity letter from Duke Energy
Gotham updated their financial models and surveyed the market for debt and equity. Assuming
they continue, they expect to spend over $5,000,000 before a potential groundbreaking in late
2024, and the entire project costs are in the range of $220,000,000.
As a result of their due diligence, they found that construction costs increased dramatically since
their initial response, operating costs, especially insurance costs, have increased 50% or more,
and projected revenues have declined as the overall Tampa Bay rental apartment market slowly
declines. Rental rates are flat to declining and Clearwater rental rates appear insufficient to
support the new development. These factors are well known to all in the industry, as projects are
being shelved across the state and country and developers do not expect conditions to turn
around until 2025 or beyond.
As discussed, Gotham submitted documents supporting their assertions to the City, and the City
asked its consultants, HR&A, to review and provide guidance. HR&A responded that the
assertions appear accurate and that the financial models are also generally accurate, noting that
plans are still preliminary. Gotham proposes a reduction to 400 units in one tower and only one
level of underground parking. The purchase price would be reduced to $7,600,000 and the City
would be asked to contribute an additional $4,000,000, in addition to the $17,000,000 to assist
with parking garage costs.
Gotham notes total costs under the 400 unit development scenario of $554,893 per apartment
unit, well above pricing typically achieved by other apartment complex sales. Developers of
similar product may consider the eventual sale as condominium units, but the agreement with the
city would preclude this.
November 16, 2023
Mr. David Margolis
Page four
We have prepared a complete appraisal and are submitting this appraisal in a written narrative
appraisal report format. Included within the accompanying appraisal report are exhibits and
documented data in support of the value conclusions. All material collected during our analysis
has been retained in our files and is available for inspection upon request.
This appraisal has been prepared in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice and governmental regulations, as well as the client’s appraisal and reporting
requirements.
The opportunity to have been of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions or
comments, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ0940
Wayne Beurnier
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ1307
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that, upon request for valuation by Mr. David Margolis, Esq., City of
Clearwater Attorney, City of Clearwater Economic Development and Housing, we have
personally inspected, collected and analyzed various data, and appraised the market value of the
fee simple estate of the subject property, located at 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater,
Florida 33756-5103.
We certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:
• The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
• The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported
assumptions and limiting conditions and are our personal, impartial, and unbiased
professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
• We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report
and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
• We have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the
property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately
preceding acceptance of this assignment.
• We have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the
parties involved with this assignment.
• Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting
predetermined results.
• Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the
development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the
cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result,
or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this
appraisal.
• Our reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has
been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics &
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, which include the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. This certificate is also a
certification under Florida Real Estate License Law Chapter 475.
• The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to
review by its duly authorized representatives.
• We have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report.
Also, we made an inspection of selected comparable properties.
• No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the persons signing this
certification.
• As of the date of this report, H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI, has completed the continuing
education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute.
• The undersigned appraisers, based on education, work experience and the previous
appraisal of properties similar to the subject, are competent and qualified to appraise the
property.
This certificate is in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
Standard Rule 2-3 and with the Appraisal Institute's Supplemental Standards of Professional
Practice. It is also a certification under Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board of the Division of
Real Estate of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation.
The reader should review the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, to which this analysis is
subject, included at the end of the report. No hypothetical conditions are required for this
appraisal.
In our opinion, the fee simple estate of the subject land, located at 112 South Osceola
Avenue, Clearwater, Florida 33756-5103, had a market value as of the appraisal date of
November 3, 2023, of approximately TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS ($12,000,000).
Under current economic conditions, the marketing period is estimated at 24 to 36 months.
In our opinion, the fee simple estate of the subject land, located at 112 South Osceola
Avenue, Clearwater, Florida 33756-5103, had a disposition value, based on a six month
marketing period, and as of the appraisal date of November 3, 2023, of approximately
EIGHT MILLION FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,400,000).
H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ0940
Wayne Beurnier
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ1307
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Property Name: Former City Hall Site
Property Classification: Multifamily Residential Land
Address: 112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33756-5103
Municipal Jurisdiction: City of Clearwater
County: Pinellas County
Section, Township and Range: 17-29S-16E
Census Tract: 12-103-0254.20
Metropolitan Statistical Area: Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater
Property Ownership: City of Clearwater
Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple estate
Legal Description: Please see Legal Description section
County Identification No.: 16-29-15-20358-001-0040
Purpose of Appraisal: Estimate market value as-is
Appraisal Date: November 3, 2023
Date of Report: November 16, 2023
Report Type: Narrative
Intended User of Appraisal: Client, City of Clearwater Economic Development
and Housing
Intended Use of Appraisal: Assist in disposition negotiations
URS - 232098 Page 2
Property Assessment 2023: $22,851,832 (Parent Tract)
Tax Millage Rate 2023: 20.2462 mils
Non-Ad Valorem Taxes 2023: $ 0
Total Property Taxes 2023: $ 0 Gross
$ 0 Net
Neighborhood: The subject neighborhood is the westerly edge of
the Central Business District of the City of
Clearwater, Florida fronting Clearwater Bay.
Commercial development includes restaurants,
retail shops, offices, Morton Plant Hospital complex
and municipal buildings, and there are several
condominium buildings along the waterfront, with
Water’s Edge being the tallest in the downtown
area. There are single-family homes including new
townhomes to the north and south of the downtown
area. Clearwater Beach is about two miles west of
Clearwater Bluff. Tampa International Airport and
the Westshore Business District are 17 miles
easterly via SR 60. Customers, clients and
employees generally come from a broader market
area.
Land Use Plan: Central Business District CBD
Zoning District: Downtown
Site Data: The subject is located at the northwest corner of the
two streets, extending approximately 387.07 feet
east to west along Pierce Street and 285.04 feet
north to south along South Osceola Avenue. The
west boundary is 300.62 feet. The site is generally
rectangular and contains approximately 113,256
square feet or 2.60 acres. The subject has good
elevation, being on the Bluffs, and views of the bay
would be available from virtually any multi-story
development on the site. The site is approximately
two miles from the beach and there are protected
lanes on either side of Clearwater Bridge for
walking, running or bicycling.
URS - 232098 Page 3
Soil is sandy, typical for the area, and it is assumed
that no adverse subsoil conditions exist. Municipal
potable water and wastewater disposal are available
to the site, as are electric and telephone services.
There are no known impediments to development.
Drainage and utility easements appear typical.
Flood Zone Data: “X”, minimum flood risk, above 100-year flood
plain, per FEMA Map Panel 12103C0108J, dated
August 24, 2021.
Improvement Data: The subject property was formerly improved with
the Old City Hall building. The building has been
demolished.
The approximate 25,000 square foot, three story
building has been demolished and removed.
Site improvements consist of asphalt paving to the
east and recent sod to the west, plus underground
laterals for potable water and waste water, not in
use. The site improvements have negligible
contributory value.
Personal Property: No personal property is applicable.
Environmental Conditions: No unusual environmental conditions were
observed, but this appraisal is subject to receipt of a
satisfactory environmental audit.
Highest and Best Use: As if vacant and available, the subject site has a
highest and best use to hold for future development
to multi-family units, likely rental apartments, to a
minimum density of 400 units.
The subject is not currently improved.
Marketing/Exposure Periods: 24 to 36 months / 12 months
George F. Young Survey 11/22 Mean LF
E-W Lineal Feet 387.17 387.07 387.12
N-S Lineal Feet 300.20 285.04 292.62
Square Feet 113,256
Acres 2.60
URS - 232098 Page 4
Value Indications
Cost Approach N/A
Sales Comparison Approach $12,000,000
Income Capitalization Approach N/A
Final Estimate of Value $12,000,000 As-Is Market Value
$ 8,400,000 Disposition Value
URS - 232098 Page 5
SUBJECT MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Area Location Map
Neighborhood Map
URS - 232098 Page 6
Area Aerial Photograph
Neighborhood Aerial Photograph
URS - 232098 Page 7
Property Appraiser’s Aerial Photograph - Southerly Portion of Parent Tract
Subject 2.6 acres is within SEC of south parent tract
Approximate Subject 2.6 Acre Boundaries
Building has been demolished
URS - 232098 Page 8
Ground Level Photographs
View westerly from subject bluff toward SR 60 Causeway to Clearwater Beach beyond
View easterly along Pierce Street, subject on left
View southerly from Coachman Park, subject beyond Water’s Edge Tower
URS - 232098 Page 9
Aerial Overview of properties nearby the subject
Overview of parent tract, the subject, Coachman Park on right, The Oak Cove on left, high
rise Water’s Edge Condominium in middle and Pierce 100 Condominium top left
URS - 232098 Page 10
Aerial view westerly of subject property, Old City Hall building now demolished
Aerial view northerly of subject approximate boundaries
URS - 232098 Page 11
View south along South Osceola Avenue, subject on right
View east along Pierce Street from South Osceola Avenue intersection
URS - 232098 Page 12
View south along South Osceola Avenue from Pierce Street
View west along Pierce Street, subject on right
URS - 232098 Page 13
View northwesterly of Old City Hall demolished building,
Water’s Edge Condominium in right background
View northerly of subject approximate boundaries
URS - 232098 Page 14
PURPOSE, INTENDED USE AND DATE OF APPRAISAL
Purpose of this appraisal is to estimate, with the highest degree of accuracy possible, the market
value, as vacant land, of the fee simple estate of the subject property.
The intended user of this appraisal report is the client, the City of Clearwater Economic
Development and Housing Department. This appraisal report is prepared for the sole and
exclusive use of the intended user and may not be relied upon by any third parties for any
purpose whatsoever without the prior written consent of the appraiser. No additional intended
users are identified by the appraiser.
The intended use of this appraisal is to assist in disposition negotiations, subject to the stated
scope of work, purpose of the appraisal, reporting requirements of this appraisal report and
definition of market value.
Property rights appraised are the fee simple estate of the subject property.
This is a complete appraisal in a narrative format. Date of this appraisal is November 3, 2023,
the last date of inspection. Date of report is November 16, 2023.
URS - 232098 Page 15
SCOPE OF APPRAISAL
The scope of work for this appraisal assignment includes the identification of the appraisal
problem, which is the valuation of the subject property as if vacant land as of the date of
appraisal.
The steps taken in the analysis include:
Personal inspection of the property under appraisement.
In order to determine the competitive market of the subject, analysis was made of regional and
neighborhood data and ascertainment of demographic and economic trends that affect the
property and its intended use.
In order to determine the competitive market position of the subject, analysis was made of
economic trends affecting the property, including supply and demand analysis of properties
considered directly competitive in the market, resulting in analysis of highest and best use of the
property, both as if vacant and as improved.
Description of the property site, including verification with applicable governmental authorities
as to land use regulations, utilities, and property taxes, as well as non-invasive inspection and
complete description of the physical characteristics of the existing or planned improvements.
Please note that the appraisers are not engineers or contractors, and the inspection is limited to a
visual inspection as to general quality and condition. While obvious impairments will be
brought to the attention of the client, an inspection by a licensed engineer, pest control or other
professional is always recommended.
Estimation of highest and best use of the site, both as if vacant and as improved.
Estimation of value using the sales comparison approach. There is adequate market data to
support this approach to market value.
In order to apply the sales comparison approach, research was made of sales comparable
properties through two real estate sales reporting services and the Property Appraiser's Office.
Each sale was verified with a party considered knowledgeable as to the details of the transaction
and motivation of the parties, principally with the buyer, seller, real estate broker or manager
involved. Qualitative and quantitative adjustments are made to comparable sales in order to
obtain an indication of value of the subject.
Reconciliation of the value indications, with emphasis placed on the approach(es) considered
most reflective of current market activity for final value estimate.
URS - 232098 Page 16
VALUATION DEFINITIONS
Estate is, “1. An owner’s degree, quantity, nature, and extent of interest or interests in property.
There are many different types of estates, including freehold (fee simple, determinable fee, and
life estate) and leasehold. To be an estate in land, an interest must allow possession (either now
or in the future). See also freehold estate; leasehold estate. 2. The property of an individual at a
point in time.”1 As related to property, the terms estate and interest are synonymous for the
purpose of this appraisal. Unless otherwise distinguished, the term property indicates real
property in this report.
Fee simple estate is the property interest represented by, "absolute ownership unencumbered by
any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers
of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat."2
Leased fee estate or interest is, “the ownership interest held by the lessor, which includes the
right to receive the contract rent specified in the lease plus the reversionary right when the lease
expires.”3
Leasehold estate or interest is, “the right held by the lessee to use and occupy real estate for a
stated term and under the conditions specified in the lease.”4
Hypothetical condition is, “(1) a condition that is presumed to be true when it is known to be
false. (SVP); or (2) a condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is contrary to
what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the assignment results but is used
for the purpose of analysis. Comment: hypothetical conditions are contrary to known facts about
physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external
to the property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in
analysis. (USPAP, 2020-2021 ed.)”5 As an example, this condition is sometimes applied to an
anticipated zoning change.
Extraordinary assumption is, “An assignment- specific assumption as of the effective date
regarding uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be false, could alter the
appraiser’s opinions or conclusions. Comment: Uncertain information might include physical,
legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property, or conditions external to the property,
such as market conditions or trends, or about the integrity of data used in an analysis. (USPAP,
2020-2021 ed.)”6
Market Value for the purposes of this appraisal, as defined in the Federal Register, Department
of the Treasury Agencies’ appraisal regulations, “the most probable price which a property
should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the
1 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2022, p. 65.
2 Ibid, p. 73.
3 Ibid, p. 105.
4 Ibid, p. 105.
5 Ibid, p. 92.
6 Ibid, p. 68.
URS - 232098 Page 17
buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected
by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale as of a specified
date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
• Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
• Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their
own best interests;
• A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
• Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto; and
• The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special
or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.”7
Market value is also defined as: "The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash or in
terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms for which the specified property
rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite
to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and for self-
interest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress."8
Market value is described, not defined, in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USPAP) as, “a type of value, stated as an opinion, that presumes the transfer of a
property (i.e., a right of ownership or a bundle of such rights), as of a certain date, under specific
conditions set forth in the value definition that is identified by the appraiser as applicable in an
appraisal.”9
Prospective opinion of value is, “a value opinion effective as of a specified future date. The term
does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value opinion as being effective at some
specific future date. An opinion of value as of a prospective date is frequently sought in
connection with projects that are proposed, under construction, or under conversion to a new use,
or those that have not yet achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long-term occupancy.”10
Retrospective value opinion is defined as:” A value opinion effective as of a specified historical
date. The term retrospective does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value
opinion as being effective at some specific prior date. Value as of a historical date is frequently
sought in connection with property tax appeals, damage models, lease renegotiation, deficiency
judgments, estate tax, and condemnation. Inclusion of the type of value with this term is
appropriate, e.g., “retrospective market value opinion.”11
7 Federal Register, Department of the Treasury, Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, December 10, 2010, p. 77472.
8 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2022, p. 118.
9 Appraisal Institute, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and Advisory Opinions 2020-2021 Edition, The Appraisal
Foundation, USA, 2020, p. 5.
10 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2022, p. 149, 150.
11 Ibid, P. 166
URS - 232098 Page 18
Disposition Value is: “The most probable price that a specific interest in a property should bring
under the following conditions.
1. Consummation of a sale within a specified period of time, which is shorter than the
typical exposure time for such a property in that market.
2. The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of the date of valuation.
3. Both buyer and seller are acting prudently and knowledgeably.
4. The seller is under compulsion to sell.
5. The buyer is typically motivated.
6. Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best interest.
7. An adequate marketing effort will be made during the exposure time.
8. Payment will be made in cash in US dollars (or local currency) or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable thereto.
9. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by special
or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.12
Encumbrance is defined as, “any claim or liability that affects or limits the title to property. An
encumbrance can affect the title such as a mortgage or other lien, or it can affect the physical
condition of the property such as an easement. An encumbrance cannot prevent the transfer of
possession, but it does remain after the transfer.”13
Fixture is defined as, “an article that was once personal property but has since been installed or
attached to the land or building in a rather permanent manner so that it is regarded in law as part
of the real estate.”14
12 Ibid, p. 55
13 Ibid, p. 62.
14 Ibid, p. 75.
URS - 232098 Page 19
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The legal description of the subject property obtained from the George F. Young, Inc. survey
dated November 7, 2022, the last date of field work.
URS - 232098 Page 20
OWNERSHIP AND FIVE-YEAR HISTORY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
A review of the public records indicates that the subject property ownership is in the name of the
City of Clearwater, with a mailing address of 600 Cleveland Street, 6th Floor, Clearwater,
Florida 33755. According to Official Records, there has been no conveyance since 1957 for the
subject parent tract.
After response to an RFP published by the City, the property is now under contract, see a few
excerpts as follows.
PURCHASE PRICE
The full Purchase Price of Fifteen Million and Four Hundred Thousand Dollars and
no/100s ($15,400,000.00) as shown herein, subject to adjustments pursuant to this
Contract and the Development Agreement, has been reached in accordance with the
terms of that certain Request for Development Concepts (RFP No. 28-22) for Downtown
Clearwater Waterfront Development Opportunities for the old City Hall Site and the
Harborview Site, as defined in the Development Agreement.
URS - 232098 Page 21
The subject property is in contract for $15,400,000 and was planned for 600 apartment units in
two buildings, equivalent to $25,667 per unit. However, the buyers in contract, DeNunzio and
Gotham, have reconsidered that plan and are currently in negotiations with the City to reduce the
purchase price and the number of units, now anticipating 400 units in one building.
No title search was conducted by the appraisers, and the above is provided for informational
purposes only and is not warranted.
URS - 232098 Page 22
MARKET AREA: LOCATION, DESCRIPTION AND TREND
A market area is a geographic area wherein occupants usually have an observable commonality
of interests. Market areas can be large areas, equating to an entire county or even a group of
counties, depending on the purpose of analysis. Habitats, buildings and business enterprises may
be relatively uniform, as in a district or neighborhood, all within a larger market area; that is, a
smaller area exhibits a greater degree of commonality than the larger area. For example, there
may be a retail district and/or industrial zone within a mixed-use neighborhood which includes
residences, and this neighborhood and other connecting neighborhoods and districts may form a
larger market area. A market area is the area from which demand for a particular property or use
is drawn and will vary by use type. For example, the market area for a community shopping
center is larger than the market area for a neighborhood or strip shopping center.
There is no set life expectancy for a market area, neighborhood or district, and major changes
can interrupt the order of the stages. In some instances, after a period of decline, a neighborhood
may undergo a transition to other land uses, or its life cycle may begin again due to revitalization
and redevelopment of land or buildings.
Social considerations in a market area analysis involve a description of occupants and visitors
revealing their reasons and motivations for living, working and visiting within the market area.
These reasons may include the market areas reputation, environment and availability and
convenience to employment, shopping/service centers and recreation centers. Demographic
analysis is often related to driving times and linkages to commonly used supporting properties
and facilities, rather than by specific census tracts.
A residential neighborhood is typically a group of complementary land uses, such as homes,
schools and neighborhood commerce, whereas a district may be characterized by homogenous
land uses, such as industrial districts or office districts or high-rise districts. Although a market
area may be confined to a neighborhood, a market area is often larger and may include a broad
array of land uses and several neighborhoods and census tracts. Some of the smallest areas of
commonality may be referred to as traffic analysis zones or commercial nodes which are based
on specific traffic routes and particular roadway intersections.
Each neighborhood or district has a dynamic quality of its own, which is described as the life
cycle of a neighborhood or district. The complementary land uses that comprise neighborhoods
and the homogenous land uses that comprise districts typically evolve through four stages.
1. Growth - A period during which the neighborhood gains public favor and acceptance.
2. Stability - A period of equilibrium without marked gains or losses.
3. Decline - A period of diminishing demand.
4. Revitalization - A period of renewal, modernization and increasing demand.
The demographic analysis that follows was obtained using information from the Appraisal
Institute / Site To Do Business data service. The compiled information is based on forecast
modifications to the 2020 census utilized for demographic projections.
URS - 232098 Page 23
Market Area
The subject neighborhood is the westerly edge of the Central Business District of the City of
Clearwater, Florida fronting Clearwater Bay. Commercial development includes restaurants,
retail shops, offices, Morton Plant Hospital complex and municipal buildings, and there are
several condominium buildings along the waterfront, with Water’s Edge being the tallest in the
downtown area. There are single-family homes including new townhomes to the north and south
of the downtown area. Clearwater Beach is about two miles west of Clearwater Bluff. Tampa
International Airport and the Westshore Business District are 17 miles easterly via SR 60.
Customers, clients and employees generally come from a broader market area. The subject is
located in the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metropolitan statistical area.
A Drive Time analysis was prepared using 10, 20 and 30 minute drive times. For the subject
property, the broader market area is generally described using a 30-minute drive time from the
subject property, which best represents the overall market area in terms of the concentration of
potential users and employees. The main transportation route through the market area is US
Highway 19, traversing Pinellas County north to south. Primary east-west arteries are SR 60, CR
580 through Oldsmar, US 92/Gandy Bridge linking Pinellas County to south Tampa, Ulmerton
Road and Interstate 275, which extends from north of Tampa southerly through St. Petersburg to
near Bradenton/Ellenton, and connects with Interstate 75 to both north and south. The westerly
terminus of Interstate 4 intersects Interstate 275 near downtown Tampa and extends across the
state through Orlando, terminating at Interstate 95 near Daytona Beach.
Market Area Boundaries
Source: STDB.com
URS - 232098 Page 24
Social Influences
Population Totals
In the identified area, the current year population is 791,394 persons. In 2020, the Census count
in the area was 786,419. The rate of change since 2020 was 0.19% annually. The five-year
projection for the population in the area is 790,248 representing a change of -0.03% annually
from 2023 to 2028. Currently, the population is 48.5% male and 51.5% female.
The difference between change in population and change in households is a result of two factors,
the presence of group quarters (dormitory or other non-household) population in the market area,
and the average number of persons per household. The group quarters population in the market
area was 14,350 in 2023, or 1.8 percent of the total population.
Population by Education
In 2023, the educational attainment of the population aged 25 years or older in the area was
distributed as follows:
Residents 46,786 195,939 386,672
2023 Total Daytime Population 100,102 407,215 882,350
Workers 53,316 211,276 495,678
2028 Total Population 87,945 389,830 790,248
2023-2028 Annual Rate -0.07%-0.06%-0.03%
2023 Total Population 88,275 390,952 791,394
2023 Group Quarters 3,713 10,052 14,351
2020 Total Population 87,675 388,687 786,419
2020 Group Quarters 3,712 10,030 14,350
Population Summary
2010 Total Population 83,860 373,758 745,071
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Bachelor's Degree 20.6%21.8%23.2%
Graduate/Professional Degree 10.8%12.0%12.2%
Some College, No Degree 18.6%19.6%18.8%
Associate Degree 9.8%11.0%11.1%
High School Graduate 25.0%23.7%23.1%
GED/Alternative Credential 5.7%4.7%4.6%
Less than 9th Grade 4.0%2.4%2.5%
9th - 12th Grade, No Diploma 5.4%4.7%4.5%
2023 Population 25+ by Educational Attainment
Total 66,467 308,546 618,426
URS - 232098 Page 25
Population Characteristics
By age group, the percent distribution of the market area population is as follows:
The median age in this area is 49.7, compared to U.S. median age of 39.1.
Households
The household count in this area has changed from 359,185 in 2020 to 363,384 in the current
year, a change of 0.36% annually. The five-year projection of households is 365,999, a change
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
85 +3.5%4.5%3.9%
18 +82.4%85.1%84.6%
65 - 74 13.5%15.9%15.0%
75 - 84 7.6%10.0%9.0%
45 - 54 12.3%11.7%12.2%
55 - 64 14.7%15.3%15.3%
25 - 34 11.9%10.6%11.3%
35 - 44 11.8%10.9%11.4%
10 - 14 5.1%4.4%4.5%
15 - 24 10.1%8.9%9.2%
0 - 4 4.7%3.7%3.9%
5 - 9 4.8%4.0%4.2%
2023 Population by Age
Total 88,276 390,950 791,393
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
2028 47.0 52.6 50.4
2023 46.4 51.6 49.7
2020 45.9 50.3 48.3
2010 42.9 47.1 45.9
Median Age
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Widowed 7.8%8.8%8.2%
Divorced 15.2%14.9%14.1%
Never Married 32.6%28.4%29.5%
Married 44.4%47.9%48.1%
2023 Population 15+ by Marital Status
Total 75,356 343,230 691,399
URS - 232098 Page 26
of 0.14% annually from the current year total. Average household size is currently 2.14,
compared to 2.15 in the year 2020.
The number of families in the current year is 191,324 in the specified area.
Housing
Currently, 58.6% of the 418,399 housing units in the area are owner occupied; 28.3%, renter
occupied; and 13.1% are vacant. Currently, in the U.S., 58.5% of the housing units in the area
are owner occupied; 31.7% are renter occupied; and 9.8% are vacant. In 2020, there were
415,402 housing units in the area and 13.5% vacant housing units. The annual rate of change in
housing units since 2020 is 0.22%.
2023-2028 Annual Rate 0.12%0.13%0.14%
2028 Households 38,638 182,495 365,999
2028 Average Household Size 2.18 2.08 2.12
2023 Households 38,412 181,296 363,384
2023 Average Household Size 2.20 2.10 2.14
2020 Total Households 37,837 179,076 359,185
2020 Average Household Size 2.22 2.11 2.15
2010 Households 36,026 170,839 336,610
2010 Average Household Size 2.24 2.13 2.17
Household Summary
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
2028 Average Family Size 2.87 2.73 2.76
2023-2028 Annual Rate 0.08%0.10%0.12%
2023 Average Family Size 2.89 2.75 2.78
2028 Families 21,004 100,408 204,274
2010 Average Family Size 2.92 2.77 2.79
2023 Families 20,923 99,889 203,048
2010 Families 19,899 95,494 191,324
Families Summary
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
URS - 232098 Page 27
Vacant Housing Units from this data often includes second homes, vacation homes, homes for
sale and for rent, and housing in transition for razing or remodeling.
Median home value in the area is $320,837, compared to a median home value of $308,943 for
the U.S. In five years, median value is projected to change by 0.94% annually to $336,206.
Rental Housing
Please see following information on the future demand in the Tampa Bay market from U.S.
Apartment Demand Through 2035; 193 pages, Hoyt Advisory Services, Eigen10 Advisors, LLC,
May 2022; 50 Metro areas included; Norman G. Miller lead author; commissioned by National
Apartment Association and National Multi-Family Housing Council.
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Vacant Housing Units 15.2%14.5%13.2%
Owner Occupied Housing Units 52.0%58.4%59.2%
Renter Occupied Housing Units 32.8%27.1%27.7%
Vacant Housing Units 15.3%14.5%13.1%
2028 Housing Units 45,587 213,386 421,434
Owner Occupied Housing Units 51.2%57.7%58.6%
Renter Occupied Housing Units 33.5%27.8%28.3%
Vacant Housing Units 15.9%14.9%13.5%
2023 Housing Units 45,370 212,074 418,399
Owner Occupied Housing Units 48.2%55.8%56.2%
Renter Occupied Housing Units 36.2%29.3%30.3%
Vacant Housing Units 19.0%17.4%16.4%
2020 Housing Units 44,847 210,397 415,402
Owner Occupied Housing Units 46.9%55.9%56.7%
Renter Occupied Housing Units 34.1%26.7%26.9%
Vacant Housing Units 12.9%13.5%12.9%
2010 Housing Units 44,455 206,847 402,807
Owner Occupied Housing Units 55.0%61.8%62.6%
Renter Occupied Housing Units 32.0%24.6%24.4%
Housing Unit Summary
2000 Housing Units 42,160 196,948 380,414
2023 $328,257 $314,620 $320,837
2028 $340,884 $327,434 $336,206
Median Home Value
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
URS - 232098 Page 28
URS - 232098 Page 29
RANKING and DEFINITIONS:
METRO RANKING is the relative rank among 50 multifamily metro markets based upon the average of HAS forecasted total
5+ multifamily demand 2021-2035 and the percentage growth in that demand, ranging from 1 (Austin) to 50 (Cleveland).
AFFORDABILITY INDEX is the % of renters who are paying less than 35% of gross income on rent, based on the U.S. Census
American Community Survey, 2020 five year average figures. Higher numbers indicate more affordable markets. This index
ranges from 47 (Miami) to 66 (Columbus) with a Metro average of 60.
MF SUPPLY / RESTRICTIONS is an average ranking of the increase in 5+ rental stock from 2011 to 2021 and the excess
percentage growth in stock delivered as compared to percentage growth in rental households from 2011-2021. High rankings (1)
indicate high growth markets in which supply is at least keeping pace if not exceeding demand whereas low rankings (50)
indicate slow growth markets and/or where supply from 2011-2021 was less than demand.
STAR SHARE is that share of Metro rental housing stock with five or more units HAS qualified as *Second-Tier Affordable
Rentals or those non-institutional sites of typically lower unit count, lower quality and greater age, a critical and ongoing
multifamily supply component. Using CoStar® ratings of 1-5 for sites of five units or more, STAR is the lower ratings of 1-2.
This share ranges from 64% (Los Angeles) to 12% (Austin) with a Metro average of 36%.
URS - 232098 Page 30
Per Capita and Household Income
Current per capita income is $43,287 in the area, compared to the U.S. per capita income of
$41,310. The per capita income is projected to be $51,059 in five years, compared to $47,525
for all U.S. households.
Current median household income is $63,337 in the area, compared to $72,603 for all U.S.
households. Median household income is projected to be $75,557 in five years, compared to
$82,410 for all U.S. households.
Current average household income is $94,032 in this area, compared to $107,008 for all U.S.
households. Average household income is projected to be $109,999 in five years, compared to
$122,048 for all U.S. households.
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
2028 $44,802 $49,537 $51,059
Per Capita Income
2023 $37,817 $42,011 $43,287
2028 $65,264 $71,970 $75,557
Median Household Income
2023 $55,123 $60,458 $63,337
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
$200,000+6.7%6.9%7.5%
Average Household Income $86,272 $90,299 $94,032
$100,000 - $149,999 14.2%15.3%15.8%
$150,000 - $199,999 6.2%6.5%6.7%
$50,000 - $74,999 15.9%17.8%18.0%
$75,000 - $99,999 11.4%12.7%13.1%
$25,000 - $34,999 8.9%8.5%8.2%
$35,000 - $49,999 13.0%12.9%12.7%
<$15,000 14.8%11.1%10.2%
$15,000 - $24,999 9.0%8.3%7.7%
2023 Households by Income
Household Income Base 38,412 181,295 363,383
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
URS - 232098 Page 31
The following household ratio descriptions have not likely changed significantly from 2020,
current data was not available.
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
$2,000,000 +2.0%1.0%0.9%
Average Home Value $420,884 $365,309 $370,829
$1,000,000 - $1,499,999 3.1%2.0%2.0%
$1,500,000 - $1,999,999 1.2%0.8%0.7%
$500,000 - $749,999 9.6%9.4%10.6%
$750,000 - $999,999 4.1%3.2%3.2%
$300,000 - $399,999 25.4%24.7%24.1%
$400,000 - $499,999 11.6%12.5%13.6%
$200,000 - $249,999 9.2%7.5%8.0%
$250,000 - $299,999 12.3%12.2%11.6%
$100,000 - $149,999 3.5%4.7%5.4%
$150,000 - $199,999 7.5%6.1%6.7%
<$50,000 5.4%9.1%7.5%
$50,000 - $99,999 4.9%6.7%5.9%
2023 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value
Total 23,225 122,444 245,071
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
7 + Person Household 0.8%0.6%0.6%
5 Person Household 3.9%3.3%3.4%
6 Person Household 1.6%1.2%1.3%
3 Person Household 13.4%12.4%13.0%
4 Person Household 8.8%8.2%8.8%
1 Person Household 35.1%36.0%35.2%
2 Person Household 36.3%38.2%37.6%
2020 Households by Size
Total 37,837 179,076 359,185
URS - 232098 Page 32
Economic Influences
Economic considerations involve the financial capacity of a neighborhood’s occupants to rent or
own property, to maintain it in an attractive and desirable condition, and to renovate or
rehabilitate it when needed. In general, residential property values declined during the recession
of 2008-2009, but have continued to improve since about 2012. The area is expected to continue
with stable to increasing population levels and corresponding growth of housing units.
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Without Own Children <18, With Relatives 6.7%6.2%6.1%
No Relatives Present 1.5%1.3%1.4%
65 Years and over 9.3%12.0%10.7%
With Own Children <18 5.1%3.8%3.9%
Female Householder, No Spouse/Partner 31.8%32.0%31.3%
Living Alone 18.5%20.8%19.9%
Without Own Children <18, With Relatives 3.0%2.5%2.6%
No Relatives Present 1.9%1.6%1.7%
65 Years and over 5.7%6.2%5.6%
With Own Children <18 1.4%1.2%1.3%
Male Householder, No Spouse/Partner 22.9%20.6%20.8%
Living Alone 16.6%15.2%15.2%
With Own Children <18 2.3%1.8%1.9%
Without Own Children <18 5.9%5.9%6.2%
Without Own Children <18 27.0%29.8%29.1%
Cohabitating Couple Households 8.2%7.7%8.1%
Married Couple Households 37.1%39.8%39.9%
With Own Children <18 10.1%10.0%10.8%
2020 Households by Type
Total 37,837 179,076 359,185
URS - 232098 Page 33
Business Climate and Economic Activity
In the market area, there is an approximate employee ratio of 66.4% White-collar occupations,
24.0% Professionals, 16.4% Services, and 17.2% Blue Collar.
The ten basic industries and the participation in the market are reflected in the chart below. The
Services industry makes up the largest employment pool with 51.8% of the total work force.
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Production 3.6%4.2%4.8%
Transportation/Material Moving 5.8%5.8%5.8%
Construction/Extraction 4.9%3.7%3.5%
Installation/Maintenance/Repair 2.8%3.1%2.9%
Blue Collar 17.3%16.9%17.2%
Farming/Forestry/Fishing 0.0%0.1%0.1%
Administrative Support 11.6%13.1%12.5%
Services 19.2%17.1%16.4%
Professional 23.2%23.4%24.0%
Sales 10.2%10.1%10.2%
White Collar 63.5%66.1%66.4%
Management/Business/Financial 18.5%19.4%19.6%
2023 Employed Population 16+ by Occupation
Total 42,098 195,054 407,320
Services 53.0%52.5%51.8%
Public Administration 4.3%3.9%3.6%
Information 1.1%1.6%1.7%
Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 9.0%9.5%9.8%
Retail Trade 11.9%11.7%11.7%
Transportation/Utilities 5.8%5.2%4.9%
Manufacturing 5.8%7.5%8.1%
Wholesale Trade 2.1%2.0%1.9%
Agriculture/Mining 0.0%0.2%0.2%
Construction 6.9%5.9%6.2%
2023 Employed Population 16+ by Industry
Total 42,101 195,054 407,319
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
URS - 232098 Page 34
The following chart indicates 12-month employment changes on non-farm payrolls for Tampa
MSA and the U.S. Notice the dramatic upward change after the negative Covid effect on jobs in
mid-2020 and the relatively quick recovery. Second chart is year over year change.
In September 2023, the unemployment rate for Florida was 2.8% from a civilian labor force of
about 11.154 million. The U.S. unemployment rate was 3.8% in September 2023. Please see
following link describing Miami area with 1.5% unemployment and other Florida employment
statistics. https://floridajobs.org/news-center/DEO-Press/2023/10/20/floridacommerce-announces-the-miami-
area-september-2023-employment-data
The subject four-county MSA unemployment in September 2023 was 3.2%. County
unemployment rates for September 2023 were 3.1% in Hillsborough County, 3.0% in Pinellas,
3.5% in Pasco and 4.1% in Hernando County, all higher than September 2022.
Please see chart of historical unemployment trends for the subject MSA.
URS - 232098 Page 35
Household Disposable Income – 10 Minute Drive
(20 and 30 minute area percentages are similar to 10 minute Average Disposable Income)
Census 2020
87,675
45.9
37,837
2.22
75+
6,268
1,168
1,034
923
1,032
878
410
510
167
148
$35,100
$52,946$82,527 $74,499 $64,340Average Disposable Income $39,277 $61,070 $73,772
307 390 310
Median Disposable Income $30,151 $47,285 $55,745 $63,286 $54,007 $42,964
$200,000+4 102 215
1,046 1,123 812
$150,000-$199,999 2 92 256 376 425 317
$100,000-$149,999 55 559 957
1,035 1,289 1,322
$75,000-$99,999 58 459 523 814 868 620
$50,000-$74,999 201 910 1,099
498 673 891
$35,000-$49,999 200 665 729 774 958 1,130
$25,000-$34,999 157 535 519
662 1,205 1,417
$15,000-$24,999 225 465 358 356 691 825
<$15,000 267 642 755
45-54 55-64 65-74
Total 1,169 4,431 5,411 5,868 7,621 7,644
2023 Disposable Income by Age <25 25-34 35-44
Number of Households
$48,037
Average Disposable Income $67,463
Median Disposable Income
1,636 4.3%
$200,000+1,476 3.8%
$150,000-$199,999
3,751 9.8%
$100,000-$149,999 5,062 13.2%
$75,000-$99,999
5,487 14.3%
$50,000-$74,999 6,733 17.5%
$35,000-$49,999
3,954 10.3%
$25,000-$34,999 4,196 10.9%
$15,000-$24,999
38,412 100.0%
<$15,000 6,117 15.9%
Total
2023 Households by Disposable Income Number Percent
226 0.12%
Average Household
Size
2.20 2.18 -0.02 -0.18%
Households 38,412 38,638
-330 -0.07%
Median Age 46.4 47.0 0.6 0.26%
Population 88,275 87,945
2023-2028 2023-2028
2023 2028 Change Annual Rate
URS - 232098 Page 36
Household Consumer Spending – Goods and Services
10 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes
Spending Potential Index 83 87 91
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs: Total $$41,848,110 $206,041,989 $430,984,313
Average Spent $1,089.45 $1,136.49 $1,186.03
Average Spent $1,789.22 $1,888.08 $1,969.54
Spending Potential Index 80 84 88
Spending Potential Index 83 90 92
Travel: Total $$68,727,402 $342,301,445 $715,698,077
Support Payments/Cash Contributions/Gifts in Kind: Total $$99,492,479 $510,112,561 $1,050,926,576
Average Spent $2,590.14 $2,813.70 $2,892.06
Average Spent $20,240.27 $21,129.28 $21,932.39
Spending Potential Index 82 85 89
Spending Potential Index 83 88 91
Shelter: Total $$777,469,401 $3,830,653,587 $7,969,878,978
Personal Care Products & Services: Total $$30,631,334 $151,720,022 $315,575,352
Average Spent $797.44 $836.86 $868.43
Average Spent $2,395.48 $2,511.90 $2,617.09
Spending Potential Index 81 85 89
Spending Potential Index 84 89 92
HH Furnishings & Equipment: Total $$92,015,094 $455,396,642 $951,007,482
Health Care: Total $$237,106,589 $1,186,543,210 $2,462,309,631
Average Spent $6,172.72 $6,544.78 $6,776.05
Average Spent $3,017.64 $3,117.33 $3,262.34
Spending Potential Index 81 84 88
Spending Potential Index 83 86 89
Food Away from Home: Total $$115,913,573 $565,158,676 $1,185,483,803
Food at Home: Total $$216,319,884 $1,058,919,112 $2,201,906,387
Average Spent $5,631.57 $5,840.83 $6,059.45
Average Spent $3,058.40 $3,225.43 $3,358.41
Spending Potential Index 81 85 89
Spending Potential Index 78 80 84
Entertainment/Recreation: Total $$117,479,423 $584,757,097 $1,220,393,535
Education: Total $$53,627,485 $261,620,534 $545,326,413
Average Spent $1,396.11 $1,443.06 $1,500.69
Average Spent $1,795.09 $1,827.94 $1,914.86
Spending Potential Index 82 83 87
2023 Consumer Spending
Apparel & Services: Total $$68,952,883 $331,398,621 $695,829,365
URS - 232098 Page 37
Governmental Influences
The subject market area covers about 75% of Pinellas County. The market area is governed by
several municipalities and Pinellas County for future land use plans and various municipal
zoning codes. The purpose and primary effect of the Future Land Use Plan is to provide a
general outline for growth for a given area in an attempt to support and provide for orderly
growth within the state. The implementation of this land use plan has the effect of eventually
requiring the zoning ordinances to comply with the plan within a reasonable time. The
designations, therefore, of the land use plan should be viewed as the long-term intentions with
respect to a given land area and its boundaries.
Most commercial land uses are designated along major traffic arteries and at commercial nodes
within the market area, which are surrounded by residential uses. The governmental tax burdens
within the market area appear to be in proportion to the governmental services provided
including road and drainage infrastructure, however, designated areas may be specially assessed
for needed infrastructure updating.
Environmental Influences
Property uses within the broader market area include residential uses, primarily single-family
homes, secondarily multi-family apartments/condos and supporting commercial uses with
industrial and business park districts. Grocery stores, professional and medical offices, banking
services and restaurants are all accessible throughout the market area. Places of worship,
schools, public libraries, golf courses and nearby Gulf beaches are also convenient. Fire and
police protection appear to be adequate.
Conclusion
Outlook for the neighborhood and broader market is overall long-term positive. Commercial and
residential properties have exhibited improved occupancy rates and are near capacity, and new
and redeveloped commercial and residential properties are evident in this market. Given a
subtropical climate, access to nearby beaches and other attractive features, the greater market
area is considered an important tourism destination in addition to a typical economic area with its
production of goods and services.
In the market area, commercial land is approximately 95% built-up and the residential land is
approximately 95% built-up, reflecting an urban populated area. The population base within and
surrounding the market area provides a significant employee pool and consumer base.
Population is expected to be stable to slightly increasing over the foreseeable future. The overall
location, the area economy and overall demographic trends for the longer term favorably
influence the subject neighborhood and the market area, and no adverse factors are noted.
URS - 232098 Page 38
REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES
The subject parcel identification and assessments are obtained from the Property Appraiser’s
office as noted below. The subject is currently owned by the City of Clearwater and is tax
exempt. The assessed value below is for one of three parent tract parcels, a total of
approximately 23 acres. The subject is 2.60 acres of an approximate 8.8-acre southerly parent
parcel. The parent parcels are tax exempt as municipal ownership. The 2023 millage rate for the
ad valorem taxes on real property is 20.2462 mils in the subject district.
Real Property Assessments and Tax Exempt 2023
Parcel Number
Assessed
Value
Non-Ad
Valorem
Total Gross
Tax
Total Net
Tax
16-29-15-20358-001-0040 $22,851,832 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Totals $22,851,832 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Assessed values are based on a property’s condition as of January 1 of each year and are
preliminary until certified to the Florida Department of Revenue in June. The county Property
Appraiser first estimates a market or just value, then applies various caps or exemptions to arrive
at taxable values, which may vary among taxing authorities. The 10% cap on annual assessment
increases for commercial properties while under the same ownership does not apply to school
board taxes. Non-Ad Valorem taxes are not based on value but are typically fixed amounts for a
fire, lighting, road or water district. Therefore, it may not be possible to estimate taxes by simply
multiply the assessed value by the millage rate. The tax millage rate in a geographic district is
determined by the amount of funds necessary to provide all governmental services, such as
schools, police, fire/rescue, library, etc., divided by the overall tax base.
A Truth in Millage (TRIM) notice setting forth proposed taxes is sent to property owners in
August, with an appeal period through September. The final millage rate is established by each
county commission in October, and property tax invoices are then mailed to owners for earliest
payment during November.
Property taxes in Florida are due by March 31, but may be paid as early as November 1, when a
4% discount is allowed. The discount decreases by 1% per month until March, when there is no
discount. Prudent property owners typically take advantage of the 4% discount and pay real
estate taxes in November, rather than in March of the following year.
Taxes become delinquent April l, after which time a penalty is imposed. Certificates for
delinquent taxes are auctioned approximately 60 days from delinquency, and the holder of a tax
certificate may seek foreclosure to recoup investment or to acquire title in approximately 22
months if taxes and penalties remain unpaid.
URS - 232098 Page 39
LAND USE AND ZONING CLASSIFICATION
The Land Use plan sets forth the physical plans for growth and development of a community.
The primary thrust of the Plan is to determine the overall development of the county, where it
was, where it is today and how the future land use patterns and policies will reflect and meet the
needs of growth tomorrow, and zoning is a specifically delineated area or district within which
regulations and requirements uniformly govern the use, placement, spacing and size of land and
buildings. The Land Use Plan and Zoning work hand in hand and must be compatible in intent
prior to development of any property.
In the event of pre-existing conditions of lot or building non-conformities, a property may be
considered legally conforming per a “grandfather” rule. Pre-existing conditions in compliance,
which predate adoption of zoning regulations or become non-conforming by virtue of right-of-
way changes, typically will place the property in a special exception category as legally non-
conforming.
Future Land Use Plan
According to the City of Clearwater Future Land Use, from the documentation and mapping by
the Planning Commission, the area of the subject site is located in a Central Business District
CBD, which permits a variety of commercial and residential uses. With respect to the
surrounding, existing land use and the subject’s proposed use, the subject property is presently
compatible with the general Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The zoning intention is to create a
mixed-use development of residential, retail, office, beverage sales, restaurants, hotels/motels,
etc. amongst public/institutional uses, which would customarily be found in a downtown area.
The regulation creates latitude of density, height and uses for larger assembled properties and the
City has created multi-family density pools that are also available. The city is flexible with
expanding development regulations in regard to fulfilling the Imagine Clearwater project in the
subject vicinity.
URS - 232098 Page 40
Zoning
Downtown (D)
The intent and purpose of the Downtown District and Development Standards is to encourage
mixed use, pedestrian-oriented development, promote context-sensitive forms, patterns, and
intensities of development, support a variety of new housing types to provide for a range of
affordability and mix of incomes, preserve and celebrate the unique features of Downtown's
community and neighborhoods, encourage the renovation, restoration and/or reuse of existing
historic structures, and provide for the design of safe, attractive, and accessible places for
working, living, and shopping consistent with the vision, guiding principles, goals, objectives
and policies in the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan.
The intent and purpose of the Downtown District and Development Standards is to guide the
development and redevelopment of sites in Downtown Clearwater consistent with the vision,
guiding principles, goals, objectives and policies in the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment
Plan to achieve quality urban and architectural design throughout Downtown and provide
regulatory clarity and predictability for property owners, investors, residents, and business
owners. The standards are designed to accomplish the following:
•Encourage mixed use, pedestrian-oriented development;
•Promote context-sensitive forms, patterns, and intensities of development;
•Support a variety of new housing types to provide for a range of affordability and mix of
incomes;
•Preserve and celebrate the unique features of Downtown's community and neighborhoods;
•Encourage the renovation, restoration and/or reuse of existing historic structures: and
•Provide for the design of safe, attractive, and accessible places for working, living, and
shopping.
The Downtown Core Character District is intended for high intensity mixed-use, office, and
residential development in buildings with active ground floor uses opening onto pedestrian-
friendly streetscapes. Standards are designed to support a dense urban pattern of development
with buildings façades aligned along public sidewalks and parking primarily located within
buildings behind active uses and behind buildings. Properties adjacent to the Pinellas Trail are
designed to provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to the trial.
75 du/ac (maximum base density in Downtown Core)
+ 30 du/ac (40% density bonus, min. 50% units residential rental)
105 du/ac (105 dwelling units permitted)
4.0 FAR (maximum base intensity in Downtown Core)
+ 1.0 FAR (25% FAR bonus, min. 25% of building's rentable floor area is dedicated to office
use and is Class A Office space
5.0 FAR (217,805 SF permitted)
URS - 232098 Page 41
Downtown District
Zoning and Land Use Conformity
The above zoning and land use information represents a brief review of the zoning regulations.
Although the jurisdiction has rather straightforward zoning regulations, the regulations can be
rather complex and interrelated, and not all factors potentially affecting the subject property can
be shown. The reader is advised to consult the zoning regulation and department personnel for
an optimum understanding of these regulations, 727-562-4604.
URS - 232098 Page 42
CONCURRENCY AND IMPACT FEES
The 2011 Amendments to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, required local governments to adopt
comprehensive land use plans that include minimum specified levels of service for four types of
public services and facilities, including sanitary sewer, stormwater, potable water and solid
waste. Chapter 163 also prohibits local governments from issuing development permits if levels
of service are below the specified level or if the development’s impact would cause levels of
service to fall below the specified levels. This means that the availability of public facilities
must be concurrent with the impacts of the development. The original concurrency requirements
became effective in January 1990. A local government may extend the concurrency requirement
so that it applies to additional facilities within its jurisdiction such as schools, transportation
including mass transit, and parks and recreation.
According to employees of the Planning and Land Use/Zoning Department, it does not appear
that concurrency guidelines would adversely affect typical development on the subject site.
Impact fees
The local and county jurisdictions charge water, sewer and transportation impact fees on new
development. Redevelopment is charged the difference between the fees required under the new
classification and those required under the previous classification.
Permit and Service Fees
Each jurisdiction typically has several departments monitoring the various aspects of property
development. Additional permit fees, plan review fees, hookup charges, inspection fees, service
fees, deposits, and special fees, such as, tree removal/replacement charges, may all be applicable
to new construction. If all impact fees, permit fees, and service charges are applicable to a
development, then the total cost is typically between 2% and 5% or more of the total project’s
development costs, including land and improvements.
URS - 232098 Page 43
SITE DESCRIPTION
Data sources for this site description include information provided by the Property Appraiser’s
office, other public records, a personal inspection by the appraisers and review of survey copy
dated November 2022 from George F. Young, Inc.
Site Description
The subject is located at the northwest corner of the two streets, extending approximately 387.07
feet east to west along Pierce Street and 285.04 feet north to south along South Osceola Avenue.
The west boundary is 300.62 feet. The site is generally rectangular and contains approximately
113,256 square feet or 2.60 acres. The subject has good elevation, being on the Bluffs, and
views of the bay would be available from virtually any multi-story development on the site. The
site is approximately two miles from the beach and there are protected lanes on either side of
Clearwater Bridge for walking, running or bicycling.
Subject at northwest corner of Pierce Street and South Osceola Avenue
Soil is sandy, typical for the area, and it is assumed that no adverse subsoil conditions exist.
Municipal potable water and wastewater disposal are available to the site, as are electric and
telephone services. There are no known impediments to development. Drainage and utility
easements appear typical.
Property Characteristics
Land Area 113,256 square feet or 2.60 acres per survey
Site Configuration Rectangular
Dimensions Please see Young survey below. The subject parcel
is part of larger municipal waterfront parcel.
URS - 232098 Page 44
Terrain/Vegetation Generally level on a bluff with slight slope westerly
toward Clearwater Bay, and with a retaining wall
and a 20 foot+ drop to a lower level at the west
boundary. Vegetation is minimal.
Elevation Site elevations are generally between 29 feet and 31
feet above MSL per survey.
Soil Conditions Appears to be sandy to sandy loam, typical for the
area. No subsidence was noted, but many areas of
Florida are susceptible to soil issues, and a
geotechnical investigation by a professional
engineer is always recommended.
Access Pedestrian and vehicular access is currently along
both South Osceola Avenue and Pierce Street
Flood Zone “X”, minimum flood risk, above 100-year flood
plain
FEMA Map Panel 12103C0108J, dated August 24, 2021
Drainage Sheet flow and typical run-off into municipal
stormwater system
Potable water City of Clearwater
Sewer City of Clearwater
Garbage collection City of Clearwater or private vendor
Electricity Duke Energy
Telecommunications Frontier, Spectrum and others
Police protection City of Clearwater
Fire protection City of Clearwater Fire Department and nearest
facility is Fire Station 45 at 1130 Court Street, 727-
562-4334, approximately one mile ESE.
George F. Young Survey 11/22 Mean LF
E-W Lineal Feet 387.17 387.07 387.12
N-S Lineal Feet 300.20 285.04 292.62
Square Feet 113,256
Acres 2.60
URS - 232098 Page 45
Public transportation PSTA
Emergency medical service Pinellas County
Encumbrances
According to the copy of the November 2022 survey provided, there is a utility easement in the
northwest corner tip of the subject property. Other utility easements may be present and should
not negatively affect the property for redevelopment.
The appraiser is not aware of title encumbrances, easements, encroachments, deed restrictions,
covenants, association rules, special assessments or other possible encumbrances which may
adversely affect title to the subject property. No title search information has been presented to
the appraiser.
Survey of Old City Hall – November 2022 by George F. Young, Inc.
Certified to Gotham Property Acquisitions, LLC and The Denunzio Group, LLC
URS - 232098 Page 46
URS - 232098 Page 47
URS - 232098 Page 48
URS - 232098 Page 49
FEMA Flood Map
Subject site is in “X Zone” and subject parent westerly tract is in “AE Zone”
URS - 232098 Page 50
IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
The subject property was formerly improved with the Old City Hall building. The building has
been demolished.
Based on County Property Appraiser Records
The approximate 25,000 square foot, three story building has been demolished and removed.
Site Improvements
Site improvements consist of asphalt paving to the east and recent sod to the west, plus
underground laterals for potable water and waste water, not in use. The site improvements have
negligible contributory value.
Personal Property
No personal property is applicable.
URS - 232098 Page 51
MARKETABILITY AND ESTIMATED MARKETING PERIOD
Marketability looks at the market appeal of the subject property; more specifically, it analyzes
and supports a reasonable marketing period to affect the sale of the subject property. Included in
this analysis is a discussion of supply, competition, and demand of the subject property and
competitive properties located within the market area.
Marketability is defined as, “the relative desirability of a property (for sale or lease) in
comparison with similar or competing properties in the area.”15 That is, a property with good
marketability has superior features or condition in comparison with competing properties.
A marketability study is “a microeconomic study that examines the marketability of a given
property or class of properties, usually focusing on the market segment(s) in which the property
is likely to generate demand. Marketability studies are useful in determining a specific highest
and best use, testing a specific highest and best use, testing development proposals, and
projecting an appropriate tenant mix.”16 While this type of study is typically quite detailed and
specific, a brief version is part of the highest and best use analysis of every appraisal.
A marketability analysis is defined as, “the study of how a specific property is expected to
perform in a specific market. A marketability analysis expands on a market analysis by
addressing a specific property.”17
Market value estimates imply that an adequate marketing effort and reasonable time for exposure
occurred prior to the effective date of the appraisal.
Exposure time is, “(1) the time a property remains on the market, or (2) the estimated length of
time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the
hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.
Exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date of the appraisal.”18
“Exposure time is different for various types of property and under various market
conditions. It is noted that the overall concept of reasonable exposure
encompasses not only adequate, sufficient, and reasonable time but also adequate,
sufficient, and reasonable effort. This statement focuses on the time component.
The fact that exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date
of the appraisal is substantiated by related facts in the appraisal process:
supply/demand conditions as of the effective date of the appraisal; the use of
current cost information; the analysis of historical sales information (sold after
exposure and after completion of negotiations between the seller and buyer); and
15 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Sixth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2015, p. 138.
16 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2010, p. 120.
17 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Sixth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2015, p. 138.
18 Ibid, p. 82.
URS - 232098 Page 52
the analysis of future income expectancy projected from the effective date of the
appraisal.”19
Marketing time is defined as, “an opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or
personal property interest at the concluded market value level during the period immediately
after the effective date of the appraisal. Marketing time differs from exposure time, which is
always presumed to precede the effective date of an appraisal.”20
Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths of the subject include a good developable site in a downtown area. The subject site
provides good views of Clearwater Bay and the Gulf of Mexico and has good visibility at a non-
signalized corner. Also, the subject has potential high density for multi-family development per
city approval.
Weaknesses of the subject are negligible other than being located with frontage on two relatively
narrow two-lane streets.
Market Participant Interviews
In addition to reviewing periodic commercial reports of the Tampa Bay area real estate activity
by such firms as Cushman and Wakefield, CBRE, Colliers International, Marcus & Millichap
Eshenbaugh Land Company, Framework Group, and others, we have interviewed brokers and
market participants familiar with the market. Some of the more pertinent discussions as relates
to the subject are noted below.
Bill Eshenbaugh of Eshenbaugh Land Company and Bruce Erhardt of Cushman & Wakefield
both indicated that there have been fewer deals for land acquisition than during 2020 and 2021
and early 2022. Higher finance costs for land acquisition and development, increasing
construction costs for materials and labor and insurance expense for end product have all become
a concern for rental apartment developers. Also, increasing regulations have become deterrents
for many potential apartment land buyers as previous profit ratios are being trimmed. However,
rental demand continues, with wages being better than a few years ago and with many potential
home buyers unable to purchase a home due to higher mortgage costs and a general short supply
of affordable homes. All of these recent events and the continued population influx into Tampa
Bay Metro have placed pressure on developers and investors.
Phillip Smith, President of Framework Group, a well experienced development team based in
Tampa, indicated that, although the site is generally attractive, with a location near quality
beaches and within a downtown neighborhood, there are challenges due to the high cost of
development and unproven rent levels in the Clearwater CBD market. He indicated that a two
phase development, two buildings with a total of 400 rental units is likely more economically
feasible than a single phase with one building. He believes that end use demand for rental
19 Appraisal Institute, Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and Advisory Opinions 2006 Edition, The Appraisal
Foundation, USA, 2006, p. 90.
20 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Sixth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2015, p. 140.
URS - 232098 Page 53
apartments will continue in Tampa Bay, but that rent increases will not be at the level
experienced in the past few years. He felt a $4.00 per square foot per month apartment rent is a
likely threshold for developers to proceed with developments. Such rate is quoted as an asking
rate for better, smaller units in downtown areas of St. Petersburg and Tampa, but larger units are
typically priced lower.
Matt Everett of Newmark Realty Group indicated there has been a significant decrease in the
price level for multi-family development land values. He cited the rise in construction costs,
higher cost of capital, flattening rental rates and increased insurance costs of the end product, all
tend to affect the investor market for stabilized acquisitions.
Yogesh Melwani of Align Commercial Real Estate is marketing Comparable No. 13 in this
report located on the east side of Tampa Bay in south Hillsborough County and he mentioned
that the previous low interest rates spoiled the consumer for housing ownership and spoiled
many developers to engage new projects without previously attractive costs of capital.
Robb Frye, Senior Director of Development for Southern Land Company, who is under
development of a high-rise rental apartment tower on Las Olas in Ft. Lauderdale, says they are
struggling with their budget and do not expect a similar development to be feasible until interest
rates decline and rental rates increase. Rental rates of $4.00 per square foot are necessary to
make the numbers work, and Clearwater rents are well below that target.
Recent Shifts In Commercial Real Estate Dollar Volumes
LoopNet article, CRE Sales Plummet in Q1 as Expected; Here’s What to Focus on Next, April
19, 2023.
Data confirms what CRE professionals suspected over the first quarter of 2023: CRE
sales have stalled. Transaction volume was off significantly for office, retail,
multifamily and industrial assets combined, contracting by -60.3% quarter-over-
quarter and -64.3% year-over-year, according to CoStar, the publisher of LoopNet.
Dollar volume moved from $116 billion to $46 billion and $129 billion to $46 billion
respectively. Year-over-year volume declined the most for office assets (-72.2%) and
quarter-over-quarter volume declined most for industrial properties (-69.4%). “We're
in a stale period where people are waiting to see what happens, which is why there's no
transaction volume,” said Chad Littell, national director of U.S. capital markets
analytics at CoStar. But for perspective on these first quarter figures, he noted that
they are being compared to last year’s peak transaction numbers. “We’re coming off
really robust transaction volume in the fourth quarter of 2021,” with $239 billion
trading hands, making the first quarter contraction appear starker. “The decline in
transaction volume is less pronounced when comparing the first quarter of 2023 to the
five-year pre-outbreak period.” Key conditions contributing to the decline include flat
or falling rents, higher operating costs from rising inflation and increased capital costs
that have caused values to decline. Sellers and buyers can’t agree on pricing and
lenders have pulled back significantly from CRE lending.
URS - 232098 Page 54
Reasonable Exposure and Marketing Period for Subject
The appraiser must analyze historical data and future projections in order to estimate historical
market exposure time and the future marketing period. According to owners and brokers active
in the subject’s market area and in similar markets, it was revealed that there is an increasingly
active market for this type of property throughout the area and in the subject’s local market. The
presence of an active market was supported by review of data obtained from the Property
Appraiser’s office for transfer of such properties. During the last few years, the marketing
period for similar properties has typically ranged from four to twelve months, but with some
properties requiring more than twelve months if they are of an unusual condition or if they
appear to be priced above the market. The subject property should be well received if placed on
the market for sale. Based on the above, we estimate a typical exposure period for comparable
sales of 12 months. As economic conditions have deteriorated, a marketing period for the
subject of 24 to 36 months is estimated. Given the broad potential configuration and
composition of building design and building volumes, a buyer’s permitting period would likely
add several months to transaction closing after a sale contract agreement.
Selling commissions in order to affect the sale of a property similar to the subject are usually
6.0% and downward. For the subject property type and its high value range, a commission level
of between 2.0% and 4.0% is applicable.
Availability of Mortgage Financing
At the present time, third-party financing is available for acquisition and/or development of
properties similar to the subject, however, lenders are quite cautious and hesitant without
detailed projection of successful development and absorption.
Interest rates have increased over the past year and underwriting standards have become more
stringent. Conversations with commercial bank lenders implied that appropriate interest rates for
improved commercial properties would typically range from approximately 6.0% to 7.5%,
possibly higher dependent on the term and length of period between interest rate reviews. Land
acquisition loans with a one to three year period term often have interest only payments previous
to new construction. Interim construction loans are about 7.0% to 8.0% interest. The loan-to-
value ratio would typically range between 50% and 70% of value. For income producing
properties, the range of the debt coverage ratio is typically 1.3 to 1.5, and loan origination fees or
points are typically 0.0% to 1.0%.
Additional prerequisites for approval of financing include the personal guarantee of the owner, as
well as an excellent credit history and prior successful ownership of properties similar to the
subject. Strength and quality of the cash flows from income producing properties and the
condition of the property would also be considered. Typical buyers are developers or
experienced property investors with motivation of positive cash flow.
URS - 232098 Page 55
Multi-Family Real Estate Market
Please see following information about the real estate market for recent activity and near future
trends.
Moody’s Investor Services
CBRE reports
Multifamily Rents Drop Amid Supply Surge (Yardi Matrix Sep 2023)-
Multifamily rents declined in September due to softening demand and an increased housing
supply in Sun Belt and Western markets. Still, the sector remains robust overall, thanks to strong
job growth and household formation, despite challenges that include rising energy costs and
higher interest rates.
URS - 232098 Page 56
Yardi Matrix Review of National Apartment Rentals
September 2023
URS - 232098 Page 57
Source: Matrix National Multifamily Report, September 2023 - Yardi Matrix
CBRE Data
Source: CBRE U.S. Cap Rates Survey H2 2022; July 2023 release.
URS - 232098 Page 58
CBRE Data
Second Half 2022
Source: CBRE U.S. Cap Rates Survey H2 2022; March 2023 release.
URS - 232098 Page 59
Capitalization rates have moved upward by an approximate 100 basis points indicating a
weakness of sales of the suburban Class A multi-family sector in the Tampa Bay Metro area
according to CBRE surveys. See Tampa line item in above and next chart.
First Half 2023
Source: CBRE U.S. Cap Rates Survey H1 2023; September 2023 release.
URS - 232098 Page 60
2023 Multifamily Annual Report
Building Design+Construction – September October 2023, pages 9-11
https://www.bdcnetwork.com/download-2023-multifamily-annual-report
This organization captures recent viewpoints from several resources.
The Future State Of Multifamily
Industry experts agree the hard-charging multifamily construction sector has been indicating a
deceleration—and they point to rising interest rates.
Rising rates over the past year and a half have “changed the mortgage market for multifamily,”
according to Yardi Matrix’s June 2023 Multifamily National Report. “Expensive debt has
quashed transaction activity,” the report writes. Amid increasing interest rates and slowing rent
growth, transaction volume in the apartment market fell for the fifth consecutive quarter, NMHC
reported in July 2023.
NAA’s Munger places the recently rising interest rates within a larger historic context—noting
that “the interest rates we’re seeing now are not a new phenomenon,” she says. “The era of ‘free
money’ is behind us, and it’s really a matter of adjusting to the new rates.”
“In the rental market, slowing rent growth and rising vacancies, especially in high-cost market
segments, will likely lead to a slowdown in new apartment construction,” according to the JCHS
report. In addition to higher interest rates, JCHS cites tightening lending standards and rising
operating costs as contributing to a slowdown.
URS - 232098 Page 61
“Borrowing costs are higher for multifamily developers and lending conditions have tightened,
so fewer deals are getting done,” says Jesse McConnico, Research Manager with John Burns
Real Estate Consulting. Luettke adds, “We’re presently at a moment when starts are slowing
down and completions are lower than expected.
“Permits for multifamily projects with five or more units are down more than 16% on a year-to-
year basis, and the pace of permits has been slowing since February, according to NAHB. “Our
forecast is for ongoing weakness, given the number of apartments under construction is near one
million, the highest total since 1973,” Dietz says. With permitting activity beginning to slow,
“we expect the influx of new supply to recede in 2025,” Munger adds.
Brad Dillman, Chief Economist with developer, property manager and investment firm RPM
Living, paints an even starker picture: “Many investors have completely paused funding
additional development projects for the year,” Dillman says.
“Higher borrowing costs reduce the attractiveness of a development.” There are still several
investors willing to provide equity for projects, Dillman adds, but it will be harder for them to hit
their target returns. Aside from rising interest costs, they also have to contend with increases in
construction costs, land costs, government fees, and flat or declining rents, Dillman says.
“We’re already seeing a sharp pullback in the number of apartment units starting construction
due to higher costs of borrowing and a softening market,” says Chris Bruen, Senior Director,
Research with NMHC. But the current pullback, with starts trending down, could bode well for
developers who can get their projects started now and then capitalize on a stronger leasing
environment later, according to McConnico.
Yardi Matrix forecasts 506,574 new units in 2024—followed by 424,899 units in 2025, 401,065
units in 2026, and 417,378 units in 2027. Yardi Matrix’s estimates assume a mild recession in
late 2023 or early 2024. But if a deeper and longer recession takes hold, with debt and equity
finance far less available, then the multifamily rental market could see “a deeper fall-off in new
construction starts beginning in the second half of 2023 that remains through 2025,” Ressler
says. In this scenario, new supply would fall to a forecasted low of 355,000 in 2026.
“If the economy avoids a recession, the labor market and wage growth remain strong, and
inflation continues on its downward path, we will see steady demand for apartments,” Munger
says. “There are still many young people living with family and they will form new households
as the economy, and their own financial situations, strengthen.”
Much depends on the economy— but not all. Immigration levels also will affect the multifamily
market. “The 2022 increase in immigration bodes well for the market, especially if it continues,”
Munger says. “Immigrants tend to rent initially and sometimes for long periods of time.”
Without high immigration numbers, however, the recent flurry of construction activity could tip
the scale from demand to supply, Dillman says. “From our perspective, there is too much
housing under construction in the U.S., unless one assumes strong immigration figures over the
URS - 232098 Page 62
years ahead,” Dillman says. “Strong immigration assumptions did prove correct for 2021 and
2022, but whether that continues going forward is uncertain.”
There will be more multifamily housing supply than demand in the near term, agrees Mangold.
“Absorption is expected to be modest in the second half of 2023 as renters face economic
headwinds.” But although RCLCO expects supply to outpace absorption by 1.5 to 2 times
through this year, it also anticipates that demand will increase again in 2024—with the supply-
absorption gap narrowing and then reaching equilibrium in late 2024 or early 2025.
Economic headwinds likely will have less effect on senior living and student housing, both
of which indicate a turnaround from their pandemic era lull. According to JCHS, all households
headed by a person 65 and over increased 43% from 2009 to 2019, and their rentership rate
edged up slightly. “We’ve been seeing more and more seniors opt to rent over the years,”
McConnico says. Recent data on student housing indicates very strong pre-leasing activity for
the upcoming academic year, according to Munger. “Student housing isn’t as impacted by the
economy, wages, and consumer sentiment as market-rate apartment rates are,” she says. Ressler
agrees: “The student housing sector is typically less impacted by recessions than other
commercial real estate property types.”
A REGIONAL LOOK: NEAR TERM
“In the Sun Belt and the West, demand has cooled to normal from red-hot as a wave of new
supply comes online,” according to Yardi Matrix’s Multifamily National Report. A growing
number of metro areas report negative growth year-over-year, Yardi Matrix reports. Nine of the
top 30 metros were negative in June 2023, mostly in the Sun Belt and the West.
Nashville, Raleigh-Durham, and Austin have the largest multifamily pipelines under way as a
percentage of inventory, so they likely will see the largest inventory expansions in 2024,
according to John Burns Real Estate Consulting. As a result of the supply recently delivered,
rents have declined year over year in all three markets.
While completion levels are high for now, permitting activity has begun to slow down. In
response, Munger says, “rent growth has started to decelerate and has even turned negative in
some markets that are experiencing high levels of construction.” These include Austin,
Nashville, and Phoenix. “It’s important to note, though, that most of these markets still show
positive absorption. So the demand is absolutely there—it’s just not enough to outpace new
supply.”
“We definitely have a lot of supply under way, and some markets are going to pay for it,”
McConnico says. “We are seeing occupancy moderate from all-time highs, and rents have fallen
in some heavily supplied and maybe even oversupplied markets. You also have to look at the
demand picture. Some areas really need it and have been able to handle it.”
While the Sun Belt has seen high population growth, it also has seen rising insurance costs
stemming from increasing climate-related disasters. “Demographic and insurance trends are
URS - 232098 Page 63
setting up a medium-term challenge for developers trying to meet rising demand in these metros
despite significant insurance costs and availability,”Luettke says.
HIGH-END NOW, AFFORDABLE TOMORROW?
Multifamily supply might be outpacing demand— but not when it comes to affordable housing.
As Luettke says, “Demand for affordable housing remains well above available supply.” And as
McConnico notes, “There is definitely a need for more affordable units.”
“The underproduction of housing has translated to higher housing costs,” Bruen says. This has
resulted in a loss of 4.7 million affordable apartments— with monthly rents less than $1,000—
between 2015 and 2020.
High mortgage rates and low resale inventory are keeping renters in place longer and driving
multifamily demand for now, McConnico notes. McConnico adds that, while rents have
increased, they still haven’t gone up as much as home prices and remain lower than home
payments. An average monthly house payment is at least $1,000 higher than an average rent
payment nationally, according to a Marcus & Millichap analysis. “Renting remains the more
affordable choice in many areas,” Munger says.
“We anticipate multifamily demand will continue to hold as single-family market stress
incentivizes some households to pursue multifamily options,” Luettke says. Demand likely will
remain high nationwide, which will buoy new construction, despite the financing challenges, he
adds. “In the near future, the relationship between new constructions and affordability will
remain a central topic.” Yet the majority of new multifamily construction has focused on Class
A projects—with Class B and C projects accounting for just 5% to 10% of total deliveries in
recent years, according to Moody’s Analytics. “Even as the abundance of mostly high end
apartment units under construction reaches the market, it remains unclear how much relief this
will provide for households with low and moderate incomes,” according to JCHS.
What do these high-rent, luxury properties mean for the future of affordable multifamily
housing?
According to Bruen, today’s luxe apartments could become tomorrow’s affordable units. “The
most affordable market-rate housing units tend to be older, just as used cars are less expensive
than new cars,” Bruen says. “So if we don’t build newer units today, we won’t have an adequate
supply of older, more affordable units in the future.” “The amount of new supply coming to
market now is promising, and we have already seen it making a dent in affordability in some
areas and some market segments,” Munger says. “But this is not an overnight process, and we
have decades of underbuilding to make up for until supply and demand—at all price points—are
truly in balance.” Mangold adds, “Increasing interest rates and affordability concerns will prove
to be ongoing challenges for both multifamily developers and renters.”
URS - 232098 Page 64
Recent Shifts In Commercial Real Estate Transaction Dollar Volumes
Data confirms what CRE professionals suspected over the first quarter of 2023: CRE sales have
stalled. Transaction volume was off significantly for office, retail, multifamily and industrial
assets combined, contracting by -60% quarter-over-quarter and -64% year-over-year, according
to CoStar, the publisher of LoopNet. Dollar volume moved from $116 billion to $46 billion and
$129 billion to $46 billion, respectively. Year-over-year volume declined the most for office
assets (-72%) and quarter-over-quarter volume declined most for industrial properties (-69%).
“We're in a stale period where people are waiting to see what happens, which is why there's no
transaction volume,” said Chad Littell, national director of U.S. capital markets analytics at
CoStar. But for perspective on these first quarter figures, he noted that they are being compared
to last year’s peak transaction numbers. “We’re coming off really robust transaction volume in
the fourth quarter of 2021,” with $239 billion trading hands, making the first quarter contraction
appear starker. “The decline in transaction volume is less pronounced when comparing the first
quarter of 2023 to the five-year pre-outbreak period.” Key conditions contributing to the decline
include flat or falling rents, higher operating costs from rising inflation and increased capital
costs that have caused values to decline. Sellers and buyers can’t agree on pricing and lenders
have pulled back significantly from CRE lending. Source, LoopNet articles, CRE Sales
Plummet in Q1 as Expected; Here’s What to Focus on Next, April 19, 2023.
The following chart depicts the strength of several multi-family markets nationwide. All of the
eight Florida metro markets are rated in a normal condition, down from Strong, based on a
separate map from John Burns Research & Consulting report, see main chart below for national
markets, Current and Historical Sales and Pricing Market Conditions: Top 33 Markets, October
2023.
URS - 232098 Page 65
URS - 232098 Page 66
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
The highest and best use concept is reflective of a basic assumption about real estate and market
behavior; that the price a buyer will pay for a property is based on their conclusion about the
most profitable use of the site or property. Therefore, sites and improved properties tend to be
put to their highest and best uses and, in this manner, maximize the profit potential for the
property owner.
The determination of a property's highest and best use may or may not conform with the existing
use of the site because the alternative uses of the site may be restricted by the presence of
improvements or legal encumbrances. The highest and best use is determined separately for the
land or site as though vacant and available to be put to its highest and best use than for the
improvements.
Highest and best use is defined as, "(1) the reasonably probable use and property that results in
the highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal
permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. (2) the use
of an asset that maximizes its potential and that is possible, legally permissible, and financially
feasible. The highest and best use may be for continuation of an asset’s existing use or for some
alternative use. This is determined by the use that a market participant would have in mind for
that asset when formulating the price that it would be willing to bid. (3) the highest and most
profitable use for which the property is adaptable and needed or likely to be needed in the
reasonably near future. (Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions)."21
The first determination reveals the fact that land value is derived from potential land use. Land
has limited value unless there is a present or anticipated use for it; the amount of value depends
on the nature of the land's anticipated use. According to the concept of surplus productivity, the
highest and best use of a site is that use among all reasonable alternative uses that yields the
highest present land value after payments are made for labor, capital, and coordination.
The highest and best use of a property as improved refers to the optimal use that could be made
of the property, including all existing structures. The implication is that the existing
improvement should be renovated or retained as long as it continues to contribute to the total
market value of the site, or until the return from a new improvement would more than off-set the
cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one.
To determine the highest and best use of the subject site, as if vacant, the use must meet four
criteria. The highest and best use must be 1) legal permissibility, 2) physically possible, 3)
financially feasible, and 4) maximally productive. These criteria should usually be considered
sequentially; a use may be financially feasible, but this is irrelevant if it is physically impossible
or legally prohibited.
21 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Sixth Edition, Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2015, p. 109.
URS - 232098 Page 67
Legal Permissibility
Restrictions, zoning codes, building codes, land use controls, and environmental regulations are
considered because they may preclude many possible highest and best uses.
• The subject site has an overall land use designation of Central Business District CBD,
and is zoned Downtown, in which a variety of commercial and residential uses are
permitted, limited by building height and setbacks, parking and lot coverage
requirements.
• The subject site is of sufficient size to meet minimum development criteria.
Physically Possible
The size, shape, area, and terrain of a site affect uses to which land may be developed.
• The subject site is 113,256 square feet or 2.60 acres, is generally level and readily
developable.
• The site currently has frontage on two local streets Pierce Street and South Osceola
Avenue with average visibility from those streets.
• No soil tests were available. However, improvements in the general area have typically
been constructed without undue foundation expense. Yet, a multi-story development will
likely require soil testing previous to land acquisition.
• Municipal potable water, sewer, garbage collection, electricity and telecommunications
are available.
• Overall, the site size, topography, configuration, and orientation are sufficient for
development.
Financially Feasible
All the potential uses of the subject site that are expected to produce a positive return are
regarded as financially feasible and are examined here.
• The market area population is served by average quality transportation linkages providing
average quality access throughout the county, the MSA and statewide, yet the subject site
is 7 miles to the nearest Interstate access. The market area population, social
characteristics, and income characteristics are average. The outlook for the market area
is positive, with moderate growth expected for the economic base, population and income
characteristics.
• Residential uses are permitted for the subject site, which is suitable for multi-family
development, especially with 250 feet height or more. Tampa metro demand for rental
URS - 232098 Page 68
housing appears to continue and apartment effective rental rates experienced a 0.5%
quarterly decrease after a few years of strong increases. “As rent growth patterns began
to change at the end of 2022, Tampa’s multifamily sector found itself in a strong spot.
The metro’s average rate was $1,798 as of December 2022, following a 0.5% slide on a
trailing three-month basis. Strong development and a propensity for adding upscale
inventory to Tampa’s rental stock have pressured the average occupancy rate in stabilized
properties to 94.7% as of November 2022”, from Yardi Matrix, Tampa: Expansion
Underway, February 2023. Yardi reported Lifestyle average rent at $2,038 and rent-by-
necessity with an average pf $1,534.
Quarterly Rent Changes Indicate Declining Growth Rates
Yardi’s reporting continues. “Developers added 7,268 units to metro Tampa’s
multifamily stock in 2022, accounting for 3.0% of existing inventory. That was 90 basis
points higher than the slowing national rate of multi-family completions. It was also the
market’s second-best year for apartment construction during the past 10 years, trailing
only 2021’s high of 7,754 units. The market had 17,712 units under construction at the
end of 2022. There were another 67,200 apartments in the planning and permitting stages
across metro Tampa. Development is primarily catering to upscale renters, with nearly
90% of units underway at the start of this year set to be added to the Lifestyle quality
segment.”
Although high density appears to be available for development on the subject site and the subject
as if developed with high-rise units will have very good views westerly of the intracoastal
waterway and sunsets beyond Clearwater Beach, the subject is not a beachfront property but a
water-view property. The subject neighborhood is not a major employment or retail hub, and it
is not a full-scale CBD multi-family location such as downtown Tampa or downtown St.
Petersburg, each with continued and increasing development of condos and rental apartments
over the past 10 to 15 years.
Also, the multi-family market has demonstrated signs of a pullback in the last 12 months
corresponding to interest rate increases affecting consumer demand of individual condos.
Acquisitions and developers’ construction costs which have been increasing during that period
URS - 232098 Page 69
with materials and labor; also, insurance costs continue to increase, all of which dampen the
multi-family market for supply of condominium and rental development.
• Office uses are permitted and will fit the site. The office market is stagnant for large
buildings, especially CBD locations, and investors are taking a very conservative
approach to speculative building. However, the market appears to support build to suit
space.
• Retail uses are permitted and will fit the site. The retail market is active including some
speculative buildings under construction, for example, strip centers. Numerous build-to-
suit buildings have been constructed for national credit tenants. However, the subject is
most suitable for ancillary retail as a secondary use.
• Numerous other commercial uses or institutional uses are permitted and will fit the site.
The commercial market continues to be strong in general, yet investors are taking a
conservative approach to speculative building.
Maximally Productive
Physically, the subject can support combinations of building area scenarios in multiple story
designs, limited by floor area ratio and parking requirements. The subject offers high density for
multi-family development.
As if vacant, the maximally productive use of the subject site is for development to a multifamily
use in high-rise design. Depending on the average size of the units, the subject site has potential
for a variety of building configurations. In recent years, the multi-family development market
for rental apartments had favored an average of approximately 1,100 square feet, typically with a
mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units. However, these indications were typically for suburban garden
apartments. Downtown high-rise apartment developments are more likely with smaller average
square feet than suburban rentals. The following chart of apartment sales since mid-2021 in the
Tampa Bay area includes predominantly non-CBD properties with a variety of construction years
and mostly 3 and 4 stories. Mid-rise and high-rise multi-family rental developments generally
have lower average area and the sites are typically smaller than suburban apartment sites.
As may be noted, density per acre for the above apartment sales ranged from 8 units to 150 units
per acre, with the Channelside apartment building at 150 units per acre the only CBD site,
although other CBD sites may have higher density. Applied to the subject, a density of 150 units
Property Name Property Address
Property
City Sale Date YB Sale Price Units
Price Per
Unit
Price
Per SF
Building
SF Avg SF Flr Acres DUA
1 Circa at FishHawk Ranch13930 Spector Rd Lithia 10/8/2021 2015 $66,250,000 260 254,808$ 196$ 338,308 1,301 4 10.30 25
2 Altis Promenade 18065 Promenade Park LnLutz 6/7/2021 2020 $90,400,000 338 267,456$ 256$ 352,771 1,044 3 3.50 97
3 Cortland Gateway 9505 49th St N Pinellas Park 6/30/2021 2020 $78,000,000 288 270,833$ 271$ 288,000 1,000 4 10.15 28
4 Enclave at Tranquility Lake9707 Tranquility Lake CirRiverview 9/13/2022 2009 $98,000,000 348 281,609$ 228$ 429,004 1,233 3 27.93 12
5 Lake 28 22743 Preakness Blvd Land O Lakes 4/26/2022 2004 $71,000,000 252 281,746$ 255$ 277,980 1,103 3 31.52 8
6 Pier 8 at The Preserve 2130 Leather Fern Dr Odessa 7/1/2021 2020 $100,000,000 350 285,714$ 222$ 450,264 1,286 3 17.98 19
7 The Boulevard 2098 Seminole Blvd Largo 1/18/2023 2015 $76,700,000 260 295,000$ 260$ 294,622 1,133 3 8.94 29
8 Axio at Carilon 250 Carillon Pky St. Pete 10/1/2021 2021 $90,850,400 298 304,867$ 305$ 298,000 1,000 5 5.20 57
9 Nexus Brandon 650 Tapestry Ln Brandon 11/9/2021 2020 $88,000,000 287 306,620$ 307$ 287,000 1,000 4 6.10 47
10 ST Channel Club 1115 Twiggs Street Tampa 11/15/2021 2019 $136,000,000 324 419,753$ 392$ 347,060 1,071 22 2.16 150
89,520,040$ 301 296,841$ 269$ 336,301 1,117
Average unit size 971 1.15 load factor
URS - 232098 Page 70
per acre appears reasonable, equivalent to 390 units. We believe the 400 units as proposed is
reasonable for rental apartment development on the subject land and would include five or six
levels of parking plus open and covered surface parking. Parking can be a challenge, depending
on how many are needed by retail tenants. This is only one scenario of several available to a
developer on the subject 2.6 acre site.
Highest and Best Use As If Vacant
Physically, the subject property is suitable for multi-family development, and legally, the subject
site can be developed with such uses. The subject site has good views and transportation
linkages.
Financial analysis of all physically possible and legally permissible uses indicates the property
will be best utilized for a build-to-suit development of a use consistent with zoning regulations,
likely multi-family units.
As if vacant and available, the subject site has a highest and best use to hold for future
development to multi-family units, likely rental apartments, to a minimum density of 400 units.
Highest and Best Use As Improved
The subject is not currently improved.
URS - 232098 Page 71
INTRODUCTION TO THE APPRAISAL PROCESS
Traditionally, three approaches are used to arrive at an estimate of market value, the cost, sales
comparison, and income capitalization approaches. Ideally, each approach, properly employed,
provides an accurate indication of value, but, due to the unique characteristics of various types of
properties, one or more of the approaches may be inappropriate or inapplicable in arriving at an
estimate of value. The three approaches are:
Cost Approach
The cost approach is based on the principle of substitution, that no prudent person would pay
more for a property than the cost to acquire a similar site and construct a building of equal
desirability and utility, assuming no undue or costly delay. The procedure involves first
estimating value of the site as if vacant. Anticipated direct and indirect costs necessary to
reconstruct all improvements are then estimated, predicated upon labor and material prices
prevailing on the appraisal date. From this construction cost estimate, deductions are made for
accrued depreciation caused by physical deterioration and functional and economical
obsolescence. This depreciated cost figure is then added to the estimated value of the site,
resulting in the indication of value by the cost approach. The cost approach is most accurate
when applied to a relatively new structure with no functional deficiencies, and which represents
highest and best use of the site. The depreciation estimates are difficult to precisely measure
from market data, so the indication of value may largely depend on the experience, judgment and
ability of the appraiser, especially for older improvements.
Sales Comparison Approach
The sales comparison approach is also based on the principle of substitution; that a prudent
person would pay no more for a property than the cost to acquire another property of similar
desirability or utility. The process involves the collecting, analyzing, and comparing of sales,
listings and offers for properties similar to the property under appraisement. After the most
comparable property transactions are identified, adjustments are made for such variables as
changes in market conditions since date of sale, location, size, physical characteristics and terms
of sale.
Advantages of the sales comparison approach are that it permits direct comparison of the
property under appraisement to factual market transactions involving similar properties, and that
it is probably the approach most easily understood. Limitations of the sales comparison
approach are that no two properties are identical, and dissimilarities between the comparable
properties and the subject may relate to intangible qualities that are difficult to measure.
Application of this approach may be limited by the lack of data for specific types of properties.
Income Capitalization Approach
The income capitalization approach is based on the principle of anticipation; that value of a
property may be measured by the present worth of anticipated future benefits accruing to the
ownership and use of the property. The procedure involves estimating gross income the property
URS - 232098 Page 72
is capable of producing, then deducting vacancy/collection losses and expenses which might be
incurred in the operation. Resultant net income, as estimated by the appraiser, is converted to an
indication of value through various means of capitalization or discounting.
The income capitalization approach is most accurate in valuation of income producing
properties. If sufficient sales of tenant-occupied, investor-owned comparables may be located,
the income capitalization approach can provide a highly accurate value indication. The
approach, however, has limited application for non-income producing properties, such as vacant
land.
Reconciliation of Value Indications
Final step in the valuation process is reconciliation of value estimates indicated by the
approaches outlined above, weighting each according to their relative importance, based on
market appropriateness and availability and reliability of data. Dependent on type of property
and purpose of appraisal, one or all of the approaches may be considered reliable. Result of this
final reconciliation of values is the estimate of value as defined in the report.
Valuation Methodology
The cost approach and income capitalization approaches were not developed for the subject land
as if vacant. The sales comparison approach includes data of sufficient quantity and quality to
derive a reasonably accurate indication of value and has been developed and reported below.
URS - 232098 Page 73
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
The sales comparison approach, like the cost approach, is based on the principle of substitution;
in other words, the value of a property should be no higher than the cost to acquire another
property offering similar physical or locational attributes.
This procedure involves market research to identify similar properties which have recently sold
or are offered for sale, investigation of the sale transactions to ensure their validity and to
determine motivating forces, and comparison of the sold properties to the subject, adjusting
prices paid for various dissimilarities having a discernible effect on value. We considered
differences for such factors as changes in market conditions since time of sale, locations, number
of developable multi-family units, and if available, terms of the land sale.
The application of the market or sales comparison method requires the appraiser to follow the
following steps:
1. Market research - to obtain information about transactions, listings and other offerings
similar to the subject.
2. Verification of the information to determine if it is factual, accurate, reflects arm’s length
market conditions, and whether any unusual terms or conditions were present.
3. Develop relevant units of comparison.
4. Compare each comparable sale toward the subject according to the typical elements of
comparison for an indicated value of the subject.
5. Reconcile the multiple value indications that result from the comparable sales into a
single value indication.
Applying the sales comparison approach to value to the subject property, these five steps were
employed. In our research of the public records, we searched for sales with a highest and best
use the same as or similar to the highest and best use of the subject. The comparable sales were
verified with a principal of the transaction, or with persons with direct knowledge of the
transaction.
In the verification process, we have attempted to obtain additional data that is normally
appropriate in the sales comparison approach. This data would include the intended use of the
property, mortgage terms, extraordinary acquisition or development costs, and any other data
deemed relevant.
To estimate the value of the site as if vacant, the site is compared with recent sales of sites
having a similar highest and best use and other similar characteristics. Comparable land sales are
reduced to a common denominator or unit of comparison such as price per front foot, price per
square foot or acre, price per buildable square foot, or price per dwelling unit, a common land
use index for multi-family acquisitions. Consideration for factors such as market conditions and
favorable financing, and for locational and physical differences are part of the analysis.
In searching the Public Records, a number of land sales were found. However, several were
discarded, as they were considered so dissimilar that no supportable indication of value for the
URS - 232098 Page 74
subject could be determined. Several land sales, however, exhibited characteristics sufficiently
similar to the subject site and are included in this analysis.
Please refer to the land sales summary chart and location map included within this section for
orientation. The land sale comparables were purchased for development generally consistent
with multi-family use.
Salient data regarding the comparable sales considered most indicative of value of the subject
follow.
URS - 232098 Page 75
Comparable Land Sales
URS - 232098 Page 76
Comparable Land Sale Number 1
Location Linz Bayview Apartments
2975 Gulf To Bay Boulevard
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33759
Date of Sale November 2019
Grantor David William Kirkpatrick, Trustee
Grantee DD Gulf To Bay, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $12,050,000
Adjusted - Demolition $ 900,000
Adjusted Price $13,950,000
Recorded In OR Book 20780 page 2197
Tax Parcel ID 17-29-16-12312-000-0020 plus merged parcel
17-29-16-00000-410-0200 as submerged land
Site Description
Gross Area 7.472 acres, 325,480 square feet
Useable Area 7.472 acres, 325,480 square feet
Plus Submerged Land Owned 1.888 acres
Land Use / Zoning US 19 Regional Center, City of Clearwater
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.50 maximum; 150’ height max
Apartment Development 398 apartments developed 2023
Development Density 53.3 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 77
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,612,687
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,612,687
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $39.79
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $39.79
Sale Price Per Developed Apartment $32,538
Comments
This comparable site is located on south side of Gulf to Bay Boulevard between US 19 and
Bayside Bridge/McMullen Booth Road. The site was formerly a mobile home park with about
85 mobile homes, clubhouse and maintenance building. We estimate overall demolition costs of
approximately $900,000 and added to the purchase price as acquisition land cost. The number of
apartment units for this mid-rise development is 398 plus central parking garage. The buyer
Davis Development has approximately eight luxury apartment developments in Florida and other
developments in several states.
Adjacent to the east of the Linz is newly developed Bainbridge Bayview Apartments with 284
apartments in five and seven story buildings plus a parking garage. To the west is two-story
Grande Bay Apartments built in 1970. The subject land is westerly adjacent to the Grande Bay
development.
The developer offers the following description for Linz Bayside:
“…brand new community, located in Clearwater, Florida, beautiful one, two, and three
bedroom apartments fused with style and modern convenience. You can enjoy luxury
living by lounging around our resort-style pool, getting social in our indoor and
outdoor entertaining areas, or by getting energized in our high endurance fitness
center. Our community offers this and many more luxury amenities...Linz Bayview
Apartments is a large pet-friendly community offering the perfect balance of luxury
and location. We are central to many great shopping, dining, and entertainment
options that the area has to offer. With excellent access to major roads, your morning
commute will be quick and easy“.
:
URS - 232098 Page 78
Verification Davis Development, Kyle Osborne, Morrow
Construction, 770-474-4345; CoStar, Public
Records, Media Releases, Deed, Onsite
Management and Leasing
Under construction including central parking garage nearly completed
Linz Apts Qty.Sq. Ft.Sq. Ft.
Studio 40 465 18,600
1 BR 199 721 143,479
2 BR 139 1,029 143,031
3 BR 20 1,343 26,860
398 331,970
Weighted average 834 Apt size
URS - 232098 Page 79
Comparable Land Sale Number 2
Location Bainbridge Bayview Apartments
2981 Gulf To Bay Boulevard
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33759
Date of Sale October 2019
Grantor Wilder, LLC
Grantee BVT-Bainbridge Bayview Owner, LLP
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $4,700,000
Adjusted - Demolition $ 700,000
Adjusted Price $5,400,000
Recorded In OR Book 20716 page 1134
Tax Parcel ID 17-29-16-12312-000-0010 including submerged
land
Site Description
Gross Land Area 4.380 acres, 190,793 square feet
Useable Land Area 4.380 acres, 190,793 square feet
Plus Submerged Land Owned 1.250 acres
Land Use / Zoning US 19 Regional Center, City of Clearwater
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.50 maximum; 150’ height max
Apartment Development 283 apartments developed 2023
Development Density 64.6 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 80
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,073,058
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,073,058
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $28.30
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $28.30
Sale Price Per Developed Apartment $19,081
Comments
This comparable site is located on south side of Gulf To Bay Boulevard between US 19 and
Bayside Bridge/McMullen Booth Road. The site was formerly a mobile home park Bayside
Trailer Gardens with about 70 mobile homes and office. We estimate overall demolition costs of
approximately $700,000 and added to the purchase price as acquisition land cost. The number of
apartment units for this mid-rise development is 284 plus parking garage below the seven story
building plus a 4.000 square foot club house. Approximately 30 units were committed in the
first two weeks of opening in mid-May 2023. On November 1, 2023 occupancy was 36 units
and another 48 commitments are due for occupancy in December 2023. There are one and two
free-month concessions as is now typical for new developments.
The buyer Bainbridge Companies has approximately five luxury apartment developments in
Florida and other developments in several states. In 2017, the site for Bainbridge at Westshore
Marina was purchased at $37,606 per developable apartment located at 5030 Bridge Street in
South Tampa near Gandy Bridge.
Adjacent to the west of Bainbridge Bayview is the new Linz Bayview Apartments with 398
apartments nearing completion including parking garage. And west of Linz is two-story Grande
Bay Apartments built in 1970.
See representative interior photographs of apartments, https://www.apartments.com/bainbridge-
bayview-clearwater-fl/v2cgh1d/ See floor plans with square feet and monthly rents for currently
available apartments at Bainbridge Bayview, https://bainbridgebayview.com/floorplans/
Source: Leasing office and https://www.forrent.com/fl/clearwater/bainbridge-bayview/f2cgq1r
Verification Bainbridge Companies Wellington Florida, 561-
333-36369; CoStar, Public Records, Media
Releases, Deed, Onsite Management and Leasing
URS - 232098 Page 81
URS - 232098 Page 82
Comparable Land Sale Number 3
Location Cortland Bayside Apartments (developed as
Bainbridge Bayside)
19337 (19355) US Highway 19
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33764
Date of Sale December 2017
Grantor Wilder, LLC
Grantee Bayside Apartments Owner, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $14,700,000
Adjusted - Demolition $ 500,000
Adjusted Price $14,200,000
Recorded In OR Book 21257 page 1163
Tax Parcel ID 20-29-16-01325-000-0020 including sand and
mangrove shore land
Site Description
Gross Land Area 15.599 acres, 679,481 square feet
Useable Land Area 15.599 acres, 679,481 square feet
Plus Mangrove Shore Land Owned 1.54 acres
Land Use / Zoning US 19 Corridor, City of Clearwater
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.50 maximum; 100’ height max
Apartment Development 360 apartments developed 2019
Development Density 23.1 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 83
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $897,509
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $897,509
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $21.34
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $21.34
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $40,278
Comments
This comparable site is located easterly off of US 19, south of Gulf To Bay Boulevard with bay
waterfront of 820 feet. We estimate overall demolition costs of approximately $500,000 for
offices buildings and added that cost to the purchase price as acquisition land cost. The number
of apartment units for this four-story, five-residential building development is 360 plus club
house. The shore boundary includes a narrow 220 foot sandy beach.
The site buyer/developer was Bainbridge Companies, which has approximately five luxury
apartment developments in Florida including two new multi-family developments in Orlando of
390 at 70 DUA and 341 units. In the Tampa Bay area, the site for Bainbridge at Westshore
Marina was purchased in 2017 at $37,606 per developable apartment located at 5030 Bridge
Street in South Tampa near Gandy Bridge.
This US 19 Bainbridge apartment property as completed was sold to US Highway 19N Florida
Partners, LLC (Cortland Company of Atlanta) in November 2020 for $104,200,000 or $289,444
per apartment. Cortland owns six apartment complexes in the Tampa Bay market.
The average apartment size of Cortland Bayside is 1,111 square feet with monthly rents
approximately $1.95 for three bedrooms to $2.65 for one bedrooms, per square foot; the best
locations within a building are likely higher rents.
1 BR/1 B 2 BR/2 B 3 BR/2 B
See representative interior photographs of apartments, https://cortland.com/apartments/cortland-
bayside/gallery/ See floor plans with square feet and monthly rents for currently available
apartments at Cortland Bayview, https://www.apartments.com/cortland-bayside-clearwater-
fl/jn8e0v7/
URS - 232098 Page 84
Verification Bainbridge Companies Wellington FL, 561-333-
3669; CoStar, Public Records, Media Releases,
Deed, Onsite Management and Leasing
URS - 232098 Page 85
Comparable Land Sale Number 4
Location Aventon Lana Apartments
2031 Glass Loop (Off east side of US Highway 19)
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida 33763
Date of Sale September 2021
Grantor Southern Comfort Park, Inc.
Grantee Aventon Clearwater Owner, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $15,559,300
Adjusted - Demolition $ 775,000
Adjusted Price $16,334,300
Recorded In OR Book 21731 page 598
Parcel ID 05-29-16-01833-000-0020
Site Description
Gross Land Area 21.90 acres, 953,964 square feet
Useable Land Area 21.90 acres, 953,964 square feet
Land Use / Zoning US 19 Corridor, City of Clearwater
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.50 maximum; 100’ height max
Apartment Development 396 apartments completed 2023
Development Density 18.1 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 86
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $710,470
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $710,470
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $17.12
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $17.12
Sale Price Per Developed Apartment $41,248
Comments
This comparable site is located easterly off of US 19, north of Gulf To Bay Boulevard, site is
non-water front located two miles north of Gulf To Bay Boulevard. We estimate overall
demolition costs of approximately $775,000 for removal of mobile homes and added that cost to
the purchase price as acquisition land cost. Arbor Shoreline Office Park with four buildings and
59,000 square feet was demolished in preparation of this apartment development.
The number of apartment units for this three-story, ten-residential building development is 396
plus club house. There is a narrow, vegetated conservation strip along the easterly boundary
near the clubhouse. Occupancy started in April 2023 and as of November 1, 2023, 153 units are
occupied, or almost 39% of total units. Concessions are still being offered with one month free
rent.
The site buyer Aventon Companies is a multi-state developer/builder with apartment projects
from Virginia to Florida. Aventon Companies owns seven apartment complexes in Florida. The
Aventon Lana monthly rents are approximately $2.34 for one bedrooms and $2.28 for two
bedrooms, per square foot; the best locations within a building are likely higher rents.
1 BR/1 B 2 BR/2 B
See representative interior photographs and floor plans of apartments, currently under
construction with some finished units.
https://aventonlana.com/?utm_knock=gmb&utm_source=googlemybusiness&utm_medium=orga
nic&utm_campaign=gmblisting
Verification Aventon Companies, Raleigh, NC, 984-777-3363;
Clearwater 727-334-8251; CoStar, Public Records,
Media Releases, Deed, Onsite Management and
Leasing
URS - 232098 Page 87
Clubhouse
Rendering before completion
URS - 232098 Page 88
Comparable Land Sale Number 5
Location Broadstone Westshore Apartments
5105 West Tyson Avenue
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33611
Date of Sale September 2022
Grantor Sajet Properties, LLC
Grantee Westshore Apartments Venture, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $15,500,000
Adjusted $ 0
Adjusted Price $15,500,000
Recorded In OR Book 2022-469411
Parcel ID Folio # 131227-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 11.930 acres, 519,671 square feet
Useable Land Area 11.930 acres, 519,671 square feet
Land Use / Zoning CMU 35/ IG, City of Tampa
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Per approved specific plan
Apartment Development 325 apartments including 40 THs
Development Density 27.2 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 89
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,299,245
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,299,245
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $29.83
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $29.83
Sale Price Per Developed Unit $47,692
Comments
This comparable site is located on the north side of Tyson Avenue, a few blocks south of Gandy
Boulevard, generally in the neighborhood of Westshore Marina District among new high and
mid-rise condominium buildings, townhomes and new apartments. The site has an approved
plan of 325 residences consisting of 285 apartments and 40 THs plus parking garage. These
units will range from 593 square feet to 1,520 square feet. The water draft is conducive to boats
for excursions through Tampa Bay to Gulf of Mexico. The number of slips, if permitted, would
likely be limited to parallel docking along the rebuilt seawall. Rental prices have not been
disclosed. The site under construction with a central garage is complete.
The buyer/developer is Alliance Residential Company of Scottsdale Arizona which has
developed properties in 16 states, including Tampa’s Bleecker Hyde Park and Citrus Village
apartments. The new owner will rebuild the sea wall and opening is expected for late 2024.
This Tyson Avenue land was first placed on the market in 2017 for $19,000,000. Santander
Bank provided $78,000,000 toward the land acquisition and construction.
Verification Alliance Residential Company, Scottsdale, AZ,
602-778-2800; Bobby Anderson 407-755-4272;
CoStar, Public Records, Media Releases, Deed
Preliminary design Three-story central garage
URS - 232098 Page 90
Comparable Land Sale Number 6
Location Tyson south tip apartments
5440 West Tyson Avenue
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33611
Date of Sale June 2021
Grantor Orion Marine Construction, Inc.
Grantee MAA Westshore Exchange, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $23,500,000
Adjusted – Commercial Element $ 1,200,000
Adjusted Price $22,300,000
Recorded In OR Book 2021-286840
Parcel ID Folio # 131191-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 15.868 acres, 691,215 square feet
Useable Land Area 15.868 acres, 691,215 square feet
Land Use / Zoning PD, City of Tampa
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Per approved specific plan
Apartment Development 495 apartments
Development Density 31.2 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 91
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,480,957
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,480,957
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $32.26
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $32.26
Sale Price Per Developed Unit $45,051
Comments
This comparable site is located at the south tip of West Tyson Avenue, southeast of Gandy
Boulevard generally in the neighborhood of Westshore Marina District among new high and
mid-rise condominium buildings, townhomes and apartments. This site has an approved plan of
495 residences plus parking garage. The water draft is conducive to boats for excursions through
Tampa Bay and to Gulf of Mexico. The number of slips, if permitted, may be limited to docking
along the east seawall due to wave action in Tampa Bay. Rental prices have not been disclosed.
The buyer/developer is Mid-America Apartment Communities, a REIT which owns
approximately 300 apartment communities and is based in Germantown, Tennessee. Some
projects offer a few furnished apartments. MAA has 14 communities in the Tampa Bay area.
Verification Mid-American Apartment Communities, 901-682-
6600; CoStar, Public Records, Media Releases,
Deed
Under construction Rendering
URS - 232098 Page 92
Comparable Land Sale Number 7
Location The Emerson Apartments
3015 North Rocky Point Drive
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33607
Date of Sale March 2019
Grantor BBC Rocky Point, LLC
Grantee NR Rocky Point Owner, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $7,800,000
Adjusted $ 0
Adjusted Price $7,800,000
Recorded In OR Book 2019-139709
Parcel ID Folio # 094469-0100
Site Description
Gross Land Area 3.083 acres, 134,315 square feet
Useable Land Area 3.083 acres, 134,315 square feet
Land Use / Zoning PD, City of Tampa
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Per approved specific plan
Apartment Development 180 apartments completed 2022
Development Density 58.4 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 93
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $2,529,636
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $2,529,636
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $58.07
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $58.07
Sale Price Per Developed Apartment $43,333
Comments
This comparable site is located north of SR 60/Courtney Campbell Causeway in the waterfront
Rocky Point neighborhood. The site has been developed with 180 luxury apartments among
mid-rise office buildings, hotels, condominiums, apartments and restaurants. The overall
building is a central nine stories plus two five story wings, all above two levels of parking. The
units recently began occupation in February 2023. There was a reported 57% in pre-lease
commitments.
The units have 10 feet ceilings and balconies. There is a concierge service and business center.
The shoreline is native vegetation with 12 slips generally for boats under 30 feet to pass under
SR 60 bridge from North Rocky Point basin; this is similar to docks and boats in nearby Pelican
Landings and Dana Shores with single-family waterfront subdivisions.
The buyer/developer is Northwood Ravin which has over 25 communities and has coupled with
Framework Group of Florida for this development and for others in Florida.
See representative interior photographs and descriptions of apartments,
https://emersonrockypoint.com/
Verification Northwood Ravin Companies, Charlotte, NC, 704-
714-9460; Tampa 813-443-2144; CoStar, Public
Records, Media Releases, Deed, Onsite
Management and Leasing
URS - 232098 Page 94
Rocky Point Neighborhood
URS - 232098 Page 95
Comparable Land Sale Number 8
Location 533 3rd Avenue South (275 5th Street South)
Downtown St. Petersburg
St. Petersburg, Pinellas County, Florida 33701
Date of Sale April 2023
Grantor Burton W. Wiand, Receiver for Equialt Fund, LLC,
Equialt 519 3rd Ave S, LLC, and EA SIP, LLC
Grantee 5th And 3rd Owner, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $20,250,000
Adjusted $20,250,000
Recorded In ORBP 22409-894
Tax Parcel ID 193117-74466-052-0160;-0140;-0150;-0160;-0170;
-0180; and -0200
Site Description
Gross Land Area 40,000 square feet
Useable Land Area Same
Useable Acres 0.918
Development FAR Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 367 apartments
Development Density 400 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Downtown Center-1, City of St. Petersburg
URS - 232098 Page 96
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $506.25
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $506.25
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $22,052,250
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $55,177
Comments
This parcel is in the downtown core of St. Petersburg with convenient access to Interstate 275.
This site consists of 10 lots as 7 contiguous parcels along the north side 3rd Avenue South. In
addition to full block frontage on 3rd Avenue South, the site has half-block frontage on 5th Street
South and 6th Street South. The property is being developed as 275 5th Street and construction of
the 24-story tower with 511,509 square feet is to begin in the first quarter of 2024 with
completion in early 2026. This neighborhood includes several rental apartment buildings built in
the last ten years and is an employment hub including health and medical facilities and the
Innovation Center along 4th Street South.
Verification Focus Development, Christopher McAdams, 813-
616-8501; CoStar, Public Records, Deed, Media
Foreground land along north side of 3rd Avenue South
URS - 232098 Page 97
Comparable Land Sale Number 9
Location 1515 North Westshore Boulevard
Westshore Business District
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33607
Date of Sale July 2021
Grantor The Auto Club Group, Inc. (AAA Auto Club South)
Grantee Ally 1515, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $8,750,000
Adjusted $8,750,000
Recorded In ORBP 2021-368156
Tax Parcel ID Folio 112131-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 83,670 square feet
Useable Land Area Same
Useable Acres 1.92
Development FAR Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 360 apartments – permits in progress
Development Density 187 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Planned Development, City of Tampa
URS - 232098 Page 98
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $104.58
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $104.58
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $4,555,396
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $24,306
Comments
This parcel is in the Westshore Business District with convenient access to Interstate 275. This
site also has frontage on North Trask Street across from Jefferson High School. Tampa
International Airport and International Plaza are nearby northerly. This neighborhood has
several office buildings and hotels. Buyer/developer plans two 14-story luxury apartment
buildings with garage in between and will provide approximately 6,500 square feet for a high
quality restaurant tenant.
There was no distress in this arm’s length all cash and sale. This parcel had not transferred in
last 40 years.
Verification Ally Capital Group; CoStar, Public Records, Deed,
Media
Rendering - 2025 Completion planned
URS - 232098 Page 99
Comparable Apartment Land Sale Number 10
Location Tapestry University Park Apartments
8350 Carolina Street (Broadway Avenue)
Sarasota, Manatee County, Florida 34243
Date of Sale October 2022
Grantor DCNIG Sarasota 1, LLC
Grantee Arlington University Park, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $9,000,000
Adjusted $ 0
Adjusted Price $9,000,000
Recorded In OR Book 2022-41122355
Parcel ID 2038800059; 2038650004; 2038600009; and
2038900003
Site Description
Gross Area 8.57 acres, 373,309 square feet
Useable Land Area 8.57 acres, 373,309 square feet
Flood Zone District FEMA “X” above 100 year flood area
Land Use / Zoning LM rezoned to PD, Manatee County
Apartment Development 180 apartments permitted
Development Density 21.0 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 100
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,050,176
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,050,176
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $24.11
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $24.11
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $50,000
Comments
This comparable site is four adjacent parcels located one block north of University Parkway
among two other apartment complexes and about two miles westerly to entrance of Sarasota
International Airport. Access to Interstate 75 is 4.5 miles east. There are several trees to be
cleared for development.
The number of apartment units is 180 plus club house as Tapestry University Park. No
commercial element is planned.
The site buyer is Arlington Properties of Birmingham, Alabama with more than 25,000
apartment units developed since 1969, including in several Florida cities.
Verification Arlington Properties, David Ellis, 205-328-9600;
CoStar, Public Records, Deed
URS - 232098 Page 101
Comparable Apartment Land Sale Number 11
Location Collier Artisan Apartments
6100 Gillett Road
Palmetto, Manatee County, Florida 34221
Date of Sale December 2022
Grantor RC Palmetto Apartments, LLC
Grantee Collier Artisan, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $22,000,000
Adjusted $ 0
Adjusted Price $22,000,000
Recorded In OR Book 2022-41151274
Parcel ID 612110159; 612130059; 612110300
Site Description
Gross Land Area 21.19 acres, 923,019 square feet
Useable Land Area 21.19 acres, 923,019 square feet
Flood Zone District FEMA “X” above 100 year flood area
Land Use / Zoning RES-6 rezoned to PD, Manatee County
Apartment Development Scenario 1 405 apartments including part affordable units, or
Apartment Development Scenario 2 300 apartments luxury market units
URS - 232098 Page 102
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,047,684
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,047,684
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $24.05
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $24.05
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $54,815 per 405 units including affordable units
$74,000 per 300 luxury units
Comments
This comparable site is three adjacent parcels located in northwest quadrant of the Interstate 75
and Moccasin Wallow Road interchange. This development is 1.2 miles north of the Interstate
275 connection toward Pinellas County via Skyway Bridge across Tampa Bay. This land was
cleared for development. The location is among several new single-family subdivisions along
Moccasin Wallow Road east and west of Interstate 75.
The number of apartment units of 405 represents bonus units including a ratio of affordable type
units. The current development plan is for 300 units in eight, three-story buildings plus 8,000
square foot club house/fitness center. Parking includes 484 surface spaces plus six garages of six
bays each. No commercial element is planned. The land buyer is Collier Companies of
Gainesville, Florida which has numerous apartment projects throughout Florida, especially in
Gainesville.
Verification Eshenbaugh Land Company, Ryan Sampson 813-
287-8787; CoStar, Public Records, Deed
Rendering of planned apartment buildings
URS - 232098 Page 103
Comparable Land Sale Number 12
Location 10215 Estuary Lakes Drive
Tampa, Florida 33619
Date of Sale March 2023
Grantor I-75/Palm River Road, LLC
Grantee Estuary Apartments Owner, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $10,500,000
Adjusted $10,500,000
Recorded In Inst: 2023131315, page 1 of 4
Tax Parcel ID’s U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00002.0
U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00003.0
U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00004.0
U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00008.0
U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00010.0
U-29-29-20-A4C-000000-00011.0
Site Description
Gross Land Area 8.73 acres; 380,148 square feet
Flood Zone District FEMA “X” above 100 year flood area; “AE” 100
year flood plain area
URS - 232098 Page 104
Land Use / Zoning Commercial
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,203,163
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $27.62
Sale Price Per Unit $34,426
Comments
This comparable site is located one street away from being adjacent to the west side of interstate
highway I-75 and just south of State Road 60 in Tampa. The site is on the south side of Estuary
Lakes Dr. and across the street is a Carvana car dealer with a building car showroom/dispensary.
The neighborhood is characterized by office, retail, and hospitality among other uses.
The site was vacant. The site was also generally cleared and level. All utilities were available.
The buyer plans to develop a 305-unit multi-family complex that will feature about 10,000
square feet of retail space. The community is expected to be comprised of two five-story
apartment buildings and a four-story parking garage. Amenities planned are a clubhouse, fitness
center, pool with a deck and pavilion. There was no distress in this arm’s length transaction and
the sellers did not provide any concessions.
Verification Stephanie Addis, 813-405-0965; CoStar, Public
Records, Deed
URS - 232098 Page 105
Comparable Land Sale Number 13
Location Little Harbor Condominium Site
462 Bahia Beach Boulevard
Ruskin, Hillsborough County, Florida 33570
Date of Sale May 2023
Grantor Harborside Suites, LLC
Grantee Listing
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $16,000,000
Adjusted $ 0
Adjusted Price $16,000,000
Recorded In OR Book NA
Parcel ID Folio # 031587-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 15.162 acres, 660,436 square feet
Useable Land Area 15.162 acres, 660,436 square feet
Land Use / Zoning PD, Hillsborough County
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 330 units including condos or rental apartments as
of July 2023 entitled
Development Density 21.8 DUA
URS - 232098 Page 106
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Acre $1,055,303
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $1,055,303
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $24.23
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $24.23
Sale Price Per Developable Condo $48,485
Comments
This comparable Bahia Beach site is located west of US 41, westerly on West Shell Point Road,
south of Apollo Beach. The site will have excellent westerly views over the east side of Tampa
Bay. Height restriction is 120 feet max. The Little Harbor community has wet slips and indoor
dry slips, resort condos, some in a rental program, townhomes, two restaurants and The Inn at
Little Harbor. The site was under contract last year at asking price, but buyer changed plans.
Verification Align Commercial Realty, Yogesh Melwani, 407-
654-8200; CoStar, Public Records
URS - 232098 Page 107
Comparable Land Sale Number 14
Location 101 and 102 S. Parker St., 110 Kellar Avenue and
108 Cedar Avenue (2 blocks SW of other 3 parcels)
West across river from Tampa downtown core
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33606
Date of Sale July 2022
Grantor Hillsborough River Realty Corp.
Grantee RD RWD Tampa, LLC as Trustee (The Related
Group) v
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $55,490,000
Less Non-MF Elements $ 9,050,000 Student housing, retail, boat slips
Adjusted to MF Land $46,440,000
Recorded In ORBP 2022-353139
Tax Parcel ID Folios 194704-0000; 194707-0000; 194083-0000;
and 194247-0000
Site Description for Multi-Family
MF Gross Land Area 195,376 square feet
MF Useable Land Area 195,376 square feet
MF Useable Acres 4.485
MF Development FAR 241 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Planned Development and CI, City of Tampa
URS - 232098 Page 108
Units of Comparison – Multi-Family Element
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $237.70
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $237.70
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $12,371,757
Allocated Sales Price Per Buildable Unit or Sq. Ft.
Planned/Developed Building Area Mixed Use – Apartments, condos, student housing
and retail plus 10 wet slips on river
Comments
All parcels are vacant. Three of the four parcels are across the street from one another. These
three parcels were previously improved years ago, they now appear to be partially below road
grade by about two to three feet. The fourth parcel, a former parking lot, is two blocks southwest
from the other three. The fourth parcel is proposed for student housing. The other parcels on
Parker Street are proposed for a condominium building on the west side of Parker Street and two
apartment towers on the river side.
This location is west across the river from Tampa downtown core and north across Kennedy
Boulevard is the University of Tampa. For the overall land it is reported that the plan is for 10
boat slips on the river front, approximately 200 student housing apartments with three beds each
on the Cedar Avenue parcel, about 1,080 multi-family units on the Parker Street parcels with
approximately 36,000 square feet of retail space and no designated office use. Kennedy
Boulevard is the main east west commercial street between downtown and Westshore Business
District a distance of four miles.
Buildable Type QTY $ Unit - SF Allocations
MF Units 1,080 43,000$ 46,440,000$
Retail SF 36,000 110$ 3,960,000$
Student Housing 200 25,000$ 5,000,000$
Boat Slips Proposed 10 90,000$
Sale Price 55,490,000$
Other than MF Units (9,050,000)$
MF Units 46,440,000$
Addresses SF Land Sub Totals Acres
102 Parker St 96,596
101 Parker St 79,722
110 Kellar 19,058 195,376 4.485
108 Cedar 44,872
108 Cedar 31,680 76,552 1.757
Totals 271,928 6.243
URS - 232098 Page 109
There was no distress in this arm’s length land sale. City National Bank of Florida provided
$30,500,000 toward the purchase price. These parcels have not been transferred since before
2000.
Verification Buyer The Related Group, Alexis Wong, 305-965-
5567; CoStar, Deed, Public Records, Mortgage
View east along Kennedy Boulevard over Hillsborough River toward west downtown
Comparable land site on right
URS - 232098 Page 110
Comparable Land Sale Number 15
Location North Tampa Street – NEC at Whiting Avenue
Tampa downtown SW core
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33606
Date of Sale October 2023
Grantor HT Downtown Landco VIII, LLC
Grantee ASL Franklin Whiting, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $12,750,000
Adjusted $12,750,000
Recorded In ORBP 2023454191
Tax Parcel ID Folio 193600-0005
Site Description
Gross Land Area 29,524 square feet
Useable Land Area Same
Useable Acres 0.68
Development FAR Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 300 apartments – permits in progress
Development Density 440 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Central Business District-2, City of Tampa
URS - 232098 Page 111
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $431.85
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $431.85
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $18,811,475
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $42,500
Comments
This parcel is in the southwest core of downtown Tampa with convenient access to Selmon
Expressway and Interstates 4 and 275. The site has two corners and has been used as a parking
lot; it is a near rectangular shape.
There was no distress in this arm’s length cash sale. This parcel last transferred for $4,600,000
in April 2019.
Verification Newmark Realty, Matthew Everett, 813-549-9026;
CoStar, Public Records, Deed
URS - 232098 Page 112
Comparable Land Sale Number 16
Location 940 Channelside Drive – SWC at Washington
Tampa downtown NE core
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33602
Date of Sale May 2023
Grantor Dynamic Channelside, LLC
Grantee 940 Channelside, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $7,850,000
Adjusted $7,850,000
Recorded In ORBP 2023217318
Tax Parcel ID Folio 190207-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 21,850 square feet
Useable Land Area Same
Useable Acres 0.50
Development FAR Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 262 units as “The Place” phase II
Development Density 522 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Channel District-3, City of Tampa
URS - 232098 Page 113
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $359.27
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $359.27
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $15,649,703
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $29,962
Comments
This parcel is in the northeast core of downtown Tampa with convenient access to Selmon
Expressway and Interstates 4 and 275. The site is located on a signalized corner and has been
used as a parking lot, it is a rectangular shape. The Place Phase I has been completely developed
with two-eight story buildings including parking on lower floors.
There was no distress in this arm’s length land sale. SJP Investment Properties, LLC provided
$5,735,000 toward the purchase price. This parcel last transferred for $4,730,000 in December
2020.
Verification Buyer Framework Group, Phillip Smith, 813-725-
725-3911; CoStar, Public Records, Deed, Mortgage
URS - 232098 Page 114
Comparable Land Sale Number 17
Location 1237 Twiggs Street – SWC at Channelside Drive
Tampa downtown NE core
Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida 33602
Date of Sale November 2021
Grantor J.H. Williams Oil Company, Inc.
Grantee Hillsborough Madison, LLC
Indicated Consideration
Nominal $8,800,000
Adjusted $8,800,000
Recorded In ORBP 2021 608705
Tax Parcel ID Folio 190170-0000
Site Description
Gross Land Area 89,050 square feet
Useable Land Area Same
Useable Acres 2.04
Development FAR Per approved specific plan
Multi-Family Development 351 units as Parc Madison
Development Density 172 DUA
Land Use / Zoning Channel District-1, City of Tampa
URS - 232098 Page 115
Units of Comparison
Sale Price Per Gross Sq. Ft. $98.82
Sale Price Per Usable Sq. Ft. $98.82
Sale Price Per Usable Acre $4,304,638
Sale Price Per Developable Apartment $25,071
Comments
This parcel is in the northeast core of downtown Tampa with convenient access to Selmon
Expressway and Interstates 4 and 275. The site has two corners and is across the street from
Sparkman Channel and the Port Tampa Bay Authority office building. The site is irregular but a
near rectangular shape.
There was no distress in this arm’s length land sale. Wells Fargo provided $71,732,000 toward
the purchase price and development. This parcel had not been transferred in the last 30 years.
Verification ECI Group, 770-952-1400, CoStar, Public Records,
Deed, Mortgage, Media
URS - 232098 Page 116
Comparable Multi-Family Land Sales Summary Chart
NO.LOCATION
DATE
ORBP
COUNTY
GRANTOR / GRANTEE
COUNTY PARCEL ID #
SALE
PRICE ADJUST
ADJUSTED
PRICE
UPLAND
SQ FT
ACRES
MF UNITS
USABLE
SQ FT
ACRES
DUA
$/SF
$/ACRE
$/UNITS
1 2975 Gulf To Bay Blvd.Nov-19 David Wm. Kirkpatrick Tr.12,050,000$ 900,000$ 12,950,000$ 325,480 325,480 39.79$
Clearwater, FL 33759 20780-2197 DD Gulf To Bay, LLC Demolition 7.472 7.472 1,612,687$
WF Apts Linz Bayview Apts.Pinellas 172916-12312-000-0020 APT Dev Bay view 398 53 32,538$
2 2981 Gulf To Bay Blvd.Oct-19 Wilder, LLC 4,700,000$ 700,000$ 5,400,000$ 190,793 190,793 28.30$
Clearwater, FL 33759 20716-1134 BVT-Bainbridge Bayview Owner Demolition 4.380 4.380 1,073,058$
WF Apts Bainbridge Bayview Apts.Pinellas 172916-12312-000-0010 APT Dev Bay view 283 65 19,081$
3 19337 US Hwy 19 North Dec-17 Wilder, LLC 14,000,000$ 500,000$ 14,500,000$ 679,481 679,481 21.34$
Clearwater, FL 33764 21257-1163 Bayside Apts Owner, LLC Demolition 15.599 15.599 897,509$
Apts Cortland Bayside Apts.Pinellas 202916-01325-000-0020 APT Dev Bay view 360 23 40,278$
4 2031 Glass Loop Sep-21 Southern Comfort Park, Inc.15,559,300$ 775,000$ 16,334,300$ 953,964 953,964 17.12$
Clearwater, FL 33763 21731-598 Aventon Clearwater Owner, LLC Demolition 21.900 21.900 710,470$
Apts Aventon Lana Apts.Pinellas 202916-01325-000-0020 APT Dev Inland 396 18 41,248$
5 5105 Tyson Avenue Sep-22 Sajet Properties, LLC 15,500,000$ -$ 15,500,000$ 519,671 519,671 29.83$
Tampa, FL 33611 2022-469411 Westshore Apartments Venture 11.930 11.930 1,299,245$
Apts 325 Apts + 40 THs Hillsborough Folio # 131227-0000 APT Dev Bay inlet 325 27 47,692$
6 5440 Tyson Avenue Jun-21 Orion Marine Construction, Inc.23,500,000$ (1,200,000)$ 22,300,000$ 691,215 691,215 32.26$
Tampa, FL 33611 2021-286840 MAA Westshore Exchange, LL|C Commercial 15.868 15.868 1,480,957$
Apts Hillsborough Folio # 131191-0000 APT Dev element Bay inlet 495 31 45,051$
7 3015 N. Rocky Point Dr.Mar-19 BBC Rocky Point, LLC 7,800,000$ -$ 7,800,000$ 134,315 134,315 58.07$
Tampa, FL 33607 2019-139709 NR Rocky Point Owner, LLC 3.083 3.083 2,529,636$
WF Apts Emerson Apartments Hillsborough Folio # 094469-0100 APT Dev Small WF 180 58 43,333$
8 533 3rd Ave. S.Apr-23 Receiver For Equialt Fund, LLC 20,250,000$ -$ 20,250,000$ 40,000 40,000 506.25$
St. Pete, FL 33701 22409-894 5th And 3rd Owner, LLC 0.918 0.918 22,052,250$
CBD Apts 275 5th Street - Apts Pinellas 193117-74466-052-0010+6 APT Dev CBD 367 400 55,177$
9 1515 N. Westshore Blvd.Jul-21 The Auto Club GroupSouth, Inc.8,750,000$ -$ 8,750,000$ 83,670 83,670 104.58$
Tampa, FL 33607 2021-368156 Ally 1515, LLC 1.921 1.92 4,555,396$
Apts Office district Hillsborough Folio # 112131-0000 Office District 360 187 24,306$
10 8350 Carolina Street Oct-22 DCNIG Sarasota 1, LLC 9,000,000$ -$ 9,000,000$ 373,309 373,309 24.11$
Sarasota, FL 34243 2022-41122355 Arlington University Park, LLC 8.570 8.570 1,050,176$
Apts Tapestry University Park Manatee 2038800059, etal 3 APT Dev East of airport 180 21 50,000$
11 6100 Gillet Road Dec-22 RC Palmetto Apartments, LLC 22,200,000$ -$ 22,200,000$ 923,019 923,019 24.05$
Palmetto, FL 34221 2022-41151274 Collier Artisan, LLC 21.190 21.190 1,047,684$
Burb Apts Collier Artisan Apts Manatee 612110159, etal 2 APT Dev Suburban 405 19 54,815$
12 10215 Estuary Lakes Dr.Mar-23 I-75/Palm River Road, LLC 10,500,000$ -$ 10,500,000$ 380,148 380,148 27.62$
Tampa, FL 33619 2023-131315 Estuary Apartments Owner, LLC 8.727 8.727 1,203,163$
Burb Apts Estuary Apartments+Hillsborough U292920-A4C-000000-00002.0 APT Dev Suburban 305 35 34,426$
13 462 Bahia Beach Blvd.Oct-23 Harbor Suites, LLC 16,000,000$ -$ 16,000,000$ 660,436 660,436 24.23$
Ruskin, FL 33570 NA Listing 15.162 15.162 1,055,303$
Condo Condo site Little Harbor Hillsborough Folio # 031587-0000 Condo Entitled Bay front 330 22 48,485$
14 101 South Parker St. et al Jul-22 Hillsborough River Realty 55,490,000$ (9,050,000)$ 46,440,000$ 195,376 195,376 237.70$
West side of Tampa CBD 2022-353139 RD RWD Tampa, LLC Other MF Allocation 4.485 4.485 12,371,757$
WF, both Tampa, FL 33606 Hillsborough 4 parcels west of Hills. River Elements CBD fringe 1,080 241 43,000$
15 North Tampa Street Oct-23 HT Downtown Landco VIII, LLC 12,750,000$ -$ 12,750,000$ 29,524 29,524 431.85$
NEC Tampa St. & Whiting 2023-454191 ASL Franklin Whiting, LLC 0.68 0.68 18,811,475$
CBD Apts Tampa, FL 33601 Hillsborough Folio # 193600-0005 CBD 300 443 42,500$
16 940 Channelside Dr.May-23 Dynamic Channelside, LLC 7,850,000$ -$ 7,850,000$ 21,850 21,850 359.27$
SWC @ Washington St.2023-217318 940 Channelside, LLC 0.50 0.50 15,649,703$
CBD Condo Tampa, FL 33601 Hillsborough Folio # 190207-0000 CBD 279 556 28,136$
17 1237 E. Twiggs Street Nov-21 J.H. Williams Oil Co., Inc.8,800,000$ -$ 8,800,000$ 89,050 89,050 98.82$
SWC @ Channelside Dr.2021-608705 Hillsborough Madison, LLC 2.04 2.04 4,304,638$
CBD Apts Tampa, FL 33602 Hillsborough Folio # 190170-0000 CBD 351 172 25,071$
URS - 232098 Page 117
Comparable Land Sales Map
URS - 232098 Page 118
Analysis of Comparable Land Sales
All comparable land sales are compared toward the subject site for either the comparable sites’
superior or inferior characteristics in relation to the subject site.
Multi-family land properties are typically analyzed on a unit of comparison basis. The unit of
comparison to be used is that unit customarily used in the market in the subject property’s locale.
After discussions with residential and commercial developers and investors and as evidenced by
market activity, it is believed the overall sale price per planned, entitled or developed multi-
family unit is appropriate as the unit of comparison for the sales comparison approach.
These land comparables represent prices paid for sites for upscale apartments, some with large
pools, waterfront views, roof top lounges/bars, club houses, fitness centers, business centers,
structured parking garages and other quality features attracting lessees for monthly rent generally
between $2.50 to $3.50 per square foot and higher for studio units and for the best located units
within buildings. Rental rates are highest in downtown Tampa, up to $4.50 per square foot for
small apartments, followed by St. Petersburg. (Developers state that $4.00 rents are necessary to
support new urban development.) Apartments in this category typically have high quality
appliances and fixtures, balconies, wet sprinklered systems for fire protection and other features.
There were a variety of comparable land sales found in the overall market. The sales presented
herein are the best data available and represent a reasonable basis from which to estimate value
of the subject in the current market.
Conditions of Sale
There may be a variety of conditions of a sale for which adjustments are applicable, including
contributory value of FF&E or personal property, business value, below-market seller financing,
pay-outs by buyer such as for back taxes, and atypical motivation by buyers or sellers, such as
the duress to sell under threat of foreclosure or quick liquidation of a lender-owned property.
Conditions of sale are important to the explanation of each transaction. The conditions of sale
for most commercial property transactions conform to the definition of market value. That is,
there is a reasonable amount of exposure time, buyers and sellers are well informed of the
property and the market, and neither buyer nor seller is under duress to transact.
The comparable sales were verified as arm’s length transactions, and all sales were found to be
equivalent to cash transactions. All sales represent realty. The motivations of the buyers and
sellers were found to be typical for the marketplace. Transactions reflected an investor’s
motivation to buy.
Market Conditions
The comparable land sales are compared for changes in market conditions which have occurred
between the date of the comparable land sale and the date of the value estimate of the subject
site. The degree of the adjustment is in proportion to the magnitude of change that has occurred
URS - 232098 Page 119
in the market for land in the subject property’s locale, between the date of the comparable land
sale and the date of valuation of the subject site. The greater the magnitude of change that has
occurred, the greater the upward or downward adjustment is be applied to the comparable price.
Supported by increasing demand, it appears land prices in the market area had increased steadily
until about 2007, when the economic slowdown began and were declining by 2008. The decline
of values increased in 2009, was generally flat in 2010 and 2011 and began slowly improving by
2012. Prices increased rapidly from 2013 through 2015, then the increases moderated, yet
continued upward until early 2020 when the Covid pandemic began. Some properties were
affected more than others. For instance, land for marina development increased to all-time
highs, while land for retail declined in value. In Florida, with few Covid lockdowns and
continual growth, prices increased in 2021 and 2022, yet there are signs of slowing and even a
decline of prices. Recorded closing dates are often several months after the initial purchase
contract for development land.
Contributory Value
In cases when a comparable sale has improvements which contributed to the purchase price, the
estimated value of those improvements may be subtracted from the purchase price in order to
estimate the portion of the price paid for the land. Also, any personal property which may have
contributed to a transaction price is subtracted in order to determine the price paid for the real
property. Conversely, when existing improvements or personal property are costly to remove in
order to prepare the real property for highest and best use, the removal expenses may be added to
the purchase price.
Extraordinary Site Development Costs
Extraordinary site development costs include any cost necessary to ready the comparable site for
development in excess of what is typical in the market and applicable to the subject. The
extraordinary costs may include excessive grading, fill dirt, legal expenses, off-site
improvements, etc. Where applicable, cost of extraordinary site development is added to the
nominal purchase price of the comparable sites to render the adjusted purchase price. No
comparable sales were adjusted for these factors. In the case of significant demolition costs
necessary to the buyer, such cost is added to the comparable transaction price.
Zoning and Land Use and Dwelling Units Per Acre (DUA)
This category considers differences in the zoning, current and future land use of the comparables
as related to the subject. Properties allowing more intensive uses typically sell for higher prices
per unit than those with more use restrictions in place and are adjusted accordingly. Zoning
designations of the comparables were the same or reasonably similar to the subject and required
no adjustment. In some cases, regulations may provide for a greater density than actually
developed. The decision of a developer to construct a project at below the maximum allowable
density permitted is based on an economic rationale, balancing construction cost savings with
unit absorption. Multi-family developments often do not exceed 350 units per phase in a single
URS - 232098 Page 120
project based on expected absorption and to minimize construction costs and holding costs, but
may be higher in CBD urban settings.
Floor Area Ratio – FAR
The Floor Area Ratio reflects the ratio of land to building area, which affects ease of access,
parking and the ability to expand. For example, a small site will feel cramped, and a parking
space may not be available during certain times of the day. The number of stories varied for the
mostly midrise comparable developments. Many of the comparables have structured parking
planned with the apartment buildings. City of Clearwater responded that parking is not included
in the FAR formula. Complementing the FAR comparison is density and the comparison of the
number of dwelling units per acre (DUA). DUA’s are an important index and are a function of
building height and the size of units. Suburban apartments may have a density of 15 units per
acre and promote garden style apartments, while urban sites are developed to much higher
density and promote high rise buildings. Construction costs for high rise buildings are typically
much higher per square foot than low or mid-rise construction, plus parking must be constructed.
Rather than buying extra land for surface parking, urban developers must construct garages at a
significant cost per parking space; this is one reason that CBD urban rents are necessarily higher
than suburban rents.
Location
The comparison for location is made for market relevant factors such as proximity to
complementary supporting uses, transportation linkages, population and labor markets, and
visibility, which is typically applicable to retail and other commercial uses benefitting from such
visibility. The subject has a good location, offering westerly views over Clearwater Bay toward
Clearwater Beach, and expansive views of sunsets are very good. Some of the comparables are
bay waterfront and a few comparables are in the high demand CBDs of Tampa or St. Petersburg.
Comparisons for location were appropriately given consideration.
Physical Characteristics
Adjustments were made for terrain, soil characteristics, configuration, site access, available
utilities and the general utility or developability of the site. Utilities, terrain and soil
characteristics of the comparables were generally similar to the subject. Site access varied
somewhat among the comparables, yet overall similar to the subject. Configuration and site
utility of the comparable sales were generally similar to the subject.
Land Size
The comparison for differences in land size is based upon the economic principle of diminishing
marginal returns, which states that the rate of return beyond a certain point fails to increase in
proportion to additional investments of labor or capital. Capital in this sense refers to physical
assets such as land or building, and not money. The above principle indicates that the greater the
land area, or the quantity of land units purchased, a developer will typically pay less for each
additional land unit, thus lowering the overall average unit sale price. Higher density sites
URS - 232098 Page 121
follow the same pattern, that larger sites may have a lower average price per unit for land. The
difficulty in analyzing this factor is that construction costs begin increasing as building height
increases, so the concept may not apply, particularly for those developments over 75 feet or
about seven stories. Although assemblage or plottage may be necessary and result in the
assembled site having greater value than the sum of the parts, this truism states that larger sites
will typically sell for a lower price per square foot or per acre than smaller sites.
However, due to building regulations for FARs and maximum heights, the land size may be less
important for direct comparison because the primary unit of comparison is the land price paid per
developable multi-family unit. The land size adjustment may not be applicable.
Summary of Sales Comparison Approach
Summary Chart of Land Sales
We have presented a variety of multifamily land sales including many urban sites with high
density. The sales indicated a range of prices from $19,081 to $55,177 per proposed multi-
family unit. Transactional and market conditions and locational and physical differences were
considered and they varied among the several comparables.
We excluded Sale 2 as a low-price outlier as it is an older sale and also due to its extended time
for contract closing and for its approvals of project design. Also, we excluded Sale 11 as a high-
price outlier for a suburban development. The sales range is marginally narrower, from $25,071
to $55,177 per multi-family unit, with the higher price for a downtown St. Petersburg site.
NO.LOCATION DATE GRANTEE
ADJUSTED
PRICE
MF
UNITS
USABLE
ACRES
PRICE
PER UNIT DUA MF TYPE
1 2975 Gulf To Bay Blvd.Nov-19 DD Gulf To Bay, LLC 12,950,000$ 398 7.472 32,538$ 53 WF Apts
2 2981 Gulf To Bay Blvd.Oct-19 BVT-Bainbridge Bayview Owner 5,400,000$ 283 4.380 19,081$ 65 WF Apts
3 19337 US Hwy 19 North Dec-17 Bayside Apts Owner, LLC 14,500,000$ 360 15.599 40,278$ 23 Apts
4 2031 Glass Loop Sep-21 Aventon Clearwater Owner, LLC 16,334,300$ 396 21.900 41,248$ 18 Apts
5 5105 Tyson Avenue Sep-22 Westshore Apartments Venture 15,500,000$ 325 11.930 47,692$ 27 Apts
6 5440 Tyson Avenue Jun-21 MAA Westshore Exchange, LL|C 22,300,000$ 495 15.868 45,051$ 31 Apts
7 3015 N. Rocky Point Dr.Mar-19 NR Rocky Point Owner, LLC 7,800,000$ 180 3.083 43,333$ 58 WF Apts
8 533 3rd Ave. S.Apr-23 5th And 3rd Owner, LLC 20,250,000$ 367 0.918 55,177$ 400 CBD Apts
9 1515 N. Westshore Blvd.Jul-21 Ally 1515, LLC 8,750,000$ 360 1.921 24,306$ 187 Apts
10 8350 Carolina Street Oct-22 Arlington University Park, LLC 9,000,000$ 180 8.570 50,000$ 21 Apts
11 6100 Gillet Road Dec-22 Collier Artisan, LLC 22,200,000$ 405 21.190 54,815$ 19 Burb Apts
12 10215 Estuary Lakes Dr.Mar-23 Estuary Apartments Owner, LLC 10,500,000$ 305 8.727 34,426$ 35 Burb Apts
13 462 Bahia Beach Blvd.Oct-23 Listing 16,000,000$ 330 15.162 48,485$ 22 Condo
14 101 South Parker St. et al Jul-22 RD RWD Tampa, LLC 46,400,000$ 1,008 6.243 46,032$ 161 WF, both
15 xxx North Tampa Street Oct-23 ASL Franklin Whiting, LLC 12,750,000$ 300 0.678 42,500$ 443 CBD Apts
16 940 Channelside Dr.May-23 940 Channelside, LLC 7,850,000$ 279 0.502 28,136$ 556 CBD Condo
17 1237 E. Twiggs Street Nov-21 Hillsborough Madison, LLC 8,800,000$ 351 2.044 25,071$ 172 CBD Apts
URS - 232098 Page 122
There have been multiple challenging influences for the multi-family development market
accumulating over the past year. The cost of construction labor and materials increased
significantly, interest rates increased rapidly and lenders tightened loan terms. There has been a
flattening or even lowering of rents, and Florida insurance costs per completed apartment unit
have dramatically increased, from perhaps $1,500 to $2,500 per unit per year. No developer we
spoke with is considering starting a new project at this time.
While demand for all housing types continues to grow, much of that demand is by households
who are not financially capable of buying new single-family or condominium units, and, as the
economy slows, high rental rates are susceptible to being reduced. New apartment developments
may experience slow absorption. Very low interest rates in 2021 and first-half 2022 spoiled the
consumer for housing ownership affordability in this current market. For developers, higher
interest rates contribute to projects being unfeasible.
Note that condominiums are typically developed at a lower density than rental apartments,
offering larger units or broader views. This often results in a higher price paid for land on a per-
unit basis. However, the condominium development market is experiencing the same market
forces as rental apartments and it is unlikely that a developer would consider beginning a
development at this time, even if the City of Clearwater was amenable to condominium
development.
The quandary for an appraiser is that we have recent closings at prices that were negotiated and
loans secured a year or more ago, but no one is looking to begin a new project today. Therefore,
prices just paid may not be representative of current pricing.
The prices paid per apartment unit varied among the comparable sales based on dates of recorded
sale, downtown versus urban or suburban locations, the number of units and building designs.
Considering the current multi-family market and the several challenges facing developers and
investors, few developers are planning new developments. Most expect 2024 to be no better
than 2023 and many expect a recession. 2025 could well be a recession year as well, but
developers know demand will return and, if interest rates come down in 2024 or 2025 they will
be inclined to move forward with land acquisitions and development.
A longer marketing time for multi-family land and a lower price per unit than experienced in
2021 and 2022 is believed appropriate. However, there are no sales reflecting current conditions
so the prices must be adjusted. For this analysis, we begin with what would be a current value
based on locational and physical conditions and will then discuss a present value. The City is
desirous of having the developer immediately commence development.
The subject was originally proposed at 600 units, then reduced to 400 units. For our generic
analysis, we estimate that a typical development would be based on a density of approximately
150 units per acre. At 2.60 acres, this is basically 400 units as proposed. This analysis would
assume a marketing time of two to three years. Reducing this time for a quick sale would be
referred to as a disposition value.
URS - 232098 Page 123
It is our opinion that $30,000 per apartment unit best represents market value for the subject 2.60
acres as a 400 unit development based on an expected 24 to 36 month marketing period.
400 Multi-family rental units x $30,000 per rental unit = $12,000,000
URS - 232098 Page 124
Disposition Value
The City is desirous of a quick sale of the property and the value for a quick sale in a slow
market is often referred to as disposition value. A quick sale in a slow market requires a
sufficient discount to attract capital. This is the first step, although there is no assurance that
development would proceed immediately even if the land were acquired at no cost. Land cost is
perhaps 10% of an overall development budget, so, when costs have increased 20%, even free
land may not suffice for a feasible development.
Disposition Value is: “The most probable price that a specific interest in a property should bring
under the following conditions.”
1 Consummation of a sale within a specified period of time, which is shorter than the
typical exposure time for such a property in that market.
2 The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of the date of valuation.
3 Both buyer and seller are acting prudently and knowledgeably.
4 The seller is under compulsion to sell.
5 The buyer is typically motivated.
6 Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best interest.
7 An adequate marketing effort will be made during the exposure time.
8 Payment will be made in cash in US dollars (or local currency) or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable thereto.
9 The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by special
or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.
Based on the current market for new multifamily development, a sale at a typical price is
unlikely to occur for an approximate two to three year period. Once under contract, a typical
developer will require six months to one year for due diligence.
There are few if any new land acquisitions occurring unless the project began planning a year or
more ago, and sales that are closing today were negotiated prior to the increase in interest rates,
so we have no closed sales to point to as representing current values; that is, agreements to
purchase that have occurred in the last 60 days or so. Our discussions with a number of
developers indicate that the increases in construction costs and interest rates have rendered
current development infeasible, and none would consider currently acquiring a site just to
speculatively hold it for two to three years.
If no developer-user is available today to acquire a site and pay a typical price, the alternate
buyer is an investor or speculator. Although we are not at that stage of the economy to analyze
distress sales, in years past we conducted a number of studies in order to estimate a discount that
would allow a profit sufficient for an investor to acquire a site to resell when the market
strengthened. In those studies we found that a discount of 30% to 40% was necessary to attract
an investor to pay what is best referred to as a liquidation value.
Deducting an estimate of 30% from value indicates the following.
URS - 232098 Page 125
Market Value $12,000,000
Less Discount $ 3,600,000
Liquidation Value $ 8,400,000
According to RealtyRates.com, 4th Quarter 2023 Investor Survey report, discount rates for land
leases ranged from 6.89% to 18.65%. Apartment sites are at the lower end, with a range from
6.89% to 11.45%. This 30% discount would equate to a yield of approximately 12%, considered
reasonable in this economic climate. This estimated value should be sufficient to attract an
investor to acquire the subject site within a six month marketing period.
Additional economic incentives will likely be necessary to entice a developer to proceed with
development.
URS - 232098 Page 126
RECONCILIATION AND FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE
The value conclusions of the Cost, Sales Comparison and Income Capitalization Approaches are
as follows:
Cost Approach N/A
Sales Comparison Approach $12,000,000
Income Capitalization Approach N/A
The cost approach is most appropriate when the improvements represent the highest and best use
of the site. However, as the site is vacant the cost approach was not employed.
The income capitalization approach was not utilized in the estimation of value for the subject
property as vacant land.
The sales comparison approach employs the principle of substitution, meaning that a buyer
would pay no more for the subject property than the price for which they could acquire a similar
property offering similar utility and investor goal fulfillment. A variety of sales of properties
similar to the subject were found throughout the market, and those considered most applicable to
the subject were included within the report. Based on analysis of these sales, the indication of
value of the subject by the sales comparison approach is considered quite reliable and is a
credible indication of market value.
Therefore, with full weight on the value estimate by the sales comparison approach, it is our
opinion that the market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, in as-is condition
with an extended marketing period and as of the appraisal date, November 3, 2023, is
approximately $12,000,000. It is also our opinion that the subject has a disposition value of
approximately $8,400,000 with a marketing period of approximately six months.
URS - 232098 Page 127
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. The conclusions as to market value contained herein represent the opinion of the undersigned
and are not to be construed in any way as a guarantee or warranty, either expressed or implied,
that the property described herein will actually sell for the market value contained in this
opinion.
2. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title
considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise
stated.
3. No furniture, furnishings, or equipment, unless specifically indicated herein, has been
included in our value conclusions. Only the real estate has been considered.
4. The property is appraised free and clear of all encumbrances, unless otherwise noted.
5. No survey of the property was made or caused to be made by the appraiser. It is assumed the
legal description closely delineates the property. It was checked with public records for
accuracy. Drawings in this report are to assist the reader in visualizing the property and are only
an approximation of grounds or building plan.
6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property's subsoil or
structure that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or
for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them.
7. Subsurface rights (minerals, oil, or water) were not considered in this report.
8. Description and condition of physical improvements, if any, described herein are based on
visual observation. As no engineering tests were conducted, no liability can be assumed for
soundness of structural members.
9. The appraiser has inspected any improvements. Unless otherwise noted, subject
improvements are assumed to be free of termites, dry rot, wet rot, or other infestation. Inspection
by a reputable pest control company is recommended for any existing improvement.
10. All value estimates have been made contingent on zoning regulations and land use plans in
effect as of the date of appraisal and based on information provided by governmental authorities
and employees.
11. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local
environmental laws and regulations, unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in
the appraisal report.
12. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and land use regulations and restrictions have been
complied with, unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal
report.
URS - 232098 Page 128
13. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other
legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private
entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value
estimate contained in this report is predicated.
14. No responsibility is assumed by the appraiser for applicability of "concurrency laws",
referring to the 1985 amendments to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. At this time, it is unclear
what effect, if any, these laws might have on any property in any given county. As various
legislative and judicial action is pending, the reader is cautioned to fully investigate the
likelihood of development moratorium or other governmental action with appropriate municipal,
county, or state officials.
15. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or
property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless
noted in the report.
16. Appraisal does not constitute an inspection for compliance with local building, fire, or zoning
codes. Reader is advised to contact local government offices to ensure compliance with
applicable ordinances.
17. This appraisal report covers only the premises herein; and no figures provided, analysis
thereof, or any unit values derived therefrom are to be construed as applicable to any other
property, however similar they may be.
18. Distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only
under the existing program of utilization. Separate valuations of land and improvements must
not be used in any other manner, nor in conjunction with any other appraisal, and are invalid if so
used.
19. Certain data used in compiling this report was furnished by the client, his counsel,
employees, and/or agent, or from other sources believed reliable. However, no liability or
responsibility may be assumed for complete accuracy.
20. An effort was made to verify each comparable sale noted in the report. There are times when
it is impossible to confirm a sale with the parties involved in the transaction; however, all sales
are confirmed through public records.
21. Consideration for preparation of this appraisal report is payment in full by the client of all
charges due the appraiser in connection therewith. Any responsibility by the appraiser for any
part of this report is conditioned upon full and timely payment.
22. The appraiser, by reason of this report, is not required to give testimony in court with
reference to the property herein, nor obligated to appear before any governmental body, board, or
agent, unless arrangements have been previously made therefor.
URS - 232098 Page 129
23. Unless otherwise noted, this appraisal has been prepared solely for the private use of the
client who is listed above as the addressee. No other party is entitled to rely on the information,
conclusions, or opinions contained herein.
24. Neither all nor any portion of the contents of this appraisal shall be conveyed to the public
through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without the written consent and
approval of the appraiser, particularly as to valuation conclusions, identity of the appraiser or
firm with which he is connected, or any reference to the Appraisal Institute or to the MAI
designation. Furthermore, neither all nor any portion of the contents of this appraisal shall be
used in connection with any offer, sale, or purchase of a security (as that term is defined in
Section 2(l) of the Securities Act of 1933) without the prior express written consent of the
appraiser.
25. Possession of this report or copy thereof does not convey any right of reproduction or
publication, nor may it be used by any but the client, the mortgagee, or its successors or assigns,
mortgage insurers, or any state or federal department or agency without the prior written consent
of both the client and the appraiser, and, in any event, only in its entirety.
26. Before any loans or commitments are made predicated on value conclusions reported in this
appraisal, the mortgagee should verify facts and valuation conclusions contained in this report
with the appraiser.
27. Cost estimates for construction or reproduction of improvements are based on information
from Marshall Valuation Service and other sources referenced in the report and are assumed
accurate.
28. Estimates of expenses, particularly as to assessment by the County Property Appraiser and
subsequent taxes, are based on historical or typical data. Such estimates are based on
assumptions and projections which, as with any prediction, are affected by external forces, many
unforeseeable. While all estimates are based on our best knowledge and belief, no responsibility
can be assumed that such projections will come true.
29. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed.
30. Unless stated otherwise, the possibility of hazardous material, which may or may not be
present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser during the course of the normal
inspection and research conducted during the appraisal assignment. The appraiser, however, is
not professionally qualified to detect such substances, and inspection by a professional in the
field is recommended for any property. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-
formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials could affect the value of
the property, if found. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such
material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for
any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them.
This appraisal report is subject to receipt of an environmental audit confirming that no hazardous
or toxic material is located on the premises. Should such material be discovered, final value
estimates herein would be reduced by the cost to remove such substances and to restore the
URS - 232098 Page 130
premises to serviceable condition and may further be reduced by indirect expenses and income
losses incurred by the owner during abatement. Such adjustments to the value estimate
contained herein may be made only by the appraiser and only upon receipt of the environmental
audit, construction cost estimates and other data satisfactory to the appraiser at his sole
discretion.
31. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted in 1990, provided civil rights protection
to persons with disabilities. Title III of this act provides that persons with disabilities are to be
provided access equal to, or similar to, that available to the general public in all areas of "public
accommodation," which generally means any retail, recreation, social service or lodging
establishment. It does not apply to "commercial facilities," which could be a single-tenant office
or manufacturing facility, and generally does not require alterations to existing buildings, unless
other alterations are made. This latter is subject to interpretation, but it should be assumed that
any significant renovation requiring a building permit will also require that the building be
brought to current handicap requirements for all or a portion of the building. The appraiser is not
professionally qualified in these matters, this appraisal does not constitute an inspection as to
compliance with the provisions of the act, and no responsibility is assumed for any known or
unknown conditions related to the act, civil rights or building code provisions. A number of
professional engineering firms specialize in these matters, and such professional advice should
be obtained if there is any doubt as to conformity existing.
URS - 232098 Page 131
APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS
QUALIFICATIONS OF
H. L INWOOD G ILBERT, J R ., MAI
P R E S I D E N T
PRESIDENT, URBAN REALTY SOLUTIONS – TAMPA, FLORIDA, DECEMBER 1991 TO PRESENT
Mr. Gilbert is the principal of Urban Realty Solutions, a real estate research and appraisal firm providing
market value appraisals, market studies, feasibility analyses, damage studies and litigation support on
marina, commercial, industrial and residential developments. Services available through related firms
include owner representation, market research, site selection, permitting, development budgets, marketing
plans, brokerage, construction progress inspections, property management and cash flow and absorption
projections. Financial analysis through use of Argus and other software. Consultation with municipalities
and private investors regarding economic impacts and multiplier effect of public construction and
development incentives.
Litigation support for construction damages, lost profits, inverse condemnation and Bert J. Harris Act
damages due to imposition of Inordinate Burden.
Experience includes development, construction, brokerage and property management for a variety of
office, retail, industrial and marina developments. Appraisals have included all types and sizes of
residential, commercial, industrial, retail and resort properties.
Mr. Gilbert has qualified as an expert witness in bankruptcy, state and federal courts and in the US Virgin
Islands.
The firm is incorporated as Gilbert Associates, Inc., DBA Urban Realty Solutions, and has been in
operation since 1991.
LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS
Florida State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License Number RZ0940
Florida Licensed Real Estate Broker Numbers BK272378 and BK3005632
Georgia State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser No. 363425
Maryland State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser
South Carolina Licensed Real Estate Broker No. 94753
Merchant Marine Master Captain License 3043346
Numerous Temporary and Reciprocal Licenses across the United States and Caribbean
EDUCATION
University of Georgia, Bachelor of Business Administration, 1973
Major in General Business
Minors in Finance, Management, Marketing and Real Estate
CONTINUING EDUCATION
Courses 101 and 201
Society of Real Estate Appraisers
Course II, Urban Properties
(Commercial/Income)
Course VI, Investment Analysis
Course VIII, Residential Appraisal
Capitalization Theories and Techniques (IBB)
Rate Extraction Seminar
Course X, Market Analysis
Standards of Professional Practice
Applied Appraisal Techniques
Valuation Litigation / Mock Trial
Capital Market Influences on Real Estate
Valuation
Analyzing Operating Expenses
USPAP “Core” Update for Appraisers
Power Lines and Electro-Magnetic Fields
Effect on Value and People
Eminent Domain and Land Valuation
Litigation – ALI/ABA
Litigation Skills for the Appraiser: An Overview
Construction Contracts – Strategies for Project
Completion and Litigation Avoidance
CLE Eminent Domain Conference 2001
Appraisals & Federal Regulations
The Valuation of Wetlands
Appraising for Pension Fund Portfolios
Development Analysis
Valuation of Hotels and Motels
Income Capitalization Workshop
Advanced Capitalization Workshop
Calculator and Computer Solutions to
Contemporary Problems
Hewlett Packard Financial Calculators –
Advanced Course
Impact of Environmental Considerations on
Real Estate Appraisals
Appraisal Regulations of the Federal Banking
Agencies
Discount and Capitalization Rate Components
The Appraiser as Expert Witness
Complex Litigation Appraisal
Discount and Capitalization Rate Components
Understanding Limited Appraisals and
Reporting Options
Tax Credits for Low Income Housing
Fair Lending and the Appraiser
Appraisal of Nursing Facilities
Economic Worth of On-Premise Signage
Florida Ad Valorem Property Tax Update
Regulatory Takings & Property Rights
Transportation Issues & Eminent Domain
Regression Analysis in Appraisals
Analyzing Distressed Real Estate
Marina Retrofit, Redesign & Construction
FDEP Appraising Submerged Land Easements
Developing Resort, 2nd Home and Golf Course
Communities, Urban Land Institute
Valuing Enhancement Projects (LEED Green
Buildings) & Financial Returns, BOMI
Marina Dry Stack Conference, AMI
Green Marina Design
Marina Shoreline Development &
Permitting, LSI
Feasibility, Investment Timing & Options, AI
Florida State Law Update for Real Estate Appraisers
National USPAP Update Course
Business Practices and Ethics
Inverse Condemnation
New Technology for the Real Estate Appraiser
Instructor Leadership and Development Conference
Separating Real and Personal Property from Intangible
Business Assets
Analyzing Commercial Lease Clauses
Litigation Appraisal
The Appraiser As An Expert Witness
Oil Spills and Property Values
Supervisor/Trainee Roles & Rules
Professional’s Guide to Uniform Residential Appraisal
Report
IRS Valuation
Federal Agencies and Appraisal: Program Updates
Green Building for Appraisers
Valuation of Solar Photovoltaic Systems
H. Linwood Gilbert, Jr., MAI, has completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute.
Mr. Gilbert has also attended courses and seminars covering various aspects of real estate valuation, lending,
leasing, marketing and management sponsored by The Urban Land Institute, The Ohio State University, The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Robert Morris Associates, The Northwest Center for Professional Education,
New York University, St. Petersburg College, the University of Shopping Centers (sponsored by The International
Council of Shopping Centers), CCIM Institute, Federal Housing Administration, the Environmental Assessment
Association and others. He has been a guest lecturer at NAIOP Real Estate Development course, Instructor of a
Real Estate Appraisal Course for the International Marina Institute and was guest lecturer at the St. Petersburg BAR
Association on ad valorem taxation. Mr. Gilbert is qualified as an Expert Witness in real estate valuation matters in
bankruptcy and civil courts.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
April 1993 to September 2004 Principal, Executive Vice President, Urban Economics, Inc. –Tampa, Florida
Principal of real estate research and appraisal firm providing services similar to those
provided under Urban Realty Solutions. The firm also focused on support for
litigation through valuation and damage studies. Broker of transactions totaling
$100+ million.
February 1991 to Current President, Gilbert Associates, Inc. – St. Petersburg, Florida
Real estate consulting firm providing market research, highest and best use analysis
and other financial planning and marketing services. Prepared guidelines for the
marketing, construction and management of distressed developments, including
determination of status of development approvals, such as Development of Regional
Impact, environmental and local permitting; assistance in selection of consultants and
contractors, and value engineering for proposed construction. Broker of record for St.
Petersburg CBD Master Retail Development company, including oversight of the St.
Petersburg Pier Festive Market.
1983 to February 1991 Vice President, Development, Talquin Development Company –
St. Petersburg, Florida
Responsible for development of all projects in the Tampa Bay area for this Florida
Progress Corporation subsidiary, which was begun by Gilbert and two partners and
later acquired by Florida Progress. Conducted feasibility analyses for most projects
undertaken by Development Division. Managed Development Division and was
project director from concept through completion of Bank of America Tower, a
330,000-square foot, $50 million mixed-use development, The Harborage at Bayboro,
a 635-slip marine complex, plus numerous office, retail, historical redevelopment and
industrial projects. Negotiated partnership with The Wilson Company for
development of Carillon Corporate Center, Tampa Bay’s premiere mixed use
development. Organized construction, marketing, and property management
departments, as well as the marine division. Property development and management
included approximately 750,000 square feet of commercial and industrial properties.
Negotiated major leases for buildings, air rights and submerged lands, and
design/build contracts, including conversion of historic school building to moderate
income apartments. Provided private sector leadership in the planning and
implementation of St. Petersburg’s Intown Redevelopment program.
1978 to 1983 Vice President, Warren Hunnicutt, Jr., Inc. – St. Petersburg, Florida
Appraised and conducted feasibility analyses on virtually all types of commercial,
industrial, hospitality and residential properties, and including islands and
environmentally sensitive lands. Conducted and published first county-wide surveys
of retail and industrial markets.
1972 to 1978 Assistant Vice President, Construction Lending and Review Appraiser,
Century First National Bank (now Wells Fargo) –St. Petersburg, Florida
Construction and permanent loan underwriting and administration and review
appraiser. Three years as Special Assets officer, handling all legal proceedings,
construction completion and marketing of foreclosed properties, which ranged from
major hotels to high-rise condominiums.
1969 to 1972 Real Estate Loan Representative, The Citizens & Southern National Bank –
Athens, Georgia
Underwrote and administered construction and permanent single-family FHA/VA and
conventional loans. Appraiser trainee. Also trained in credit card, sales finance,
branch management, installment lending and other departments under commercial
banking management training program.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Appraisal Institute MAI Professional Designation
Real Estate Investment Council, Inc. Member
Association of Eminent Domain Professionals Member
The International Marina Institute Member, Instructor
Southwest Florida Marine Industries Association Member
Marina Operators Association of America Member
Florida Association for the Restoration of Ethics, Inc. Member
Urban Land Institute Member
PIANC – The World Association for Waterborne Transport
Infrastructure
Member
Drystack Working Group Member
CIVIC ACTIVITIES
Past and present memberships include: Board of Directors of Tampa Union Station Preservation and Restoration,
Inc.; Co-chairman, Council of Elders of the Community Alliance of St. Petersburg, a biracial organization; Former
Board of Governors and Chairman, Transportation Committee, The St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce;
Former Board Member and Treasurer, The National Association of Industrial and Office Parks; Former Board
Member, The Science Center of Pinellas County (an educational institution); Former Board Member and
Transportation Committee Chairman, The Committee of 100 of Pinellas County; Former Board Member, Gulfcoast
Certified Development Corporation; Member, Leadership St. Pete and Leadership Tampa Bay Alumni Associations,
and a Member of the former St. Petersburg Suncoasters, sponsors of the Festival of States. Member, Marine Industry
Association of Southwest Florida.
QUALIFICATIONS OF
W AYNE B EURNIER
C E R T I F I E D G E N E R A L A P P R A I S E R
EDUCATION
Ohio Dominican University, Bachelor of Business Administration
Ohio Department of Transportation, Real Estate Principles
Xavier University/University of Dayton, Master of Business Administration program
Real Estate Institute of Ohio State University, Graduate of Realtors Institute
CONTINUING EDUCATION
Real Estate Taxation
Coal Financing
Philosophy of Science
FNMA Guidelines
Appraisal AB II, Florida
Litigation Valuation
Florida Mortgage Brokerage
Residential Appraisal Review
Market Abstraction
Business Value Capitalization
Manufactured Housing
Subdivision Analysis
Site Analysis and Valuation
Historic Properties
Warehouse Incubators
Florida State Law Update – Current
USPAP Regulations – Current
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
Insurance Procedures
Real Estate Marketing
Real Estate Finance
Real Estate Valuation
National Security Policy
Real Estate Law
Financial Institutions
Geography & Climate
Production & Operations Management
Economic Geography
APPRAISAL INSTITUTE
• Appraisal Principles
• Capitalization
• Single-Family
• Urban Properties
• Condemnation
• Investments
• Industrial
• Standards of Professional Practice
• Capitalization 310
LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS
Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, State of Florida, License Number RZ1307
Licensed Real Estate Broker, State of Florida, License Number BK434062
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
National Association of Realtors
Florida Association of Realtors
Greater Tampa Association of Realtors
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
September 2004 – Present Urban Realty Solutions, Tampa, Florida
September 1997 – 2004 Associate Appraiser, Urban Economics, Inc., Tampa, Florida
1990-1997 Appraiser Owner, Beurnier Associates, Realty Consultant, Tampa, Florida
1989-1990 Associate Appraiser, Regional Appraisal Company, Manhattan, New York
1988-1989 Appraiser Owner, Beurnier Associates, Tampa Florida
1987 Associate Appraiser, Marshall and Stevens, Tampa, Florida
1986 Associate Appraiser, Henderson Appraisal Company, Tampa, Florida
1984-1985 Associate Appraiser, AmeriFirst Appraisal Company, Fort Myers, Florida
1981-1984 Associate Appraiser, Nash – Wilson Appraisal Company, Columbus, Ohio
1976-1980 Appraiser Owner, Beurnier and Associates, Columbus, Ohio
1971-1975 Staff and Review Appraiser, Policy and Procedures Development, Bureau
of Appraisals, Ohio Department Of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio
APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE
Mr. Beurnier’s experience has included real estate market valuation, insurance valuation and liquidation
valuation. Clients included financial institutions, states and municipalities, attorneys, merger and
acquisitions principals, real estate developers, property owners and prospective purchasers. Assignments
have been in several states and with a concentration of Florida.
Classifications of valuation include: complex real estate; simplex going concern business values; eminent
domain; ad valorem tax appeal; litigation support; federal tax reporting; most categories of vacant land
including subdivision analysis; residential single-family, condominiums, estates and small income
properties; agricultural properties; mobile home and manufactured home parks; RV parks; hotels/motels;
resorts; golf courses; automotive services; self-storage facilities; industrial warehouses; flex space;
processing plants; hi-tech and clean room facilities; juvenile correctional facilities; church facilities;
apartment buildings and cooperatives; suburban and high rise office buildings; single and multi-tenant
retail properties; triple net properties; restaurants; mixed use properties; commercial condominiums-
medical, office, retail and industrial; coastal, river and lake marinas; feasibility analysis; and highest and
best use analysis.
Appraisal Report
Vacant Land
112 S Osceola Ave
Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida
Prepared For:
Mr. Dylan Mayeux
City of Clearwater
600 Cleveland St, Suite 600
Clearwater, FL, 33755
Prepared By:
Entreken Associates, Inc.
1100 16th Street North
Saint Petersburg, Florida 33705
EAI File #: 20230294
November 16, 2023
Mr. Dylan Mayeux
City of Clearwater
600 Cleveland St, Suite 600
Clearwater, FL 33755
Re: Appraisal Report
112 S Osceola Ave
Clearwater, FL, 33756
Dear Mr. Mayeux:
As requested, Entreken Associates, Inc. has prepared an Appraisal Report of the above-referenced property for the
purpose of estimating the value of the Fee Simple market value of the property and the Encumbered market value of
the property, as is, as of the effective date of value.
The subject property is located at the northwest corner of S Osceola Ave and Pierce St in Clearwater. The subject
property is a 2.60± acre site or 113,256± square foot parcel of land. The subject parcel is yet to be identified, but the
parent property is identified by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser as Parcel Number 16-29-15-20358-001-0040.
The subject property is more fully described in the body of this report.
To the best of our knowledge and belief, our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has
been prepared in conformance with the standards and reporting requirements set forth in the Uniform Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), as promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal
Foundation; the FDIC Market Value Definition; the Appraisal Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional
Practice; Title XI of the Federal Financial Institution Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), the
Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines; as well as our understanding of the appraisal guidelines of the City
of Clearwater.
The client of this report is the City of Clearwater. The intended user of this report is the City of Clearwater. The
intended use of this report is to determine the as is fee simple market value and as is encumbered market values of
the subject property for internal use. No other use or users are intended or authorized by Entreken Associates, Inc.
The scope of this assignment is restricted to the specific identified intended use and user noted above. Under no
circumstances, shall any of the following parties be entitled to use or rely on the appraisal or this appraisal report: (i)
the borrower(s) on any loans or financing relating to or secured by the subject property, (ii) any guarantor(s) of such
loans or financing, or (iii) principals, shareholders, investors, members or partners of such borrower(s) or
guarantor(s).
This letter is not an appraisal report, hence, it must not be removed from the attached appraisal report. If this letter is
disjoined from the attached appraisal, then the value opinions set forth in this letter are invalid and the analyses,
opinions, and conclusions developed herein cannot be properly understood.
We certify that we have no present or contemplated future interest in the property beyond this estimate of value. The
appraiser has not performed any services regarding the subject within the three-year period immediately preceding
acceptance of this assignment.
Your attention is directed to the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions section of this report. Acceptance of this report
constitutes an agreement with these conditions and assumptions. In particular, we note the following:
Hypothetical Conditions
The as is current value of the subject is first estimated assuming there are no restrictions or encumbrances in regards
to development and the subject can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning.
The as is current value has also been estimated assuming the subject is encumbered with a deed restriction, whereas
the future development of the site would require a mnimum of 400 apartment units, as well as up to 15,000 SF of
commercial space, and 440 or more parking spaces.
Finally, the as is current value has also been estimated assuming the subject is encumbered with a deed restriction,
whereas the future development of the site would require 400 apartment units in a single 28-storey tower construction,
as well as up to 15,000 SF of commercial space, and 440 parking spaces including one level of basement parking, as
proposed in the revised Gotham presentation.
Extraordinary Assumptions
There are no Extraordinary Assumptions for this appraisal.
Based on the appraisal described in the accompanying report, subject to the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions,
Extraordinary Assumptions and Hypothetical Conditions (if any), we have made the following value conclusions:
We have also concluded to the following market values as part of the analysis:
Premise Interest Appraised Effective Date Value Conclusion Estimated Marketing
Current Market Value Fee Simple 10/17/2023 $16,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value Deed Restricted - 400+ unit
Apartment Project 10/17/2023 $9,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value
Deed Restricted - Revised
Gotham 400 unit Single Tower
Proposal - Including Subsidies
10/17/2023 $3,450,000 5-7 months
Value Conclusions
It has been a pleasure to assist you in this assignment. If you have any questions concerning the analyses, or if
Entreken Associates, Inc. can be of additional service, please contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
Entreken Associates, Inc.
Wesley R. Sanders, MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM
Senior Managing Director
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ2911
wsanders@eairealestate.com
727.256.8025
Tampa Bay Office
1100 16th St N, St. Petersburg, FL 33705
http://eairealestate.com
Page 1
Table of Contents
Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 2
Scope of Work .............................................................................................................................................................. 4
General .......................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Site Analysis Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Highest and Best Use ................................................................................................................................................ 14
Sales Comparison Approach – No Encumbrances ................................................................................................. 16
Sales Comparison Approach – 400 Unit Rental Apartment Site ............................................................................ 22
Valuation – 400 Unit, Single Tower Rental Apartment Site (Revised Gotham Proposal) ..................................... 27
Final Reconciliation ................................................................................................................................................... 36
Certification Statement .............................................................................................................................................. 37
Basic Assumptions and Limiting Conditions .......................................................................................................... 38
Addenda ...................................................................................................................................................................... 41
Regional Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 42
Neighborhood Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 50
Engagement Letter ..................................................................................................................................................... 57
Legal Description ....................................................................................................................................................... 58
Subject Photographs ................................................................................................................................................. 59
Land Sale Comparables - Unencumbered ............................................................................................................... 65
Land Sale Comparables - Encumbered .................................................................................................................... 68
Qualifications ............................................................................................................................................................. 75
Page 2
Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions
Report Date 11/16/2023
Inspection Date 10/17/2023
As Is Date of Value 10/17/2023
Report Dates
Property Name N1DBProperty_NameVacant Land
Property Major Type N1DBProperty_Major_TypeLand
Address N1DBAddress112 S Osceola Ave
City N1DBCityClearwater
County N1DBCountyPinellas
State N1DBStateFL
Zip N1DBZip33756
Tax ID N1DBTax_ID16-29-15-20358-001-0040
Owner N1DBOwnerCity of Clearwater
Land SF N1DBLand_SF113,256
Acres N1DBAcres2.60
Zoning N1DBZoningD
Subject Summary
Highest and Best Use as Vacant Mixed Use Development
Highest and Best Use
Extraordinary Assumptions
There are no Extraordinary Assumptions for this appraisal.
Hypothetical Conditions
The as is current value of the subject is first estimated assuming there are no restrictions or encumbrances in regards
to development and the subject can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning.
The as is current value has also been estimated assuming the subject is encumbered with a deed restriction, whereas
the future development of the site would require a mnimum of 400 apartment units, as well as up to 15,000 SF of
commercial space, and 440 or more parking spaces.
Finally, the as is current value has also been estimated assuming the subject is encumbered with a deed restriction,
whereas the future development of the site would require 400 apartment units in a single 28-storey tower construction,
as well as up to 15,000 SF of commercial space, and 440 parking spaces including one level of basement parking, as
proposed in the revised Gotham presentation.
Page 3
Projected Exposure and Marketing Time
Exposure time is estimated at 5-7 months for the subject property. Marketing time is estimated at 5-7 months for the
subject
Premise Interest Appraised Effective Date Value Conclusion Estimated Marketing
Current Market Value Fee Simple 10/17/2023 $16,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value Deed Restricted - 400+ unit
Apartment Project 10/17/2023 $9,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value
Deed Restricted - Revised
Gotham 400 unit Single Tower
Proposal - Including Subsidies
10/17/2023 $3,450,000 5-7 months
Value Conclusions
Page 4
Scope of Work
According to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, it is the appraiser’s responsibility to develop
and report a scope of work that results in credible results that are appropriate for the appraisal problem and intended
user(s). Therefore, the appraiser must identify and consider:
● the client and intended users;
● the intended use of the report;
● the type and definition of value;
● the effective date of value;
● assignment conditions;
● typical client expectations; and
● typical appraisal work by peers for similar assignments.
Intended Use To determine the as is fee simple market value and as is encumbered
market values of the subject property for internal use.
Intended Users City of Clearwater
Intended Use and Users
No other use is intended or authorized by Entreken Associates, Inc. The scope of this assignment is restricted to the
specific identified intended use and user noted above. Under no circumstances, shall any of the following parties be
entitled to use or rely on the appraisal or this appraisal report: (i) the borrower(s) on any loans or financing relating to
or secured by the subject property, (ii) any guarantor(s) of such loans or financing, or (iii) principals, shareholders,
investors, members or partners of such borrower(s) or guarantor(s).
Scope
Problem
To estimate the fee simple market value of the subject property as if vacant under the current zoning with no
special development restrictions, as well as two additional development scenarios with deed restrictions that
require development of 400 apartment units, 15,000 SF of commercial space, and 440 parking spaces.
Appraisal Report
Based on the intended users understanding of the subject's physical, economic and legal characteristics, and
the intended use of this appraisal, an appraisal report format was used.
This is an Appraisal Report as defined by Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice under Standards
Rule 2-2(a). This format provides a summary or description of the appraisal process, subject and market data
and valuation analyses.
Page 5
Report Format
Although the current USPAP does not discern between appraisal report formatting, Entreken Associates, Inc., has
adapted the following descriptions and comparisons to previous editions of USPAP.
Entreken Associates, Inc. Report format descriptions:
Comprehensive Format - Similar to the former Self-Contained Appraisal Report requirements and provides the
greatest depth and detail of analysis in an appraisal.
Summary Format - Similar to the former Summary Appraisal Report requirements and provides a summary of the
analysis, property type overviews, and area analysis.
Abbreviated Summary Format - Meets the minimum requirements of the former Summary Appraisal Report and
provides a brief summary of data and analysis, as well as summary overviews.
Concise Format: Meets the minimum requirements of USPAP for an Appraisal Report and provides a concise
summary of data and analysis. This format also resembles a form report for some sections and has minimal
overviews.
The current USPAP Restricted Appraisal Report is equivalent to the former Restricted-Use Appraisal Report and
states the valuation conclusions.
This analysis was prepared in a Summary Format.
Additional supporting documentation is retained in our workfile. The significant elements of scope included the
following: Inspection of the subject property. Collection, verification, and analysis of market data through searches of
our in-house sales database, and multiple subscription-based sales databases. It is our opinion that the scope of
research and analysis associated with this Appraisal Report is adequate to produce a credible value conclusion that
will serve the needs of the client.
Market Area and Analysis of Market Conditions
A complete analysis of market conditions has been made. We maintain and have access to comprehensive
databases for this market area and have reviewed the market for sales and listings relevant to this analysis. The
market overview is retained in our files and database.
The reader is cautioned, and reminded that the conclusions presented in this appraisal report apply only as of the
effective date(s) indicated. The appraiser makes no representation as to the effect on the subject property of any
unforeseen event, subsequent to the effective date of the appraisal.
Highest and Best Use
A highest and best use analysis for the subject has been conducted. Physically possible, legally permissible and
financially feasible uses were considered, and the maximally productive use was concluded.
Property Identification
The subject has been identified by the legal description and the assessors' parcel number.
Property Rights Appraised
We have appraised the Fee Simple property rights.
Subject Inspection
An exterior inspection of the subject property has been made, and photographs taken.
Role Name Inspected Extent Date of Inspection
Appraiser Wesley R. Sanders, MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM has Exterior 10/17/2023
Property Inspection and Report Compilation Assistance
Use of Real Estate as of Effective Date of Value
As of the as is effective date of the appraisal, the subject was a Vacant Land property.
Page 6
Appraisal Process
Typically, the cost, sales comparison, and income approaches are used in determining the value of a property. The
indicated value developed by these various approaches is weighed by the Appraiser based on the reliability of market
data in determining the final value estimate.
Income Capitalization Approach
The income approach measures the present worth of anticipated future benefits (net income) derived from a property.
The approach develops the subject property's estimated net income during the remaining economic life of the
improvements. It consists of estimated vacancy, gross income, expenses and other charges. The net income is
capitalized to arrive at an indication of value. In the case of multi-tenanted properties, or where a property is not fully
leased, a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis may also be appropriate.
Sales Comparison Approach
The sales comparison approach produces a value estimate by comparing the subject property to recent sales of
similar properties in the same or competing market areas. Inherent in this approach is the principle of substitution.
The comparative process involves judgment as to the similarity of the subject and the comparable sale with respect
value factors such as the time of sale, land size, building size and quality of construction. The estimated value
through this approach represents the probable price at which the subject property would be sold as of the date of
value.
Cost Approach
The cost approach considers the current cost of reproducing a property, less depreciation. The value of the land, as if
vacant and available for development, is added to the depreciated cost in arriving at a value conclusion by the cost
approach. This approach is based on the assumption that a purchaser is not warranted in paying more for a property
than the cost of the land and duplicating the improvements.
Applicable Appraisal Methods
x
x
Methods Utilized
the subject is vacant land.
there is adequate data to develop a value estimate and this approach
reflects market behavior for this property type.
the value of the subject is estimated using the cash flows from the forecast
rental income over the projected costs. Net income generated by the
ongoing operation of the apartments is determined and using two
capitalization methods: direct capitalization and yield capitalization, a
reasonable value of the land (land residual technique) is estimated.
Income Approach
Sales Comparison Approach
Cost Approach
Conformity
We developed our analyses, opinions and conclusions and prepared this report in conformity with the Uniform
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation; the Code of Professional Ethics
and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute; the Financial Institutions Reform,
Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA); and the requirements of our client as we understand them.
Sources of Information
We obtained information from public records, the client, property contact, and a variety of sources as noted
throughout the report.
Category Sources
Market Data MLS, CoStar, Public Records, Third-party sources including paid
subscription services and our internal database
Ownership & Transaction History Pinellas County Public Records
Assessment & Tax Data Pinellas County Public Records
Site Data Pinellas County Public Records & Site Survey
Zoning Data City of Clearwater Public Records
Sale Comparables MLS, CoStar, Public Records, Third-party sources including paid
subscription services and our internal database
Data Sources
Page 7
General
Property Identification
The subject property is a 2.60± acre site or 113,256± square foot parcel of land.
The subject property is located at 112 S Osceola Ave within Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. The subject
property is identified by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser as Parcel Number(s) 16-29-15-20358-001-0040.
Legal Description: Abbreviated as:That portion of the East 402.04 feet of Lots 3, 4, & 5 of Block A, John R.
Daveys Re-Subdivision, as shown on plat recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 87 of the Public
Records of Hillsborough County, Florida, of which Pinellas County was formerly a part;
lying South of those lands described in Official Records Book 14700, Page 1498, of the
Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. LESS the East 15 feet of said Block A; and
LESS the South 20 feet of said Lot 5 per City of Clearwater Resolution 64-180, recorded
in Official Records Book 2059, Page 493, of the Public Records of Pinellas County,
Florida.
The full legal description is in the Addenda of this report.
Inspection Date:October 17, 2023
Date of Report:November 16, 2023
Ownership History:Current ownership of the parcel is under the City of Clearwater.
We are not aware of any transactions that have involved the subject property in the past
three years.
In 2022, Clearwater council and the Gotham Group signed a development agreement that
includes purchasing the subject City Hall site for $15.4 million and the Harborview Center
site for $9.3 million.
The city would offer developer incentives, $1.5 million toward impact fees to be paid for by
the Community Redevelopment Agency, the creation of a special downtown tax district, up
to $2 million to split the cost of a pedestrian bridge and $22 million for two underground
parking garages to be paid from the city’s parking fund.
Gotham has since stated that the market has changed so dramatically they can no longer
proceed with their plans and are proposing a scaled-down development and seeking to
reduce the price of the subject City Hall site.
Personal Property/
Non-Realty Items: None, personal property owned by the occupant.
Real Estate Taxes:Assessing Authority: Pinellas County
Assessment Year: 2023
The subject property is a portion of Parcel ID 16-29-15-20358-001-0040, is owned by the
City of Clearwater and is tax exempt. The 2023 assessment of the parent parcel is
summarized below. The total assessment was $22,851,832 and the taxes concluded were
calculated at $465,311 using the 2022 millage rates (2023 rates not yet disclosed) and
assessed values if taxes were due on the property. This assessment seems to be in line
with the assessments of similar properties in the area. There were no past due taxes
owed as of the inspection date.
Page 8
The following table presents the current real estate assessment and taxes for the parent tract, if the property were not
tax exempt, including non-ad valorem assessments and any cap adjustments applied to the subject property.
Current Real Estate Assessment and Taxes
School District All Other Total
16-29-15-20358-001-0040 $22,851,832 $22,851,832
Total Assessed Value $22,851,832 $22,851,832
Less: Total Cap Adjustment $0 $0
Total Taxable Value $22,851,832 $22,851,832
Millage Rate 5.96300 14.39910 20.36210
Assessment Per $1,000 $1,000
Total Ad Valorem Taxes $136,265 $329,046 $465,311
Total Non-Ad Valorem Taxes $0
Total Real Estate Taxes $465,311
Page 9
Site Analysis Summary
Location: The subject property is located at the northwest corner of S Osceola Ave
and Pierce St in Clearwater. This location is good for a commercial and
residential use.
Aerial Map
Plat Map
Page 10
Parcel ID 16-29-15-20358-001-0040
Location northwest corner of S Osceola Ave and Pierce St in Clearwater
Map Latitude 27.964379
Map Longitude -82.802334
Site Analysis & Comments The site has average and typical utility.
Site Summary
Gross Land Area (Sq Ft)113,256
Gross Land Area (Acres)2.60
Usable Land Area (Sq Ft)113,256
Usable Land Area (Acres)2.60
Site Size Attributes
Hazardous Material
No hazardous materials were observed on the subject site. However, we are not experts in the matters of the
presence or effects of hazardous materials; therefore, we assume hazardous material is not present on the site.
Primary Frontage Street Name S Osceola Ave
Secondary Frontage Street Name Pierce St
Frontage - Primary Street (Feet)295
Frontage - Secondary Street (Feet)681
View Very Good
Access Average
Site Visibility Average
Street Lighting Yes
Sidewalks Yes
Curb and Gutter Yes
Topography The subject has level topography at grade, with the subject property elevated
above the remainder of the parent property due to the presence of a bluff.
Shape Roughly rectangular
Soil Conditions Adequate for development
Site Characteristics
Adequacy of Utilities The subject's utilities are typical and adequate for the market area.
Public Electricity The site is served by public electricity
Water Supply Type City water
Sewer Type City sewer
Site Utilities
FEMA Map #12103C0108J
FEMA Map Date 8/24/2021
Flood Zone Zone X
Flood Zone Comments The Zone X classification is in an area located outside the 100-year
designated flood hazard area.
Encumbrance / Easement Description There are no known adverse encumbrances or easements. Please
reference Limiting Conditions and Assumptions.
Environmental Issues There are no known adverse environmental conditions on the subject site.
Please reference Limiting Conditions and Assumptions.
Site Hazards
Site Comments
The site has average and typical utility.
Page 11
Flood Map
Site Survey
Page 12
Zoning 1
Zoning Authority City of Clearwater
Zoning District City of Clearwater
Zoning Code D
Zoning Type/Description Downtown/Downtown Core Character District
Current Use Permitted Yes
Current Use Legally Conforming Yes
Zoning Intent/Summary The Downtown Core Character District is intended for high intensity mixed-
use, office, and residential development in buildings with active ground floor
uses opening onto pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. Standards are
designed to support a dense urban pattern of development with buildings
façades aligned along public sidewalks and parking primarily located within
buildings behind active uses and behind buildings. Properties adjacent to
the Pinellas Trail are designed to provide pedestrian and bicycle connections
to the trail. There is no height restriction and the maximum densityis 75 multi-
family units per acre, with a maximum FAR of 4.0. The is also a Public
Amenities Incentive Pool and the Pool allocation process is established in
the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The Pool allows for density
and/or intensityincreases in excess of the allowable maximum development
potential established for a parcel for projects that meet the goals, objectives,
and policies of the Redevelopment Plan and are consistent with the vision
established for the character district in which the projects are located.
Future Land Use CBD
Future Land Use Description Central Business District
Zoning Consistent with FLU Yes
Development Standards
Max FAR 4
Front Set Back Distance Varies by use
Side Yard Distance Varies by use or as required by fire code
Back Yard Distance 10'
Maximum Building Height Unlimited
Zoning Parking Requirements 1 space per unit
Site Conforms to current standards Yes
Zoning Data Source City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances
Zoning Comments The D zoning district has a max floor area ratio (FAR) of 4.0, a max densityof
75 units per acre, and no maximum height. Development of the site appears
feasible.
Zoning Summary
Page 13
Zoning Map
Page 14
Highest and Best Use
Highest and best use may be defined as the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or improved property,
which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value.
1. Legally Permissible: What uses are permitted by zoning and other legal restrictions?
2. Physically Possible: To what use is the site physically adaptable?
3. Financially Feasible: Which possible and permissible use will produce any net return to the owner of the
site?
4. Maximally Productive. Among the feasible uses which use will produce the highest net return, (i.e., the
highest present worth)?
Page 15
Zoning Code, District D, Downtown/Downtown Core Character District
Permitted Uses The Downtown designation has a wide variety of permitted uses. These include
multi-family, bars, brewpubs, congregate care facilities, medical clinics,
museums, offices, hotels, places of worship, research and technology
facilities, restaurants, retail, schools, and community centers to name a few.
Future Land Use CBD, Central Business District
Future Land Use - Permitted Uses Moderate to High Density Residential; Office; Retail Sales & Service;
Public/Semi-Public uses as indicated in approved Redevelopment Plan
Legally Permissible Comments
Given the legally permissible uses under the zoning and future land use, a
mixed use is given further consideration in determining the highest and best
use of the site, as vacant. We also have to consider the encumbrances in the
additional valuation scenarios where apartments are required as the type of
development.
Physically Possible
Land Size 2.60 acres, 113,256 square feet
Shape Roughly rectangular
Topography The subject has level topography at grade, with the subject property elevated
above the remainder of the parent property due to the presence of a bluff.
Utilities The subject's utilities are typical and adequate for the market area. The site is
served by public electricity, City water, City sewer
Access Average
Visibility Average
Functional Utility Average
Physically Possible Comments
Based on an analysis of the physical characteristics of the site, there does not
appear to be any adverse conditions or lack of utility. Thus, there are no
apparent physical or functional problems with the site, which would hinder
development.
Financially Feasible
Of the legally permissible uses that are physically possible, we have analyzed
the market for sales and rental rates versus the cost to construct for the uses
that are financially feasible. This includes mixed use development.
Maximally Productive There does not appear to be any reasonably probable use of the subject site
that would generate a higher residual land value than a mixed use. Accordingly,
we have concluded that a mixed use, developed to the normal market density
permitted by current zoning and development standards, is the maximally
productive use of the property.
For the current value of the subject with no restrictions regarding the type and
scale of development, we have concluded that development of the subject with
195 condominium units (using the 2.60 ac site area x maximum density of 75
units/acre) would be the maximally productive use.
Under the additional valuation approaches with the encumbrance to develop
the site with apartment units, we have concluded that development of the
subject with apartments would be the maximally productive use.
Highest and Best Use as Vacant Mixed Use Development
Highest and Best Use as Vacant
Most Probable Purchaser
Based on opinions of market participants, the subject parcel would most likely be purchased by a local or regional
developer.
Page 16
Sales Comparison Approach – No Encumbrances
Land Analysis
To estimate the land value, we have utilized the Sales Comparison Approach. In this approach the appraiser
develops an opinion of value by analyzing similar properties and comparing these properties with the subject
property. Application of the sales comparison approach requires the comparing and rating of other comparable
properties to the property appraised. The aim of this approach is to develop indications of what the comparable sales
would have sold for if they had possessed all of the basic and pertinent physical, functional and external
characteristics of the subject property.
The steps involved in the Sales Comparison Approach are summarized as follows:
1. Comparable land sales data in the competitive market is obtained and verified, whenever possible;
2. Market-oriented unit(s) of comparison is determined and applied to each of the comparable sales;
3. The elements of comparison that affect the value of the property being appraised are identified and applied to
each comparable sale;
4. A net adjustment is applied to each comparable unit sale price to arrive at a range of adjusted sale or unit
prices for the subject property; and
5. The adjusted prices are reconciled to an indication of an appropriate value of the subject property.
Comparable Sales Data
The subject is located in Clearwater. According to the zoning, the maximum allowable density for the subject would
be 195 units. As discussed previously, the subject would have a Highest and Best Use – Unencumbered for
development of 195 condominium units. We have identified recent sales of vacant land purchased for development of
condominiums in Clearwater.
The comparable land sales selected represent the best available for this analysis. The most widely used unit of
comparison in this market for the subject property type is based on the development potential of the site on a
residential per unit basis. As a result, we have analyzed the comparable sales on a price per unit.
The comparable land sales included in this appraisal report are summarized in the table below. The following page
includes a location map for the comparable land sales and reflects proximity to the subject property. The Addenda
contains comparable land sales data sheets. Given the characteristics of the subject site, as well as the information
obtained for the comparable data, the comparables were analyzed through the application of a traditional adjustment
grid using percentage adjustments.
Comp Address City Date Price No. of Units Price Per Unit
Subject 112 S Osceola Ave Clearwater --195 --
1 900 N Osceola Ave Clearwater 5/2/2018 $4,875,000 87 $56,034
2 125 Island Way Clearwater 1/14/2021 $2,680,000 27 $99,259
3 415 Island Way Clearwater 9/15/2021 $3,800,000 46 $82,609
Page 17
Land Sales Map
The Adjustment Process
The main points of comparison for this analysis include the transactional elements such as property rights conveyed,
financial terms, the conditions and/or motivations surrounding the sale, and changes in market conditions since the
sale date. Property level adjustments account for differences in the locational, physical and economics elements of
the sales as compared to the subject property. The comparable sales utilized herein were analyzed relative to the
subject property for the following factors:
Transactional Components
Property Rights Conveyed
Adjustments were made when applicable for conveyance of property rights other than those being appraised herein.
No transactional components adjustments were warranted for the comparable land sales.
Financing Terms
Adjustments were made when applicable for extraordinary, special or non-market financing or credits provided by the
seller or others which may have influenced the sale price. No adjustment is required.
Conditions of Sale
Adjustments were made when applicable for non-arm’s length sale transactions and/or atypical conditions. Each of
the sales (or pending sales) was an arm’s length transaction. No conditions of sale adjustments are required.
Expenditures After Sale
Adjustments were made when applicable for any reported anticipated expenditures that were incurred after the
comparable was purchased. No adjustments are required.
Page 18
Market Conditions
The sales used represent reasonably similar land parcels compared to the subject’s underlying land, which sold since
May 2018. Based on the following table, prices for improved multifamily properties increased significantly from May
2018 into mid-2022. Prices have declined slightly since then. Therefore, Sales 1, 2, and 3 require upward
adjustments for improved market conditions up to the effective date of the report.
Property Level Characteristics
Location
The subject property is located at the northwest corner of S Osceola Ave and Pierce St in Clearwater. Each of the
sales was adjusted, if required, for locational characteristics differing from those of the subject property. Sale 1 is
located just north of Downtown Clearwater, directly on Clearwater Bay overlooking a marina, requiring a downward
adjustment for location. Sales 2 and 3 are located in Island Estates, a quiet residential neighborhood in Clearwater
Bay with closer proximity to Clearwater Beach, with downward adjustments required.
Topography
The subject site has a generally level topography. Each of the land sales has a similar topography; therefore, no
adjustments were warranted.
Shape
The subject site is rectangular. Sale 1 is irregular in shape due to the existing marina, with an upward adjustment
required. Sales 2 and 3 are rectangular and conducive to development with no adjustments warranted.
Utilities
The subject and comparables have access to all public utilities with no adjustments warranted.
Zoning/Density
The subject property is located in the D zoning district with a maximum density per acre of 75 units per acre. The
proposed densities among the three comparable sales are summarized as follows.
Sale 1: 2.12 acres-87 units = 41 Units/Ac
Sale 2: 0.90 acres-27 units = 30 Units/Ac
Sale 3: 1.35 acres-46 units = 34 Units/Ac
Page 19
There is generally an inverse size and rate relationship where lands producing a higher yield (units per acre) typically
trade at a higher rate per acre and vice versa. With respect to density, those developments which have significantly
higher density per acre generate much lower sale prices per unit due to the impact of economies of scale. Conversely
lower density sites tend to generate higher rates per unit. Inherent within this theory, a typical purchaser will consider
the total unit inventory and its risks associated with higher or lower unit count (density) and pay accordingly based on
current market indices.
All three comparable sales indicated a similar range related to density per acre and we have applied an upward
adjustment to each sale compared to the subject’s allowed 75 units per acre based on the related economies of
scale.
The subject property is located in the Downtown Core zoning district offering unlimited height and up to 75 units per
acre. Comparables 1, 2, and 3 would all allow for less density and height. As we are valuing the subject on a price
per unit with adjustments for zoning/density, the adjustment detailed above with respect to density would also take
into account the zoning of the properties in comparison to the subject.
Flood Zone
Comparables 1, 2, & 3 were located in Flood Zone AE, requiring additional flood insurance. Overall, upward
adjustments are required.
Summary of Adjustments
The following table presents a summary of the adjustments for the underlying site.
Page 20
Land Analysis Grid
Address
City
State
Date
Actual Price
Price Adjustment
Adjusted Price
Price per Land SF
Usable Acres
Usable Land SF
No. of Units
Price per Unit
Transaction Adjustments
Property Rights Fee Simple 0.0%Fee Simple 0.0%Fee Simple 0.0%
Financing Conventional 0.0%Conventional 0.0%Conventional 0.0%
Conditions of Sale Arm's Length 0.0%Arm's Length 0.0%Arm's Length 0.0%
Expend. After Sale
Market Trends
Characteristics Adjustments
Location
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Topography
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Shape
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Utilities
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Zoning
Proposed Density
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Flood Zone
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Adjusted Price per Unit
Net Adjustments
-$4,063
Comp 1
Adjusted Price per Unit
-5%
Superior
$0
Similar
$0
0%
Available to Site
$81,250
$0
Similar
Gently sloping
45.0%
34
415 Island Way
$0
$0
$3,800,000$4,875,000
0%
$0
Similar
Rectangular
Superior
Comp 3
125 Island Way
$68.36
$0
$99,259
46
$82,609
Similar
$2,680,000
$0
195
1/14/20215/2/2018
$2,680,000$8,125,000 $3,800,000
27
$99,259
$52.72
-$3,250,000
112 S Osceola Ave
--
87
Comp 2
FL
Clearwater
FL
Gently Sloping
-$5,459
10.0%
$109,185
-$4,337
Superior
0%
0%
Similar
0%
Rectangular
$0
Available to Site
Clearwater
Zone AE
Gently sloping
Irregular
5%
Inferior
Gently sloping
$4,063
$0
Available to Site
HDR-NCOD Island
Est
D - Downtown Core
0%
$0
-$5,459
0%
Available to Site
$0
Zone X
D - Downtown Old
Bay
Superior
0%
75 41
5%
-$4,063
Inferior
$5,459
-5%
5%
Superior
-5%
Inferior
$4,337
MHDR-NCOD Island
Est
30
-5%
5%
Zone AE
-5.0%
$82,402$81,250
0.0%
$103,726
5.0%
-5%
$86,739
$82,609
Superior
Inferior
$4,063
Partially in AE & VE
-$4,337
-5%
Roughly rectangular
Clearwater
$56,034
9/15/2021
$0
Similar Similar Similar
SuperiorSuperior
Clearwater
FL
Fee Simple
Adjusted Price per Unit $56,034
900 N Osceola Ave
FL
$64.62
-5.0%
Superior
2.60 2.12 0.90 1.35
113,256 92,478 39,204 58,806
Page 21
Land Sale Value Metrics – Fee Simple Market Value
The following table presents the metrics for the unadjusted and adjusted land sales. The table also presents the
concluded market value per unit for the subject property. Equal weight is given in arriving at our reconciled value of
$82,000 per unit, similar to the overall median price.
Number of Comparables:3 % Δ
45%
5%
12%
0%
82,608.70 3,800,000.00 no. of unit
$82,609
Subject Size:
$82,000
As Is Fee Simple Value, Rounded:
$15,990,000
195
Reconciled Value/Unit Value:
Indicated Value:
$16,000,000
High:$103,726
Unadjusted Adjusted
$56,034
$79,301Average:
$99,259
$81,250
Median:$82,402
$89,126
Land Value Ranges & As Is Reconciled Value
Low:
In order to test the reasonableness of our concluded value, we have also considered the ratio of land value per unit to
the overall selling prices of the end units. The land-to-revenue ratio gives a general idea of how much developers are
paying for land based on the projected year 1 revenue numbers. Of note, Comparable 1 sold in May 2018 and wasn’t
completed until 2021. Comparables 2 and 3 had a shorter time period between the land sale and the completion of
the project. The ratio for the three comparables ranged from 5.42% to 9.25% or an average of 7.75%. If not for the
longer time period between acquisition and completion of Comparable 1 and the large increase in market values over
that time period, the ratio would be much higher. Utilizing the 2023 average condominium price for Comparable 1
results in an adjusted land allocation of $69,909 per unit. The average land allocation of all three comparables after
adjusting for current sales is $83,926 per unit. A summary of these ratios and allocations is shown below:
Land Price - Sale Price Ratio
Comp Project Name Address Land Sale Price Per Unit Avg Condo Sale
Price Yr 1
Land Price - Sale
Price Ratio
2023 Avg Condo
Sale Price
Adj. 2023 Land
Allocation
1 Marina Bay 920 N Osceola Ave $4,875,000 $56,034 $1,033,975 5.42%$1,290,000 $69,909
2 Dolphin Harbour 125 Island Way $2,680,000 $99,259 $1,157,000 8.58%$1,157,000 $99,259
3 Azure 415 Island Way $3,800,000 $82,609 $893,044 9.25%$893,044 $82,609
Average $79,301 $1,028,006 7.75%$1,113,348 $83,926
Indicated Unit Value for Subject Rounded:$82,000
The 2023 condominium pricing for these three projects would support pricing of the subjects 195 units to be in the
range of $1,000,000 to $1,200,000. Utilizing an average of $1,100,000 and our previously concluded land value of
$82,000 per unit results in a land-to-revenue ratio of 7.45%. This figure is in line with the average of our three
comparables. Therefore, our previously concluded market value of $82,000 per unit would appear reasonable based
on the comparables and the land-to-revenue ratio.
Page 22
Sales Comparison Approach – 400 Unit Rental
Apartment Site
In this valuation scenario, we have assumed the subject would have an encumbrance to develop a minimum of 400
apartment units without regard to the design of the building or underground parking requirement. It is likely that any
private developer when presented with such an encumbrance would consider a wrap style project (utilizing a central
above-ground concrete parking structure which is surrounded or “wrapped” by 4-8 stories).
For this analysis, we have not recreated the entire sales comparison approach, but have relied upon our previous
discussion. We have only included analysis/adjustment on the differing variables.
Comparable Sales Data
The subject is located in Clearwater. We have researched the Clearwater market for sales of land purchased for the
development of apartments and have been unable to locate any. As a result, we have had to expand our search to
neighboring cities in Pinellas County. We have found a number of apartment land sales in St. Petersburg for
comparison to the subject.
The comparable land sales selected represent the best available for this analysis. The most widely used unit of
comparison in this market for the subject property type is based on the development potential of the site on a
residential per unit basis. As a result, we have analyzed the comparable sales on a price per unit.
The comparable land sales included in this appraisal report are summarized in the table below. The following page
includes a location map for the comparable land sales and reflects proximity to the subject property. The Addenda
contains comparable land sales data sheets. Given the characteristics of the subject site, as well as the information
obtained for the comparable data, the comparables were analyzed through the application of a traditional adjustment
grid using percentage adjustments.
Comp Address Date No. of Units
Comp City Price Price Per Land Unit
Subject 112 S Osceola Ave 400
Subject Clearwater ----
1 720 Charles Ct S 6/3/2022 260
1 Saint Petersburg $8,750,000 $33,654
2 1625 1st Ave N 6/21/2022 244
2 Saint Petersburg $6,500,100 $26,640
3 1624-1662 Burlington Ave N 1/13/2023 232
3 St. Petersburg $8,456,300 $36,450
4 3200-3300 Fairfield Ave S & 695
31st St S
2/22/2023 264
4 Saint Petersburg $5,850,000 $22,159
Page 23
Land Sales Map
The Adjustment Process
Property Level Characteristics
Location
The subject property is located at the northwest corner of S Osceola Ave and Pierce St in Clearwater. Each of the
sales was adjusted, if required, for locational characteristics differing from those of the subject property. All of the
sales are located in St. Petersburg. Sales 1, 2, and 3 are located in close proximity to Downtown St. Petersburg,
requiring a downward adjustment. Sale 4 is located just west of Downtown St. Petersburg, requiring minimal
adjustment for its similar location.
Land SF
The subject site is 113,256 square feet in size. Differences in land size were also considered. Significantly larger
properties oftentimes have a smaller pool of potential buyers, which can result in lower pricing per unit of comparison
relative to much smaller properties offering similar utility, based on the economies of scale. In downtown areas it
appears that developer’s highest preference is to utilize lots that are approximately 22,000 SF (half acre) to 55,000
SF (1.25 acres) for development. Many of the sales were assemblages or were being marketed with additional sites
available to entice larger national developers, as well as smaller, local developers. Therefore, sites between 22,000
SF to 55,000 SF appear to be more desirable than those that are smaller or larger in size. The subject is much larger
in size at 113,256 SF; therefore, downward adjustments are required for Sales 1, 2, & 3. These economies of scale
size adjustments are supported by additional sales not utilized in the analysis.
Page 24
Zoning/Density
There is generally an inverse size and rate relationship where lands producing a higher yield (units per acre) typically
trade at a higher rate per acre and vice versa. With respect to density, those developments which have significantly
higher density per acre generate much lower sale prices per unit due to the impact of economies of scale. Conversely
lower density sites tend to generate higher rates per unit. Inherent within this theory, a typical purchaser will consider
the total unit inventory and its risks associated with higher or lower unit count (density) and pay accordingly based on
current market indices.
Sales 1, 2, & 3 all have a much higher density per acre and we have applied an upward adjustment to each sale
compared to the subject’s lower density per acre based on the related economies of scale. Comparable 4 has a lower
density per acre, resulting in a downward adjustment.
Flood Zone
The subject and all the comparables are located in a flood zone X with no adjustments required.
Summary of Adjustments
The following table presents a summary of the adjustments for the underlying site.
Page 25
Land Analysis Grid
Address
City
State
Date
Actual Price
Price Adjustment
Adjusted Price
Land SF
No. of Units
Price per Unit
Transaction Adjustments
Property Rights Fee Simple 0.0%Fee Simple 0.0%Fee Simple 0.0%Fee Simple 0.0%
Financing Conventional 0.0%Conventional 0.0%Conventional 0.0%Conventional 0.0%
Conditions of Sale Arm's Length 0.0%Arm's Length 0.0%Arm's Length 0.0%Arm's Length 0.0%
Expend. After Sale
Market Trends
Characteristics Adjustments
Location
% Adjustment
$ Adjustment
Land SF
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Topography
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Shape
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Utilities
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Zoning
Proposed Density
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Flood Zone
% Adjustment
Qualitative
$ Adjustment
Adjusted Price per Unit
Net Adjustments
113,256 50,000 31,749 31,750 301,344
Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4
Clearwater Saint Petersburg Saint Petersburg St. Petersburg Saint Petersburg
112 S Osceola Ave 720 Charles Ct S 1625 1st Ave N 1624-1662 Burlington
Ave N
3200-3300 Fairfield Ave
S & 695 31st St S
6/3/2022 6/21/2022 1/13/2023 2/22/2023
FL FL FL FL FL
--$8,750,000 $6,500,100 $8,456,300 $5,600,000
$8,750,000 $6,500,100 $8,456,300 $5,850,000
$0 $0 $0 $250,000
$33,654 $26,640 $36,450 $22,159
400 260 244 232 264
$0 $0 $0 $0
Fee Simple
Adjusted Price per Unit $33,654 $26,640 $36,450 $22,159
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Adjusted Price per Unit $33,654 $26,640 $36,450 $22,159
-25%-25%-25%0%
Superior Superior Superior Similar
113,256 50,000 31,749 31,750 301,344
-$8,413 -$6,660 -$9,112 $0
-10%-10%-10%0%
-$3,365 -$2,664 -$3,645 $0
Superior Superior Superior Similar
0%0%0%0%
Gently Sloping Gently Sloping Gently Sloping Gently Sloping
Roughly rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular
$0 $0 $0 $0
Similar Similar Similar Similar
Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar
0%0%0%0%
0%0%0%0%
Available to Site Available to Site Available to Site Available to Site All to Site
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
D DC-2 DC-2 DC-2 IT
$0 $0 $0 $0
Similar Similar Similar Similar
153.8 226.5 334.8 318.3 38.2
$3,365 $3,996 $5,467 -$1,108
Inferior Inferior Inferior Superior
10%15%15%-5%
0%0%0%0%
Zone X Zone X Zone X Zone X Zone X
$0 $0 $0 $0
Similar Similar Similar Similar
-25.0%-20.0%-20.0%-5.0%
$25,240 $21,312 $29,160 $21,051
Page 26
Land Sale Value Metrics – Fee Simple Market Value
The following table presents the metrics for the unadjusted and adjusted land sales. The table also presents the
concluded market value per unit for the subject property. Equal weight is given in arriving at our reconciled value of
$22,500, just below the median price.
Number of Comparables:4 % Δ
-5%
-20%
-19%
-23%
30,146.80 7,478,200.00 no. of unit
Low:$22,159 $21,051
High:$36,450 $29,160
Land Value Ranges & As Is Reconciled Value
Unadjusted Adjusted
Reconciled Value/Unit Value:$22,500
Subject Size:400
Indicated Value:$9,000,000
Average:$29,726 $24,191
Median:$30,147 $23,276
Reconciled Final As Is Value:$9,000,000
Page 27
Valuation – 400 Unit, Single Tower Rental
Apartment Site (Revised Gotham Proposal)
Development Proposal
In 2022, Clearwater council and the Gotham Group signed a development agreement that includes purchasing the
subject City Hall site for $15.4 million and the Harborview Center site for $9.3 million.
The city would offer developer incentives, $1.5 million toward impact fees to be paid for by the Community
Redevelopment Agency, the creation of a special downtown tax district, up to $2 million to split the cost of a
pedestrian bridge and $22 million for two underground parking garages to be paid from the city’s parking fund.
Gotham has since stated that the market has changed so dramatically they can no longer proceed with their plans
and are proposing a scaled-down development and seeking to reduce the price of the subject City Hall site. The initial
proposal included two 27-story towers with at least 500 apartments, with the current proposal being a single tower
with 400 units. Two levels of subsurface parking will also be eliminated in the new proposal. A summary of their
“Pathway to a Groundbreaking” for the revised proposal is shown below:
The City hired HR&A Advisors to evaluate the modifications to the development agreement that the Buyer has
proposed. Based on HR&A's preliminary guidance, the City is now preparing to make a counter-offer. We have been
asked to evaluate the market value of the land under this new proposal. We have nearly fully relied upon the figures
provided in the Gotham presentation and the HR&A analysis provided, with a few exceptions. The aim of this
approach is to develop an indication of what the market would consider an acceptable yield to cost (YTC = Net
Operating Income/Total Development Cost), capitalization rate and resultantly what the subject property would sell for
under the deed restrictions of the development agreement.
Valuation Analysis
To estimate the value of the subject with a deed restriction only allowing for the previously described development,
we have relied upon the financial information provided by both the developer (Gotham) and the City consultant
(HR&A). Utilizing this information, we have employed a land residual technique which is a form of the yield
capitalization methodology. We have considered both the capitalization rate and yield to cost in our approach.
HR&A has completed a review of Gotham’s financial model and found that most of the real estate market
assumptions employed are in alignment with market trends, industry standards, and prior transactions. HR&A
identified a financial gap of approximately $76.5 to $80.0 million under the Revised Proposal, in comparison with the
approximate $80 million financial gap that Gotham identified.
Page 28
There is one major item of disagreement that we have considered in our valuation. Both Gotham and HR&A have
utilized a rate of $5,750 per unit per year for property taxes. The HR&A report states that an income approach was
utilized to estimate this figure.
The following table presents our projected real estate taxes, including non-ad valorem assessments and any cap
adjustments that would be applied to the subject property.
Projected Real Estate Taxes
Total Construction Costs (Excluding Land Value)$205,474,891
Assessment Ratio 85%
Assessed Value $174,653,657
Current Millage Rate 20.36210
Projected Ad Valorem Taxes $3,556,315
Current Non-Ad Valorem Taxes $0
Real Estate Taxes $3,556,315
Payment Discount 4.0%
Total Taxes After December Payment Discount $3,414,063
Total Taxes Per Proposed Unit $8,535
We have utilized an assessment ratio of 85% of the total construction costs to determine the projected assessed
value upon completion. Of note, due to the complex number of development variables for the subject proposal and
resultant changing land values, we have excluded any land value from our construction cost estimate. If a land value
were to be included, it is likely that the total taxes would increase.
We have also noted that the total operating expenses that HR&A estimates does not match the amount stated in the
Gotham proposal. As shown below, Gotham has estimated total operating expenses of $4,998,161 or $12,495 per
unit.
Page 29
The Gotham proposal does not break the expenses down further into individual items. Utilizing the more detailed
information from the HR&A report, the Gotham figures appear to be comprised of taxes of $5,750 per unit, insurance
of $1,800 per unit and operating expenses of $4,945 per unit. The HR&A figures at first glance appear to be similar,
however when taking into account the $8,039 per unit operating expense line item (exclusive of taxes and inclusive of
insurance, page 12 of HR&A report), the total expenses are $1,294 per unit higher in the HR&A report. For our
purposes, we have utilized the lower operating expense estimates utilized in the Gotham proposal (with the exception
of taxes). A summary of our proforma, Gotham and HR&A expenses are shown below:
Expense Summary
Entreken Proforma HR&A Gotham
Taxes $8,535 $5,750 $5,750
Insurance $1,800 $1,800 $1,800
Operating Expenses $4,945 $6,239 $4,945
Total Expenses Per Unit $15,280 $13,789 $12,495
Total Expenses $6,112,161 $5,515,600 $4,998,161
To test the reasonability of the operating expenses, we have surveyed four other apartment properties in the
surrounding area. The operating expenses (excluding insurance and taxes) ranged from $5,029 to $5,652 per unit, or
an average of $5,293 per unit. Our estimate of $4,945 appears reasonable. The insurance amount of $1,800 per unit
was also considered reasonable, as we have relied upon a recently constructed, similar sized apartment building in
Tampa where the insurance cost was reported at $1,700 per unit.
In order to determine if the subject return on cost estimations are sufficient to meet market demands, we have
considered several resources. It should be noted the majority of these resources include returns for similar multifamily
projects and consider Yield to Cost, Internal Rate of Return and Capitalization Rates. However, the majority of this
data represent stabilized projects as opposed to the subject which will be newly constructed and unstabilized. For the
subject property, we are considering a project which is land only to be developed into a multifamily project which
would typically be a greater risk to an investor than a stabilized project in the market.
The following resources were considered in determining market acceptable returns:
According to the PwC Real Estate Investor Survey, Third Quarter 2023, expected discount rates or internal rates of
return for stabilized multifamily properties is shown on the following page:
Page 30
Page 31
As illustrated, capitalization rates for apartments in Southeast Region 4.75% to 5.50%, with an average of 5.25%.
Discount rates (IRR) for stabilized apartment projects range from 6.00% to 9.00%. However, it should be noted this
range represents stabilized projects that have been developed and units that have been absorbed/leased up. Further,
the capitalization rates and yield on cost are based on net operating income for a single year and do not consider all
the other years in the holding period like an IRR does. Creating a multiyear proforma would allow for analysis over
the entire holding period. This however, is beyond the scope of this report.
In addition, the PWC Real Estate Investor Survey illustrates various yields for mortgages, treasuries, and a composite
(PYI) of all of the stabilized IRR properties. Once again, we recognize that these represent properties which have
been constructed and are stabilized as opposed to the subject property which is being developed and inherently will
have more risk from development to stabilization.
Page 32
As stated in the HR&A analysis, Gotham utilized a 5.25% cap rate in their revised proposal. This is 62 basis points
below their yield on cost of 5.87% (though they state a required 6% YTC threshold). The subject projected return on
cost would fall below those expectations for cap rates in markets throughout the United States with the focus being
on those in the Tampa market ranging from 4.75% to 5.50% return for stabilized projects. These are derived from the
CBRE, United States Cap Rate Survey, First Half 2023, U.S. Multifamily Suburban. Yield to Cost, cap rates and the
risk-free rate are typically related. The yield on cost is also used to calculate the development spread, which is the
difference between the yield on cost and the market-based cap rate for similar but already existing buildings in the
same market. The development spread tells you how much additional return you are earning in exchange for taking
on all the risk of construction and development. Developers would typically use a 50 to 150 basis point premium over
prevailing market cap rates to determine an appropriate YTC.
We have also had discussions with various developers and brokers active in the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater
metro area regarding required investment returns in the multi-family market. This includes Patrick Dufour and Mathew
Everett at Newmark, Jason Puckett at Collier Group and Michael Mincberg at Sight Development. The consensus is
that cap rates for new multi-family projects similar to the subject would be in the range of 5.00% to 5.50%, with a 100
to 150 basis point premium to account for the development spread to arrive at a YTC in the range of 6.00% to 6.50%.
Page 33
Land Residual – Capitalization Rate
We have relied upon the data provided by both HR&A and Gotham (with the exception of the real estate taxes), and
we have first considered the value of the subject under an Income Approach to Value, to determine the residual value
of the land. We have utilized the total development costs provided in the Gotham proforma (excluding land value) and
a 5.00% capitalization rate, as summarized below. This results in a residual land value of -$14,400,000.
Proforma
Income
Effective Gross Income $15,666,942
Less: Expenses
Tax Expense $8,535 /unit $3,414,000
Insurance $1,800 /unit $720,000
Other Operating Expenses $4,945 /unit $1,978,161
Total Operating Expenses $15,280 $6,112,161
Net Operating Income $9,554,781
Sensitivity Analysis Cap Rate Value Per Unit
4.50%$212,328,467 $530,821
4.75%$201,153,284 $502,883
5.00%$191,095,620 $477,739
5.25%$181,995,829 $454,990
5.50%$173,723,291 $434,308
Less: Total Development Costs (excl. land)
Residual Land Value
$191,000,000
$205,400,000
-$14,400,000
Value
Interest Appraised Value Conclusion (Rounded)
Stabilized 400 unit Single Tower Proposal
Page 34
Land Residual – Yield to Cost Rate
We have also considered the impact a change to Yield to Cost would have on the market value of the land. Of note,
the YTC included in the Gotham report is equal to the NOI divided by the Total Development Cost less the net of
subsidy and hard cost escalation. We have carried the same amount of net subsidy and hard cost escalation
($31,250,000) in our calculation as utilized by Gotham.
We have estimated a desired YTC of 6.00% for a land development multifamily project based on the previous
discussion as well as expectations from previous development clients. There is considerable risk in the market given
rising construction costs, rising operating costs such as insurance and maintenance, an increase in multifamily
supply, and relatively strict lending standards which are currently in effect. Of note, utilizing the figures from the
revised Gotham development proposal and our estimate for taxes, results in an untrended YTC of 5.25% still
including land costs at $7,600,000.
The chart below recreates the Gotham proposal and our estimate for taxes, as well as outlines our estimated market
value as encumbered at a 6.00% YTC, shown in the sensitivity analysis. At a 6.00% YTC, this results in a residual
land value of -$15,000,000.
Revised Gotham Development Proposal
October 17, 2023
- Entreken
Proforma
Building Program
Gross SF 618,314
Net Rentable SF (Res)354,703
Net Rentable SF (Retail)15,900
Apartments (#)400
Parking Spaces (#)440
Effective Gross Income $15,666,942
Total Operating Expenses $6,112,161
Net Operating Income $9,554,781
Residential Rent PSF $3.60
Yield to Cost - Untrended 5.25%
Hard Costs $175,040,000
Land Costs $7,600,000
Financing Costs $7,700,376
Soft Costs $22,734,515
Total Development Costs $213,074,891
Sensitivity Analysis YTC Land Value Per Unit
6.50%-$27,228,260 -$68,071
6.25%-$21,348,395 -$53,371
6.00%-$14,978,541 -$37,446
5.75%-$8,054,787 -$20,137
5.50%-$501,600 -$1,254
5.25%$7,600,000 $19,000
Value
Interest Appraised Value Conclusion (Rounded)
Deed Restricted - Revised Gotham 400 unit
Single Tower Proposal -$15,000,000
Page 35
Value Summary - 400 Unit, Single Tower Rental Apartment Site (Revised Gotham Proposal)
In order to determine the current market value of the land, we have also been asked to consider the total subsidies
that will be provided for the subject development. According to the contact at the City of Clearwater, the subsidies in
place total $18,136,781. Therefore, this amount has been used to adjust the residual value indication. A summary of
the value of the subject after including these city funds is shown below:
Residual Land Value - YTC Method
Residual Land Value Conclusion
Add: Total Subsidies
Land Value (including Subsidies)
Land Value (including Subsidies), Rounded
Value Conclusion
Interest Appraised Value Conclusion (Rounded)
Residual Land Value - Income Method -$14,400,000
$3,450,000
-$15,000,000
-$14,700,000
$18,136,781
$3,436,781
Page 36
Final Reconciliation
The process of reconciliation involves the analysis of each approach to value. The quality of data applied, the
significance of each approach as it relates to market behavior and defensibility of each approach are considered and
weighed. Finally, each is considered separately and comparatively with each other.
The value indications and conclusions developed for the subject property as of October 17, 2023, subject to the
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, are summarized in the following table.
Premise Interest Appraised Effective Date Value Conclusion Estimated Marketing
Current Market Value Fee Simple 10/17/2023 $16,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value Deed Restricted - 400+ unit
Apartment Project 10/17/2023 $9,000,000 5-7 months
Current Market Value
Deed Restricted - Revised
Gotham 400 unit Single Tower
Proposal - Including Subsidies
10/17/2023 $3,450,000 5-7 months
Value Conclusions
According to the Appraisal Standards Board (ASB) of the Appraisal Foundation, “reasonable marketing time” is an
estimate of the amount of time it might take to sell a property interest at the estimated Market Value during the period
immediately after the effective date of the report. It is not intended to be a prediction of a specific date of sale and,
therefore, may be expressed as a range. Exposure time is defined as the estimated length of time the property
interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at
Market Value on the effective date of report. Based upon the sales presented herein, an exposure period of 5-7
months is considered reasonable. Marketing time is also concluded at 5-7 months.
Page 37
Certification Statement
We certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:
1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting
conditions, and is our personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions.
3. We have no present or prospective future interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and have no
personal interest with respect to the parties involved.
4. We have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report, or to the parties involved with this
assignment.
5. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.
6. Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a
predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate,
the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use
of this appraisal.
7. Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with
the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).
8. Nathan Stienstra (Senior Real Estate Analyst) provided significant real property assistance to the appraiser
signing the certification. Assistance included gathering, analyzing and reporting zoning, tax information, and
assisting with portions of the valuation analysis.
9. We certify sufficient competence to appraise this property through education and experience, in addition to the
internal resources of the firm.
10. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the
Appraisal Institute.
11. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly
authorized representatives.
12. The appraiser has not performed any services regarding the subject within the three-year period immediately
preceding acceptance of this assignment.
13. Wesley R. Sanders, MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM has made an inspection of the subject property.
As of the date of this report, Wesley Sanders, MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM has completed the requirements of the continuing
education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute. As of the date of this report, Wesley Sanders,
MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM has completed the requirements of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation
under the provisions of Chapter 475 FS of the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board.
Wesley R. Sanders, MAI, AI-GRS, CCIM
Senior Managing Director
State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser RZ2911
Page 38
Basic Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
1. By this notice, all persons, companies, or corporations using or relying on this report in any manner bind
themselves to accept these contingent and limiting conditions, and all other contingent and limiting
conditions contained elsewhere in this report. Do not use any portion of this report unless you fully accept all
contingent and limiting conditions contained throughout this document.
2. Throughout this report, the singular term "Appraiser" also refers to the plural term "Appraisers”. The terms
"Appraiser" and “Appraisers” refer collectively to "Entreken Associates, Inc.", its officers, employees,
contractors, and associate appraisers. The masculine terms "he" or "his" also refer to the feminine term
"she" or "her”.
3. These conditions are an integral part of this appraisal report, and are a preface to any certification, definition,
description, fact, or analysis. Moreover, these conditions are intended to establish as a matter of record that
the purpose of this report is to provide one or more value opinions for the subject property. All value opinions
are prepared solely for the explicitly identified client and other explicitly identified intended users.
4. Value opinions involve only real estate, and inconsequential personal property. Unless explicitly stated
otherwise, value conclusions do not include personal property, un-affixed equipment, trade fixtures,
business-good will, chattel, or franchise items of material worth.
5. As part of this appraisal, information was gathered and analyzed to form value opinion(s) that pertain solely
to one or more explicitly identified effective value dates. The effective value date is the only point in time that
the value applies. Information about the subject property, neighborhood, comparables, or other topics
discussed in this report was obtained from sensible sources. In accordance with the extent of research
disclosed in the Scope of Work section, all information cited herein was examined for accuracy, is believed
to be reliable, and is assumed reasonably accurate. However, no guaranties or warranties are made for this
information. No liability or responsibility is assumed for any inaccuracy which is outside the control of the
Appraiser, beyond the scope of work, or outside reasonable due diligence of the Appraiser.
6. Real estate values are affected by many changing factors. Therefore, any value opinion expressed herein is
considered credible only on the effective value date. Every day that passes thereafter, the degree of
credibility wanes as the subject changes physically, the economy changes, or market conditions change.
The Appraiser reserves the right to amend these analyses and/or value opinion(s) contained within this
appraisal report if erroneous, or more factual-information is subsequently discovered. No guarantee is made
for the accuracy of estimates or opinions furnished by others, and replied upon in this report.
7. This appraisal is not an engineering, construction, legal, or architectural study. It is not an examination or
survey of any kind. Expertise in these areas is not implied. The Appraiser is in no way responsible for any
costs incurred to discover, or correct any deficiency in the property. In the case of limited partnerships,
syndication offerings, or stock offerings in the real estate, the client agrees that in case of lawsuit (brought
by the lender, partner, or part owner in any form of ownership, tenant, or any other party), the client will hold
Entreken Associates, Inc., its officers, contractors, employees and associate appraisers completely
harmless. Acceptance of, and/or use of this report by the client, or any third party is prima facie evidence
that the user understands, and agrees to all these conditions.
8. Unless specifically stated otherwise herein, the Appraiser is unaware of any engineering study made to
determine the bearing capacity of the subject land, or nearby lands. Improvements in the vicinity, if any,
appear to be structurally sound. It is assumed soil and subsoil conditions are stable and free from features
that cause supernormal costs to arise. It is also assumed existing soil conditions of the subject land have
proper load bearing qualities to support the existing improvements, or proposed improvements appropriate
for the site. No investigations for potential seismic hazards were made. This appraisal assumes there are no
conditions of the site, subsoil, or structures, whether latent, patent, or concealed that would render the
subject property less valuable. Unless specifically stated otherwise in this document, no earthquake
compliance report, engineering report, flood zone analysis, hazardous substance determination, or analysis
of these unfavorable attributes was made, or ordered in conjunction with this appraisal report. The client is
strongly urged to retain experts in these fields, if so desired.
9. For appraisals of multifamily property, only a portion of all dwellings was observed. A typical ratio of
observed dwellings roughly approximates 10% of the total number of units, and this ratio declines as the
number of dwellings grows. It is assumed the functionality, physical condition, and interior finish of unseen
units are similar to the functionality, physical condition, and interior finish of observed units. If unobserved
dwellings significantly differ from those that were viewed in functionality, physical condition, or finish, the
Appraiser reserves the right to amend theses analysis and/or value opinion(s).
10. If this appraisal values the subject as though construction, repairs, alterations, remodeling, renovation, or
rehabilitation will be completed in the future, it is assumed such work will be completed in a timely fashion,
using non-defective materials, and proper workmanship. All previously completed work is assumed to
substantially conform to plans, specifications, descriptions, or attachments made or referred to herein. It is
also assumed all planned, in-progress, or recently completed construction complies with the zoning
Page 39
ordinance, and all applicable building codes. A prospective value opinion has an effective value date that is
beyond or in the future relative to the report preparation date. If this appraisal includes a prospective
valuation, it is understood and agreed the Appraiser is not responsible for an unfavorable value effect
caused by unforeseeable events that occur before completion of the project.
11. This valuation may or may not include an observation of the appraised property by a signatory to this report.
The extent of any observation is disclosed in the Scope of Work section of this report. Any observation by a
signatory is not, and should not be misconstrued as a professional property inspection. Comments or
descriptions about physical condition of the improvements, if any, are based solely on a superficial visual
observation. Electric, heating, cooling, plumbing, water supply, sewer or septic, mechanical equipment, and
other systems were not tested. No determination was made regarding the operability, capacity, or remaining
physical life of any component in, on, or under the real estate appraised. All building components are
assumed adequate and in good working order unless stated otherwise. Private water wells and private
septic systems are assumed sufficient to comply with federal, state, or local health safety standards. No
liability is assumed for the soundness of structural members since structural elements were not tested or
studied to determine their structural integrity. The roof cover for all structures is assumed water tight unless
otherwise noted. Comments regarding physical condition are included to familiarize the reader with the
property. This document is not an engineering or architectural report. If the client has any concern regarding
structural, mechanical or protective components of the improvements, or the adequacy or quality of sewer,
water or other utilities, the client should hire experts in an appropriate discipline before relying upon this
report. No representations are made herein as to these matters unless explicitly stated otherwise in this
report.
12. If this appraisal values an interest that is less than the whole fee simple estate, then the following disclosure
applies. The value for any fractional interest appraised plus the value of all other complementary fractional
interests may or may not equal the value of the entire fee simple estate.
13. An appraised property that is a physical portion of a larger parcel or tract is subject to the following
limitations. The value opinion for the property appraised pertains only to that portion defined as the subject.
This value opinion should not be construed as applying with equal validity to other complementary portions
of the same parcel or tract. The value opinion for the physical portion appraised plus the value of all other
complementary physical portions may or may not equal the value of the whole parcel or tract.
14. No liability is assumed for matters of legal nature that affect the value of the subject property. Unless a clear
statement to the contrary is made in this report, value opinion(s) formed herein are predicated upon the
following assumptions. (A) The real property is appraised as though, and assumed free from all value
impairments including yet not limited to title defects, liens, encumbrances, title claims, boundary
discrepancies, encroachments, adverse easements, environmental hazards, pest infestation, leases, and
atypical physical deficiencies. (B) All real estate taxes and assessments, of any type, are assumed fully
paid. (C) The property being appraised is assumed to be owned under responsible and lawful ownership.
(D) It is assumed the subject property is operated under competent and informed management. (E) The
subject property was appraised as though, and assumed free of indebtedness. (F) The subject real estate is
assumed fully compliant with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws. (G)
The subject is assumed fully compliant with all applicable zoning ordinances, building codes, use
regulations, and restrictions of all types. (H) All licenses, consents, permits, or other documentation required
by any relevant legislative or governmental authority, private entity, or organization have been obtained, or
can be easily be obtained or renewed for a nominal fee.
15. The allocation of value between the subject's land and improvements, if any, represents our judgment only
under the existing use of the property. A re-evaluation should be made if the improvements are removed,
substantially altered, or the land is utilized for another purpose.
16. The Appraiser assumes a prospective purchaser of the subject is aware of the following. (A) This appraisal
of the subject property does not serve as a warranty on the physical condition of the property. (B) It is the
responsibility of the purchaser to carefully examine the property, and to take all necessary precautions
before signing a purchase contract. (C) Any estimate for repairs is a non-warranted opinion of the Appraiser.
17. Any exhibits in the report are intended to assist the reader in visualizing the subject property and its
surroundings. The drawings are not surveys unless specifically identified as such. No responsibility is
assumed for cartographic accuracy. Drawings are not intended to be exact in size, scale, or detail.
18. Conversion of the subject's income into a market value opinion is based upon typical financing terms that
were readily available from a disinterested, third party lender on this report’s effective date. Atypical
financing terms and conditions do not influence market value, but may affect investment value.
19. All information and comments concerning the location, market area, trends, construction quality,
construction costs, value loss, physical condition, rents, or any other data for the subject represent estimates
and opinions of the Appraiser. Expenses shown in the Income Approach, if used, are only estimates. They
are based on past operating history, if available, and are stabilized as generally typical over a reasonable
ownership period.
20. The Appraiser is not required to give testimony or appear in court because of having prepared this report
unless arrangements are agreed to in advance. If the Appraiser is subpoenaed pursuant to court order, the
client agrees to compensate the Appraiser for their court appearance time, court preparation time, and travel
Page 40
time at their regular hourly rate then in effect plus expenses. In the event the real property appraised is, or
becomes the subject of litigation, a condemnation, or other legal proceeding, it is assumed the Appraiser will
be given reasonable advanced notice, and reasonable additional time for court preparation.
21. Entreken Associates, Inc. and the Appraiser have no expertise in the field of insect, termite, or pest
infestation. We are not qualified to detect the presence of these or any other unfavorable infestation. The
Appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of any infestation on, under, above, or within the subject real
estate. No overt evidence of infestation is apparent to the untrained eye. However, we have not specifically
inspected or tested the subject property to determine the presence of any infestation. No effort was made to
dismantle or probe the structure. No effort was exerted to observe enclosed, encased, or otherwise
concealed evidence of infestation. The presence of any infestation would likely diminish the property's value.
All value opinions in this communication assume there is no infestation of any type affecting the subject real
estate. No responsibility is assumed by Entreken Associates, Inc. or the Appraiser for any infestation or for
any expertise required to discover any infestation. Our client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if
desired.
22. Effective January 26, 1992, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - a national law, affects all
nonresidential real estate or the portion of any property, which is non-residential. The Appraiser has not
observed the subject property to determine whether the subject conforms to the requirements of the ADA. It
is possible a compliance survey, together with a detailed analysis of ADA requirements, could reveal the
subject is not fully compliant. If such a determination was made, the subject's value may or may not be
adversely affected. Since the Appraiser has no direct evidence, or knowledge pertaining to the subject's
compliance or lack of compliance, this appraisal does not consider possible noncompliance or its effect on
the subject's value. All opinions are those of the signatory Appraiser based on the information in this report.
No responsibility is assumed by the Appraiser for changes in market conditions, or for the inability of the
client, or any other party to achieve their desired results based upon the appraised value. Some of the
assumptions or projections made herein can vary depending upon evolving events. We realize some
assumptions may never occur and unexpected events or circumstances may occur. Therefore, actual results
achieved during the projection period may vary from those set forth in this report. Compensation for
appraisal services is dependent solely on the delivery of this report, and no other event or occurrence.
23. No part of this report shall be published or disseminated to the public by the use of advertising media, public
relations media, news media, sales media, electronic devices, or other media without the prior written
consent of Entreken Associates, Inc. This restriction applies particularly as to analyses, opinions, and
conclusions; the identity of the Appraiser; and any reference to the Appraisal Institute or its MAI, SRPA, or
SRA designations. Furthermore, no part of this report may be reproduced or incorporated into any
information retrieval system without written permission from Entreken Associates, Inc., the copyright holder.
Page 41
Addenda
Page 42
Regional Analysis
REGIONAL MAP
Introduction
The subject property is located in Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, which is within the Tampa-St. Petersburg-
Clearwater Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Tampa MSA is generally referred to as the Tampa Bay area,
which consists of Hernando, Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties, as defined by the US Census Bureau. It
includes the major municipalities of Tampa, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, and Brandon. Some publications also include
the Citrus, Manatee, Pasco, Polk, and Sarasota counties. However, for this analysis, we have included the four
county area. The Tampa Bay area is approximately 80 miles west of Orlando, 270 miles northwest of Miami, and 200
miles southwest of Jacksonville. Because the subject benefits from the strength of the area, an overview of this area
is appropriate, followed by a description of the community in which the subject is located. The Tampa Bay MSA is
located in Southwest Florida on the Gulf of Mexico and Tampa Bay and encompasses 2,554.5 square miles.
Page 43
MSA at a Glance - TAMPA-ST. PETERSBURG-CLEARWATER FL
Page 44
Page 45
Employment
Tampa Bay’s unemployment rate has decreased from a high of 13.2% in April 2020, and is at 2.3% as of April 2023,
according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics figures. The losses slowed in mid-2020 as Florida re-opened
businesses, but much of the leisure, hospitality and tourism industries had ground to a halt. Among the other hardest
hit industries were health care, social assistance, retail trade, professional and business services and construction.
Health care job loss may have seemed unexpected, but the sector lost at least 43,000 jobs nationally, according to
the report. Since mid-2020, these industries have recovered, and Florida unemployment now well outpaces the
national average.
Unemployment
The following table exhibits current and past unemployment rates as obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Overall, the metro and the state had a lower unemployment rate than the nation. This, combined with the pro-
business philosophy of Florida, has increased investor demand for real estate in Florida over the past couple years.
Area YE 2017 YE 2018 YE 2019 YE 2020 YE 2021 YE 2022 Jun-23
Tampa-St. Pete-Clwr, FL MSA 3.7%3.3%2.8%5.4%3.0%2.2%3.0%
Florida 3.8%3.4%2.7%6.2%3.1%2.3%3.0%
United States 4.1%3.9%3.6%6.7%3.9%3.5%3.6%
Unemployment Rates
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
Unemployment Rates
Tampa-St. Pete-Clwr, FL MSA
Florida
United States
Page 46
The following table provides the employment by industry for the Tampa Bay MSA.
Mining/Logging 300 0.0%
Construction 95,000 6.2%
Manufacturing 75,900 5.0%
Trade, Transportation, Utilities 281,200 18.4%
Information 28,600 1.9%
Financial Activities 136,500 9.0%
Professional and Business Services 301,900 19.8%
Education and Health Services 239,700 15.7%
Leisure and Hospitality 168,700 11.1%
Other Services 50,500 3.3%
Government 146,300 9.6%
Employment by Industry - Tampa Bay MSA
Industry Jun-23
Percent of
Employment
Major Employers
The following table indicates the major employers within the Tampa Bay MSA.
Company No. of Employees
State of Florida 34,100
MacDill Air Force Base 30,844
BayCare Health System 27,739
Publix Super Markets 27,000
Hillsborough County School District 24,866
HCA West Florida Division 16,865
University of South Florida 15,678
Polk County School District 13,500
Pinellas County School District 13,384
Pasco County School District 12,725
Major Employers - Tampa Bay MSA
Tourism
Visitors to the Tampa Bay area contributed a direct impact of $4.5 billion in 2021, which included spending by
international visitors, and domestic day and overnight visitors. This direct impact of $4.5 billion generated $1.2 billion
in indirect impacts and another $1.5 billion in induced impacts, resulting in a total economic impact of $7.1 billion on
the regional economy. Visit Tampa Bay said overall, total taxable hotel revenue for Tampa Bay has reached
$895,488,762 for fiscal year 2022. Those numbers surpass pre-pandemic levels and represent a winning streak that
will only continue.
In Hillsborough County, the total Tourist Development Tax collections within the first 11 months of the 2022 fiscal
year hit $53,716,578. That's a 59% increase over the same period in 2021.
Pinellas County is known for the beaches of the barrier islands including from Clearwater Beach in the north to St.
Pete Beach in the south. The St. Petersburg/Clearwater area is the leading destination on the Gulf Coast.
Busch Gardens Tampa Bay launches the Serengeti Flyer, the tallest and fastest ride of its kind, while Adventure
Island Water Park offers its new rides called Rapids Racer and Wahoo Remix. ZooTampa at Lowry Pak has also
expanded its site to treat some of the injured Florida manatees.
Page 47
The Gulf Coast draws visitors for the outdoor and on-the-water recreational opportunities such as golf with a myriad
of public, municipal and private courses. The area is known as one of the best fishing grounds with both inshore and
offshore opportunities and charter companies operating out of the many marinas in the area. Clearwater Beach is
known as one of the best beaches in the world (Trip Advisor’s #1 in 2018) with many attractions including the
Clearwater Marine Aquarium that’s home to two of the world’s most famous dolphins.
There are many museums and other cultural attractions that draw tourists including the Dali Museum, the Chihuly
Collection, St. Petersburg Museum of History and Imagine Museum to name a few. The St. Petersburg Arts Alliance
partnered with St. Petersburg to ensure a strong arts-related economic presence and foster growth in the seven arts
districts.
Largo offers several attractions including the Florida Botanical Gardens, and the Pinellas County Heritage Village, an
open-air historical village and museum dating to the mid-19th Century. The Pinellas Trail is a linear trail extending
from St. Petersburg to Tarpon Springs through Largo. The 45-mile trail is developed mostly along abandoned rail
lines and is open for cyclists, joggers, and skaters.
Linkages
Interstate 275 traverses north and south through the center of the county. This limited-access highway provides
access to Interstate 75 to the north and Saint Petersburg to the south. Interstate 75 is a limited-access highway which
traverses north and south through the center of the county. This highway provides access to Manatee County to the
south and Hernando and Pasco counties to the north. Interstate 4 is a limited access highway that terminates in
Hillsborough County and travels east to Orlando. There are several limited-access toll roads that traverse through the
county and numerous county roads.
There are three major bridges that provide access to Pinellas County from Hillsborough County. These include the
West Courtney Campbell Causeway (State Route 60), the Howard Frankland Bridge (Interstate 275/State Route 93)
and U.S. Highway 92/State Route 600.
Overall, the linkages throughout the county are ample with good access to other areas of the Tampa Bay area.
Transportation
The Tampa Bay MSA is home to two major airports including St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE) in
Pinellas County, and Tampa International Airport (TPA) in Hillsborough County.
Tampa International Airport is an international airport approximately 6.0 miles west of Downtown Tampa. It is served
by over twenty major airlines, including Southwest Airlines which operates up to 121 flights per day. In 2022, the
airport reportedly handled 21,527,863 passengers, making it the 23rd busiest airport in North America. From March 7,
2023 to April 10, 2023, the airports spring break period, TPA had almost 2.5 million passengers which beats the
previous spring break record from 2019 by almost 50,000 passengers. The airport recorded its busiest day on record
on March 19, 2023, with more than 90,000 passengers. TPA is also planning a $790 million Airside D project and will
be preparing to select a design-build firm in May of 2023.
St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport has seen an 8% increase in passengers year-to-date over 2022. The airport
connects Pinellas County with smaller cities across North America and is seeing growth in its Canadian business and
is planning a $106 million terminal expansion.
Mass transit is provided by the public transports available for each county as stated below:
Pinellas County Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA)
Hillsborough County Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART)
Pasco County Pasco County Public Transportation (PCPT)
Hernando County Hernando County Transit Services (TheBus)
Page 48
Population
The 2023 population data is the most current available for the Tampa MSA with growth as illustrated below. As
employment has increased over the past few years, the population growth has also increased. The four county
Tampa MSA had an estimated 2023 population of 3,288,270 which is expected to increase by 0.50% per year until
2028.
2023
Population
2028
Population
Estimation
Population:
Annual Growth
Rate
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater 3,288,270 3,371,259 0.50%
Florida 22,381,338 23,091,949 0.63%
USA 337,470,185 342,640,129 0.30%
Median Household Income
Total median household income for the region is presented in the following table. Overall, the subject’s MSA is similar
to the state. However, is slightly below the nation.
2023 Median
Household
Income
2023 Average
Household Income
2023 Per Capita
Income
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater $65,621 $97,348 $40,263
Florida $65,081 $97,191 $38,778
USA $72,603 $107,008 $41,310
Residential Real Estate
House Price Appreciation:
Median price for houses is $415,000 in July 2023 compared to $415,000 in June 2022, which was a 0.0% change.
Condo/townhome median pricing is down -0.7% during the same timeframe, down to $296,000 from $298,148.
Active listings are down -21.4% from last year in the Single-Family home market and up 33.1% in the
Townhouse/Condo market. This is due to the decreased sales volume and decrease in demand for housing.
The tables below summarize the most important housing market indicators for the Tampa, FL metro in July 2023.
Single-Family Townhouses and Condos
Source: Greater Tampa Realtors
Page 49
The Tampa, FL metro had a weakening seller’s market in July 2023. For the Single-Family segment, months’ supply
stood at 1.9 months. For the Townhouse/Condo segment, it stood at 2.5 months. On a market segment basis, entry-
level markets tend to have a somewhat lower demarcation point between a buyer’s and seller’s market (estimated
around 5 months) and move-up markets tend to have a somewhat higher demarcation point between a buyer’s and
seller’s market (estimated around 7 months). This is because even in a balanced market, the less expensive entry-
level homes usually sell more quickly than move-up homes. Lower levels of months’ inventory tend to lead to upward
price pressures. This is especially common in the entry-level market, where supply has been most constrained since
2012 and which has led to reduced affordability.
Mortgage Risk:
AEI measures the level of mortgage risk present in a metro through the mortgage default rate. A higher mortgage
default rate implies greater access to credit, but also indicates greater likelihood of default. While at first glance,
greater access may seem like a positive, especially for first-time buyers trying to enter the market, when market
conditions are tight, it actually works to their detriment. During a seller’s market, greater access to credit is capitalized
into higher house prices, which then generally results in home prices rising faster than, for example, incomes or rents.
In the Tampa, FL metro, the most recent mortgage default rate data is for the 1st quarter of 2023, which stood at
11.4%, compared to 12.0% for the nation. The mortgage default rate in the Tampa, FL metro decreased from a year
ago, when the mortgage default rate stood at 11.9%.
The mortgage default rate varied substantially by market segment for the Tampa, FL metro. The mortgage default
rate for entry-level buyers was 14.0%, but only 8.7% for move-up buyers.
Expected mortgage rate increases is not likely to be positive for the residential housing market. We expect pricing to
stabilize and likely only moderately increase in 2023. This depends heavily on the net positive in-migration of people
moving to the area from other parts of the country.
New Construction Activity:
In the first quarter of 2023, new construction share of sales added 18.3% overall to the Tampa, FL metro housing
stock. This is higher than the nation, for which the new construction contribution during the same time period was
13.0%. Additions to the existing housing stock during this period varied substantially by market segment. While
12.7% was added to the entry-level tier stock, 26.5% was added to the move-up tier stock.
MSA Conclusion
Housing demand and prices continue to grow, while 2022 housing permits topped the previous year by 4%, housing
prices are also at the highest levels since 2008. As the economy continued to improve throughout late 2022, not only
did housing prices continue to rise, but residential rental rates also increased. These trends have continued into 2023
throughout the residential and commercial real estate sectors. It is unclear what effect rising interest rates will have
on the economy and real estate markets. Healthcare is another key driver for the metro area—jobs in the medical
profession are over 15% of the area’s workforce and pay slightly more than the local average. Hiring in these elective
fields is evidence that residents are optimistic about the region’s recovery. This increase is also attributable to the
extra demand created by the large, fast-growing senior population. Among major metro areas, the Tampa MSA
maintains the largest percentage of residents older than 65, even with a population growth trend of under 20-year
olds outpacing the country as a whole.
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater is expected to outpace the nation over the next two years, as an influx of residents,
mostly retirees and people moving from the northeast, will drive demand for housing and other locally produced
services. These transplants will contribute to its tax base, but not add as much to its tightening labor supply as a high
percentage appear to be retirees and remote employees. This will also help to continue to drive the construction
market. Overall, these factors have led to the lowest unemployment levels in Tampa Bay since before the COVID
pandemic, a growing labor force with more people entering the job market, while driving up wages. While the
hospitality industry in the beaches area has been robust over the past few years, continually breaking records, the
industry is also expected to continue to slowly recover outside the beaches areas, as the US and world economies
improve. The beaches continue to be some of the utmost traveled to destinations with outdoor venues especially in
high demand in 2020 and 2021. These factors will ensure that Tampa Bay’s income expands faster than the nation’s
over the forecast horizon. Robust healthcare and the outdoor lifestyle demand will be a catalyst for the foreseeable
future and the outlook for the long-term economy is positive.
Page 50
Neighborhood Analysis
Introduction
Due to the summary format of the report, detailed information relative to the city trends have been summarized as
follows.
Overview
Pinellas County was founded in 1912. The county seat, Clearwater, was incorporated in 1891. It totals 608 square
miles, made up of 274 square miles of land and 334 square miles of water. The subject’s neighborhood is located in
the City of Clearwater, within Pinellas County. The address is 112 S Osceola Ave and the borders include Sunset
Point Rd to the north, Keene Rd to the east, Belleair Rd to the south, and the Intracoastal Waterway to the west.
Access/Visibility
Within the immediate area of the subject property, transportation access helps define the character of its
development. This portion of Pinellas County has average to good access with the primary north and south roadways
being Alt US-19 and Keene Rd, and the primary east and west roadways being Gulf to Bay Blvd, Drew St and Sunset
Point Rd. Gulf to Bay Blvd gives the subject neighborhood quick access to Hillsborough County. There are a number
of secondary and tertiary streets traversing the neighborhood to provide good access.
Land Use Patterns
Development within the neighborhood includes low-density commercial/retail development along major thoroughfares
such as Court St and S Missouri Ave., with residential developments located on secondary thoroughfares scattered
throughout the neighborhood. Residential makes up most of the development in the neighborhood on the south side
of Court St, and the north side of Court St to Drew St has mixed development as it’s part of Downtown Clearwater.
There is very little industrial development. The developable area in the PMA is approximately 95% developed, with
most vacant land being parcels that were previously developed and were demolished for re-development. The
approximate breakdown of land uses is as follows: Single-family 45%, Multifamily 15%, Retail 25%, Office 10%,
Industrial 3%, and Vacant Land 2%. The neighborhood is in the stability phase of its life cycle.
Page 51
New retail and mixed-use developments are also underway within 5 miles of the subject. The Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan Area serves as a long-term vision for Downtown Clearwater and surrounding residential and
commercial areas. It includes a 540-acre community redevelopment area namely Imagine Clearwater; a $55 million
master plan along downtown’s waterfront that will offer high-rise office, mixed-use residential and retail space, and
the North Marina Master Plan area on the other hand covers 64 acres just north of Downtown Clearwater which
focuses on attracting commercial, retail, restaurants and more residential to the neighborhood.
The City of Clearwater is in the design phase for a new city hall to be built at Myrtle Ave and Pierce St, south of the
Municipal Services Building downtown. Plans include a 41,679 square foot city hall along with a public plaza green
space that connects to the Pinellas Trail. The existing parking lot of the Municipal Services Building will support the
new city hall, and onsite parking will be added for the development. The project is estimated to cost $44.8 million,
$31.5 million for the new city hall and $13.3 million for renovation of the Municipal Services Building.
Serena by the Sea is a recently completed “beach-chic” condo project that overlooks the Gulf of Mexico, and is
located at 1020 Sunset Point Rd. The 80-unit, $70 million luxury condominium tower has two- and three-bedroom
plus den floor plans ranging from 1,400 to 2,574 square feet and sky penthouses as large as 4,821 square feet.
Prices start at $839,000 and go up to $2.9 million, and all of the units have been sold.
Public Facilities/ Services
Public utilities (sewer, water, trash) are available to most portions of the neighborhood and provided by Pinellas
County Utilities, while TECO Energy provides electricity. Fire and police protection are adequate to meet the needs of
the neighborhood’s residents and are provided by the Clearwater Police Department and Clearwater Fire Rescue.
Public transportation is available in the neighborhood and adequate medical services are also provided.
Neighborhood Demographics
The following tables present the subject neighborhood demographics for a one-, three- and five-mile radius from the
subject property.
Page 52
2023 Median Age 52.1 47.5 51.0
2023-2028 Annual Rate 0.50%-0.11%0.00%
2020-2023 Annual Rate -0.76%0.10%0.39%
2010-2020 Annual Rate 1.54%0.42%0.50%
2028 Population 7,151 78,523 203,467
2023 Population 6,974 78,962 203,442
2020 Population 7,149 78,703 200,857
2010 Population 6,133 75,441 191,174
1 mile 3 miles 5 miles
In the identified area, the current year population is 203,442. In 2020, the Census count in the area was 200,857.
The rate of change since 2020 was 0.39% annually. The five-year projection for the population in the area is 203,467
representing a change of 0.00% annually from 2023 to 2028.
Demographic Data
Population characteristics and income levels were obtained from STBOnline for 1, 3, and 5-mile radii near the subject’s location. A
summary of the information is presented in the following tables.
POPULATION
Page 53
2023 Average Household Size 1.90 2.19 2.09
2023-2028 Annual Rate 0.85%0.08%0.20%
2020-2023 Annual Rate 1.31%0.44%0.63%
2010-2020 Annual Rate 1.49%0.45%0.52%
2028 Households 3,545 34,553 95,757
2023 Households 3,398 34,419 94,786
2020 Households 3,257 33,929 92,883
2010 Households 2,810 32,449 88,169
2023 Wealth Index 72 96 82
1 mile 3 miles 5 miles
The household count in this area has changed from 92,883 in 2020 to 94,786 in the current year, a change
of 0.63% annually. The five-year projection of households is 95,757, a change of 0.20% annually from the current
year total. Average household size is currently 2.09, compared to 2.10 in the year 2020. The number of families in
the current year is 50,590 in the specified area.
HOUSEHOLD
Page 54
2023-2028 Annual Rate 3.87%3.29%3.37%
2028 Per Capita Income $49,259 $48,521 $48,043
Per Capita Income
2023 Per Capita Income $40,750 $41,272 $40,704
2023-2028 Annual Rate 3.55%3.12%3.17%
2028 Average Household Income $96,816 $109,169 $101,599
Average Household Income
2023 Average Household Income $81,330 $93,613 $86,929
2023-2028 Annual Rate 3.12%3.82%3.28%
2028 Median Household Income $45,273 $69,157 $67,089
Median Household Income
2023 Median Household Income $38,827 $57,341 $57,082
Mortgage Income
2023 Percent of Income for Mortgage 69.8%36.3%32.6%
1 mile 3 miles 5 miles
Current median household income is $57,341 in the area, compared to $72,603 for all U.S. households. Median
household income is projected to be $69,157 in five years, compared to $82,410 for all U.S. households.
Current average household income is $93,613 in this area, compared to $107,008 for all U.S. households. Average
household income is projected to be $109,169 in five years, compared to $122,048 for all U.S. households.
Current per capita income is $41,272 in the area, compared to the U.S. per capita income of $41,310. The per capita
income is projected to be $48,521 in five years, compared to $47,525 for all U.S. households.
INCOME
Page 55
2028 Vacant Housing Units 836 7,778 17,580
2028 Renter Occupied Housing Units 1,978 12,662 34,921
2028 Owner Occupied Housing Units 1,568 21,891 60,836
2028 Total Housing Units 4,381 42,331 113,337
2023 Vacant Housing Units 883 7,810 17,880
2023 Renter Occupied Housing Units 1,916 12,862 35,576
2023 Owner Occupied Housing Units 1,482 21,557 59,210
2023 Total Housing Units 4,281 42,229 112,666
2020 Vacant Housing Units 890 7,906 18,044
2020 Total Housing Units 4,147 41,835 110,927
2010 Vacant Housing Units 995 8,918 20,562
2010 Renter Occupied Housing Units 1,931 13,127 33,008
2010 Owner Occupied Housing Units 879 19,317 55,161
2010 Total Housing Units 3,805 41,367 108,731
2023 Housing Affordability Index 35 68 76
1 mile 3 miles 5 miles
Currently, 52.6% of the 112,666 housing units in the area are owner occupied; 31.6%, renter occupied; and 15.9%
are vacant. Currently, in the U.S., 58.5% of the housing units in the area are owner occupied; 31.7% are renter
occupied; and 9.8% are vacant. In 2020, there were 110,927 housing units in the area and 16.3% vacant housing
units. The annual rate of change in housing units since 2020 is 0.48%. Median home value in the area is $309,319,
compared to a median home value of $308,943 for the U.S. In five years, median value is projected to change by
0.81% annually to $322,060.
HOUSING
Page 56
Conclusion
The subject is located within downtown Clearwater, is just north of the county courthouse complex and is within three
miles of the heart Clearwater Beach. There have been significant increases in tourism and growth within the
Clearwater Beach area over the past five years. Consequently, this growth has had a huge impact on the City of
Clearwater and surrounding area tax base, retail/restaurant sales and overall home values. The area is nearly
completely developed. The neighborhood is well located and is within commuting distance of other areas of Pinellas
County and surrounding communities along the barrier islands. The accessibility of the locale is enhanced by its
proximity to Court St and S Missouri Ave. Given its location characteristics and being mostly built-out, a slow
population growth is expected within 3 miles of the subject over the next several years. Demand for properties is
expected to be stable to increasing with the new Imagine Clearwater waterfront development. The long-term outlook
for the neighborhood is anticipated to be one of continued slow growth, re-development, and demand into the
foreseeable future.
Page 57
Engagement Letter
Page 58
Legal Description
Page 59
Subject Photographs
View Looking South Along S Osceola Ave
(Subject on Right)
View Looking West from Northeast Corner of Subject
View Looking Northwest from Northeast Corner of Subject View Looking West from East Side of Subject
Page 60
Subject Photographs
View Looking North Along S Osceola at Pierce St
(Subject on Left)
View Looking West Along Pierce St at S Osceola Ave
(Subject on Right)
View Looking East Along Pierce St
(Subject on Left)
View Looking Northeast Across Subject
Page 61
Subject Photographs
View Looking Northwest from Subject View Looking East Across Subject
View Looking Southeast from Causeway View Looking Northeast from Causeway
Page 62
Subject Photographs
View Looking East from Causeway View Looking Northeast from Causeway
Page 63
Plat Map
(Outline is Approximate) Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser
Aerial Map
(Outline is Approximate) Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser
Page 64
Flood Map
Page 65
Land Sale Comparables - Unencumbered
ID 24587
Address 900 N Osceola Ave
City Clearwater
State FL
Zip 33755
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.9748594
Longitude -82.8000673
Tax ID 09-29-15-55249-000-0020, 09-
29-15-55249-000-0030, 09-29-
15-55245-000-0001, 09-29-15-
00000-140-0100
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Commercial
Address 900 N Osceola Ave Date 5/2/2018
City Clearwater Price $4,875,000
State FL
Zip 33755 Price Per Usable Land SF $52.72
Book/Page or Reference 20039/1276 Financing Conventional
Grantor Clearwater Basin Marina LLC Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee Marina Bay 880 LLC Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description Long Legal Days on Market --
Usable Acres 2.12 Topography Gently sloping
Usable Land SF 92,478 Zoning D - Downtown Old Bay
Road Frontage N Osceola Ave, Cedar St & Flood Zone Partially in AE & VE
Shape Irregular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Land Comparable 1
This commercial land property located at 900 N Osceola Ave, Clearwater FL, was sold on May 2, 2018, for $8,125,000.
The property is located directly on the intracoastal waterway with views of Clearwater Harbor. This is a four-parcel
portfolio operating as a marina with the buyer having plans to build a condominium development called Marina Bay
880. The $70 million luxury condo complex project by Clearwater-based Andrus Development Group began in 2019
and includes two eight-story buildings that feature 87 condominiums. According to the buyer, the purchase price of
$8,1250,000 was allocated at 60% ($4,875,000) for the value of the condominium land. The marina has 69 boat slips
Site
Transaction
Sale Comments
Page 66
ID 24586
Address 125 Island Way
City Clearwater
State FL
Zip 33767
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.978531
Longitude -82.815716
Tax ID 08-29-15-21803-000-0001
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Commercial
Address 125 Island Way Date 1/14/2021
City Clearwater Price $2,680,000
State FL
Zip 33767 Price Per Usable Land SF $68.36
Book/Page or Reference 21366 / 0935 Financing Conventional
Grantor Arlis Construction USA LLC Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee Dolphin Cay of Island Estates Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description Long Legal Days on Market 154
Usable Acres 0.90 Topography Gently sloping
Usable Land SF 39,204 Zoning HDR-NCOD Island Est
Road Frontage Island Way Flood Zone Zone AE
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Sale Comments
Site
Transaction
Land Comparable 2
This commercial land property located at 125 Island Way, Clearwater Beach FL, was sold on January 14, 2021, for
$2,680,000. The property sold for development of 27 condominium units and 10 private dock slips. The development
is known as Dolphin Harbour Condominiums.
Page 67
ID 23466
Address 415 Island Way
City Clearwater
State FL
Zip 33767
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.9817725
Longitude -82.8166663
Tax ID 08-29-15-01995-000-0001
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Commercial
Address 415 Island Way Date 9/15/2021
City Clearwater Price $3,800,000
State FL
Zip 33767 Price Per Usable Land SF $64.62
Book/Page or Reference 21721 / 2459 Financing Conventional
Grantor Elan 405, LLC Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee Azure Development Group, L.P.Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description Long Legal Days on Market --
Usable Acres 1.35 Topography Gently Sloping
Usable Land SF 58,806 Zoning MHDR-NCOD Island Est
Road Frontage Island Way Flood Zone Zone AE
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Sale Comments
Land Comparable 3
This commercial land property located at 405-415 Island Way, Clearwater FL, was sold on September 15, 2021, for
$3,800,000. The property sold with entitlements and development order for 46 condominium units and 16 private dock
slips. The development is known as Azure Clearwater.
Site
Transaction
Page 68
Land Sale Comparables - Encumbered
ID 22029
Address 720 Charles Ct S
City Saint Petersburg
State FL
Zip 33701
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.76748529
Longitude -82.6441499
Tax ID 19-31-17-20889-001-0010
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Multi-Family
Address 720 Charles Ct S Date 6/3/2022
City Saint Petersburg Price $8,750,000
State FL Price Per Unit $33,654
Zip 33701 Price per Land SF $175.00
Tax ID 19-31-17-20889-001-0010 Financing Conventional
Grantor Tuxedo Court, LLC Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee WPPI St Pete TC, LLC Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description DEMENS HILLSIDE BLK 1, LOT Days on Market 655
Acres 1.15 Topography Gently Sloping
Land SF 50,000 Zoning DC-2
Road Frontage Charles Ct S, 8th St S & 4th Ave Flood Zone Zone X
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Transaction
Site
Sale Comments
Land Comparable 1
This 1.15-acre residential land property located at 720 Charles Ct S, St. Petersburg, FL, was sold on June 3, 2022, for
$8,750,000. The seller was represented by Renee Celli of RE/MAX Metro. The property was put on the market on
August 17, 2020. The buyer took out a loan of $6,467,500 to finance the acquisition. The buyer obtained approvals for
the construction of a 15-story mixed use building with 2,700 square feet of ground-floor retail and restaurant space on
the ground floor and 260 apartments on the upper floors.
Page 69
ID 22028
Address 1625 1st Ave N
City Saint Petersburg
State FL
Zip 33713
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.77225963
Longitude -82.65559543
Tax ID 24-31-16-29718-012-0090 ; 24-
31-16-29718-012-0110 ; 24-31-
16-29718-012-0120 ; 24-31-16-
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Commercial
Address 1625 1st Ave N Date 6/21/2022
City Saint Petersburg Price $6,500,100
State FL Price Per Unit $26,640
Zip 33713 Price per Land SF $204.73
Tax ID 24-31-16-29718-012-0090 ; 24-Financing Conventional
Grantor HP Capital Partners, LLC Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee 1625 First Avenue North (St Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description FULLER'S SUB BLK 12, LOTS 12 & 13Days on Market --
Acres 0.73 Topography Gently Sloping
Land SF 31,749 Zoning DC-2
Road Frontage 1st Ave N Flood Zone Zone X
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Site
Sale Comments
This combined 0.73-acre parcel located at 1st Ave N, St. Petersburg, FL, was sold in two separate transactions to form
an assemblage. The first sale occurred on June 1, 2022 for $2,357,500 and the second sale occurred on June 21,
2022, for $4,142,600. The properties were assembled for redevelopment of the site into a 19 story apartment building
with 244 units.
Land Comparable 2
Transaction
Page 70
ID 23216
Address 1624-1662 Burlington Ave N
City St. Petersburg
State FL
Zip 33713
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.7735875
Longitude -82.6556193
Tax ID 24-31-16-29718-007-0040, 24-
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Multi-Family
Address 1624-1662 Burlington Ave N Date 1/13/2023
City St. Petersburg Price $8,456,300
State FL Price Per Unit $36,450
Zip 33713 Price per Land SF $266.34
Tax ID 24-31-16-29718-007-0040, 24-Financing Conventional
Grantor AAG Florida Homes LLC; Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee DevMar Sky St Pete, LLC Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description Long Legal Days on Market --
Acres 0.73 Topography Gently Sloping
Land SF 31,750 Zoning DC-2
Road Frontage Burlington Ave N & 17th St N Flood Zone Zone X
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities Available to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Transaction
Site
Sale Comments
This commercial land property located at 1624-1662 Burlington Ave N, St. Petersburg FL, was sold on January 13,
2023, for a total price of $8,456,300. This multifamily land consists of 4 parcel lots, totaling about 0.729 acres, which
were sold to the buyer from different entities. The property was sold to the buyer as a redevelopment project, which
plans to build a 20-story, 232-unit apartment tower called Sky St. Pete. Currently, the property is occupied by a vacant
dirt lot and seven residential structures with eight dwelling units. These buildings will be demolished to accommodate
the new development. The broker indicated as agreements were made to obtain the properties the last piece became
more important to obtain.
Land Comparable 3
Page 71
ID 22067
Address 3200-3300 Fairfield Ave S & 695
City Saint Petersburg
State FL
Zip 33712
County Pinellas
Latitude 27.76311017
Longitude -82.67744558
Tax ID 23-31-16-18736-000-0020, 23-
31-16-18736-000-0010, 23-31-
16-18736-000-0030
Property Major Type Land
Property Type Multi-Family
Address 3200-3300 Fairfield Ave S & 695 Date 2/22/2023
City Saint Petersburg Price $5,850,000
State FL Price Per Unit $22,159
Zip 33712 Price per Land SF $19.41
Tax ID 23-31-16-18736-000-0020, 23-Financing Conventional
Grantor Fairfield Office LLC & Fairfiled Property Rights Fee Simple
Grantee WILKES 4TH STREET Conditions of Sale Arm's Length
Legal Description --Days on Market --
Acres 6.92 Topography Gently Sloping
Land SF 301,344 Zoning IT
Road Frontage Fairfield Ave S Flood Zone Zone X
Shape Rectangular Encumbrance or Easement None Noted
Utilities All to Site Environmental Issues None Noted
Site
Sale Comments
Sale of three parcels that sold under two separate contracts from two different two entities. Parcels 23-31-16-18736-
000-0010 and 23-31-16-18736-000-0020 sold for $4,088,000 and Parcel 23-31-16-18736-000-0030 sold for
$1,512,000 for a total combined price of $5,600,000. The sale was contingent upon the buyer’s gaining approvals from
the city of St. Petersburg to redevelop the property into affordable housing. The sale was an off-market transaction
without the use of broker. The buyer purchased the property with the intention of redeveloping the site into a 264 unit
multifamily affordable housing complex. The buyer anticipated $250,000 in demolition costs. The site is located in an
industrial zone and received a nontransferable approval for multifamily development through a State Law and City
Ordinance permitting the rezoning of the site to affordable housing.
Land Comparable 4
Transaction
Page 72
Definitions
Definitions are from The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition (Dictionary), the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USPAP), and Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA).
Absolute Net Lease
A lease in which the tenant pays all expenses including structural
maintenance, building reserves, and management; often a long-term
lease to a credit tenant.1
Amortization
1. The process of retiring a debt or recovering a capital investment,
typically through scheduled, systematic repayment of the
principal; a program of periodic contributions to a sinking fund or
debt retirement fund.1
2. The gradual reduction of an amount over time, such as tax
depreciation of intangible items.
As Is Market Value
The estimate of the market value of real property in its current
physical condition, use, and zoning as of the appraisal date.1
Base Rent
The minimum rent stipulated in a lease.1
Base Year
The year on which escalation clauses in a lease are based.1
Building Common Area
In office buildings, the areas of the building that provide services to
building tenants but that are not included in the office area or store
area of any specific tenant. These areas may include, but shall not be
limited to, main and auxiliary lobbies, atrium spaces at the level of the
finished floor, concierge areas or security desks, conference rooms,
lounges or vending areas, food service facilities, health or fitness
centers, daycare facilities, locker or shower facilities, mail rooms, fire
control rooms, fully enclosed courtyards outside the exterior walls, and
building core and service areas such as fully enclosed mechanical or
equipment rooms. Specifically excluded from building common area
are floor common areas, parking space, portions of loading docks
outside the building line, and major vertical penetrations.2
Building Rentable Area
The sum of all floor rentable areas. Floor rentable area is the result of
subtracting from the gross measured area of a floor the major vertical
penetrations on that same floor. It is generally fixed for the life of the
building and is rarely affected by changes in corridor size or
configuration.2
Certificate of Occupancy (COO)
A formal written acknowledgment by an appropriate unit of local
government that a new construction or renovation project is at the
stage where it meets applicable health and safety codes and is ready
for commercial or residential occupancy.1
Common Area Maintenance (CAM)
The expense of operating and maintaining common areas; may or
may not include management charges and usually does not include
capital expenditures on tenant improvements or other improvements
to the property.1
The amount of money charged to tenants for their shares of
maintaining a [shopping] center’s common area. The charge that a
tenant pays for shared services and facilities such as electricity,
security, and maintenance of parking lots. Items charged to common
area maintenance may include cleaning services, parking lot
sweeping and maintenance, snow removal, security and upkeep.3
Condominium
An attached, detached, or stacked unit within or attached to a
structure with common areas that are held as tenants in common (an
undivided interest) with other owners in the project. The units can be
1 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition
2 Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA)
3 International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC), 4th Edition
residential, commercial, industrial, or parking spaces or boat docks.
These units are commonly defined by state laws in their locations.
Because units can be stacked on top of other units, these units can be
defined both vertically and horizontally.1
Conservation Easement
An interest in real estate restricting future land use to preservation,
conservation, wildlife habitat, or some combination of those uses. A
conservation easement may permit farming, timber harvesting, or
other uses of a rural nature as well as some types of conservation-
oriented development to continue, subject to the easement.1
Contributory Value
A type of value that reflects the amount a property or component of a
property contributes to the value of another asset or to the property as a whole.
The change in the value of a property as a whole, whether positive or
negative, resulting from the addition or deletion of a property
component. Also called deprival value in some countries.1
Depreciation
1. In appraisal, a loss in property value of improvements from any
cause; the difference between the cost of an improvement on the
effective date of the appraisal and the value of the improvement
on the same date.
2. In accounting, an allocation of the original cost of an asset,
amortizing the cost over the asset’s life; calculated using a
variety of standard techniques.1
Disposition Value
The most probable price that a specified interest in property should
bring under the following conditions:
Consummation of a sale within a specified time, which is shorter
than the typical exposure time for such a property in that market.
The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of
the date of valuation;
Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and
knowledgeably;
The seller is under compulsion to sell;
The buyer is typically motivated; Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best
interests; An adequate marketing effort will be made during the exposure
time; Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local
currency) or in terms of financial arrangements comparable
thereto; and The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold, unaffected by special or creative financing or sales
concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.4
Easement
The right to use another’s land for a stated purpose.1
Effective Date
1. The date on which the appraisal opinion applies. (SVP)
2. The date to which an appraiser’s analyses, opinions, and
conclusions apply.
3. The date that a lease goes into effect.1
Effective Gross Income (EGI)
The anticipated income from all operations of the real estate after an
allowance is made for vacancy and collection losses and an addition
is made for any other income.1
Effective Rent
Total base rent, or minimum rent stipulated in a lease, over the
specified lease term minus rent concessions; the rent that is
4 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition
Page 73
effectively paid by a tenant net of financial concessions provided by a
landlord. (TIs).1
Excess Land
Land that is not needed to serve or support the existing use. The
highest and best use of the excess land may or may not be the same
as the highest and best use of the improved parcel. Excess land has
the potential to be sold separately and is valued separately.1
Expense Stop
A clause in a lease that limits the landlord’s expense obligation, which
results in the lessee paying operating expenses above a stated level
or amount.1
Exposure Time
1. The time a property remains on the market.
2. An opinion, based on supporting market data, of the length of
time that the property interest being appraised would have been
offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a
sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.1
Extraordinary Assumption
An assignment-specific assumption as of the effective date regarding
uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be false,
could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions. Comment:
Uncertain information might include physical, legal, or economic
characteristics of the subject property; or conditions external to the
property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of
data used in an analysis. (USPAP, 2020-2021 ed.) 5
Fee Simple Estate
Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate,
subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of
taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.1
Floor Common Area
In an office building, the areas on a floor such as washrooms,
janitorial closets, electrical rooms, telephone rooms, mechanical
rooms, elevator lobbies, and public corridors which are available
primarily for the use of tenants on that floor.6
Full Service (Gross) Lease
A lease in which the landlord receives stipulated rent and is obligated
to pay all of the property’s operating and fixed expenses; also called a
full service lease.1
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E)
Business trade fixtures and personal property, exclusive of inventory.1
Going-Concern Value
An outdated label for the market value of all the tangible and
intangible assets of an established and operating business with an
indefinite life, as if sold in aggregate; more accurately termed the
market value of the going concern or market value of the total assets
of the business.7
Gross Building Area (GBA)
1. Total floor area of a building, excluding unenclosed areas,
measured from the exterior of the walls of the above-grade area.
This includes mezzanines and basements if and when typically
included in the market area of the type of property involved.
2. Gross leasable area plus all common areas.
3. For residential space, the total area of all floor levels measured
from the exterior of the walls and including the superstructure
and substructure basement; typically does not include garage space.1
Gross Leasable Area (GLA)
Total floor area designed for the occupancy and exclusive use of tenants, including basements and mezzanines; measured from the
center of joint partitioning to the outside wall surfaces.1
5 USPAP, 2020-2021 ed.
6 Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA)
7 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 7th Edition
Gross Up Method
A method of calculating variable operating expenses in income-
producing properties when less than 100% occupancy is assumed.
Expenses reimbursed based on the amount of occupied space, rather
than on the total building area, are described as “grossed up.”1
Gross Retail Sellout
The sum of the separate and distinct market value opinions for each
of the units in a condominium, subdivision development, or portfolio of
properties, as of the date of valuation. The aggregate of retail values
does not represent the value of all the units as though sold together in
a single transaction; it is simply the total of the individual market value
conclusions. An appraisal has an effective date, but summing the sale
prices of multiple units over an extended period of time will not be the
value on that one day unless the prices are discounted to make the
value equivalent to what another developer or investor would pay for
the bulk purchase of the units. Also called the aggregate of the retail
values or aggregate retail selling price.1
Ground Lease
A lease that grants the right to use and occupy land. Improvements
made by the ground lessee typically revert to the ground lessor at the
end of the lease term.1
Ground Rent
The rent paid for the right to use and occupy land according to the
terms of a ground lease; the portion of the total rent allocated to the
underlying land.1
Hypothetical Condition
1. A condition that is presumed to be true when it is known to be
false. (SVP – Standards of Valuation Practice)
2. A condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is
contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the
effective date of the assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis. Comment: Hypothetical conditions are
contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or economic
characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions
external to the property, such as market conditions or trends; or
about the integrity of data used in an analysis. (USPAP, 2020-
2021 ed.)1
Insurable Value
A type of value for insurance purposes. (Typically this includes
replacement cost less basement excavation, foundation, underground
piping and architect’s fees).1
Investment Value
1. The value of a property to a particular investor or class of
investors based on the investor’s specific requirements.
Investment value may be different from market value because it
depends on a set of investment criteria that are not necessarily
typical of the market.1
2. The value of an asset to the owner or a prospective owner given
individual investment or operational objectives. (IVS)
Leased Fee Interest
The ownership interest held by the lessor, which includes the right to
receive the contract rent specified in the lease plus the reversionary
right when the lease expires.1
Leasehold Interest
The right held by the lessee to use and occupy real estate for a stated
term and under the conditions specified in the lease.1
Liquidation Value
The most probable price that a specified interest in property should
bring under the following conditions:
Consummation of a sale within a short time period.
The property is subjected to market conditions prevailing as of
the date of valuation.
Both the buyer and seller are acting prudently and
knowledgeably.
The seller is under extreme compulsion to sell.
The buyer is typically motivated.
Page 74
Both parties are acting in what they consider to be their best
interests.
A normal marketing effort is not possible due to the brief
exposure time.
Payment will be made in cash in U.S. dollars (or the local
currency) or in terms of financial arrangements comparable
thereto.
The price represents the normal consideration for the property
sold, unaffected by special or creative financing or sales
concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.1
Market Rent
The most probable rent that a property should bring in a competitive
and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair lease
transaction, the lessee and lessor each acting prudently and
knowledgeably, and assuming the rent is not affected by undue
stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the execution of a lease as of a
specified date under conditions whereby
Lessee and lessor are typically motivated;
Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what
they consider their best interests; Payment is made in terms of cash or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable thereto; and The rent reflects specified terms and conditions typically found in
that market, such as permitted uses, use restrictions, expense
obligations, duration, concessions, rental adjustments and
revaluations, renewal and purchase options, frequency of
payments (annual, monthly, etc.), and tenant improvements
(TIs).1
Market Value
The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive
and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming
the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is
the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of
title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
Buyer and seller are typically motivated;
Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what
they consider their own best interests;
A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; Payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in
terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and The price represents the normal consideration for the property
sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales
concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.1
Marketing Time
An opinion of the amount of time to sell a property interest at the
concluded market value or at a benchmark price during the period
immediately after the effective date of an appraisal. Marketing time
differs from exposure time, which precedes the effective date of an
appraisal. (Advisory Opinion 7 and Advisory Opinion 35 of the
Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation address the
determination of reasonable exposure and marketing time.)1
Modified Gross Lease
A lease in which the landlord receives stipulated rent and is obligated
to pay some, but not all, of the property’s operating and fixed
expenses. Since assignment of expenses varies among modified
gross leases, expense responsibility must always be specified. In
some markets, a modified gross lease may be called a double net
lease, net net lease, partial net lease, or semi-gross lease.1
Operating Expense Ratio
The ratio of total operating expenses to effective gross income
(TOE/EGI); the complement of the net income ratio, i.e., OER = 1 –
NIR1
Partial Interest
Divided or undivided rights in real estate that represent less than the
whole, i.e., a fractional interest such as a tenancy in common or
easement.1
Pass Through
A tenant’s portion of operating expenses that may be composed of
common area maintenance (CAM), real property taxes, property
insurance, and any other expenses determined in the lease
agreement to be paid by the tenant.1
Potential Gross Income (PGI)
The total income attributable to property at full occupancy before
vacancy and operating expenses are deducted.1
Prospective Opinion of Value
A value opinion effective as of a specified future date. Ther term does
not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a value opinion as
being effective at some specific future date. An opinion of value as of
a prospective date is frequently sought in connection with projects that
are proposed, under construction, or under conversion to a new use,
or those that have not yet achieved sellout or a stabilized level of long-
term occupancy.1
Rentable Area
For office or retail buildings, the tenant’s pro rata portion of the entire
office floor, excluding elements of the building that penetrate through
the floor to the areas below. The rentable area of a floor is computed
by measuring the inside finished surface of the dominant portion of the
permanent building walls, excluding any major permanent
penetrations of the floor. Alternatively, the amount of space on which
the rent is based; calculated according to local practice.1
Replacement Cost
The estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of a specific date,
a substitute for a building or other improvements, using modern
materials and current standards, design, and layout.1
Reproduction Cost
The estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective
date of the appraisal, an exact duplicate or replica of the building
being appraised, using the same or similar materials, construction
standards, design, layout, and quality of workmanship and embodying
all of the deficiencies, superadequacies, and obsolescence of the subject building.1
Retrospective Value Opinion
A value opinion effective as of a specified historical date. The term retrospective does not define a type of value. Instead, it identifies a
value opinion as being effective at some specific prior date. Value as
of a historical date is frequently sought in connection with property tax
appeals, damage models, lease renegotiation, deficiency judgments,
estate tax, and condemnation. Inclusion of the type of value with this
term is appropriate, e.g., “retrospective market value opinion.”1
Surplus Land
Land that is not currently needed to support the existing use but
cannot be separated from the property and sold off for another use.
Surplus land does not have an independent highest and best use and
may or may not contribute value to the improved parcel.1
Triple Net (Net Net Net) Lease
An alternative term for a type of net lease. In some markets, a net net
net lease is defined as a lease in which the tenant assumes all
expenses (fixed and variable) of operating a property except that the
landlord is responsible for structural maintenance, building reserves,
and management; also called NNN lease, net net net lease, or fully
net lease.1
Use Value
The value of a property based on a specific use, which may or may
not be the property’s highest and best use. If the specified use is the
property’s highest and best use, use value will be equivalent to market
value. If the specified use is not the property’s highest and best use,
use value will be equivalent to the property’s market value based on
the hypothetical condition that the only possible use is the specified
use.
Value-in-Use
The amount determined by discounting the future cash flows
(including the ultimate proceeds of disposal) expected to be derived
from the use of an asset at an appropriate rate that allows for the risk
of the activities concerned.
Page 75
Qualifications
Page 76
New York | Dallas | Los Angeles | Raleigh | Washington DC | Atlanta
Memorandum
To: David Margolis, B.C.S., City Attorney, City of Clearwater; Michael Delk, Assistant City
Manager, City of Clearwater; and Jay Ravins, Finance Director, City of Clearwater
From: HR&A Advisors, Inc.
Date: October 10, 2023
Re: Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation
Executive Summary
Overview and Purpose
At the request of the City of Clearwater, HR&A was tasked with reviewing the revised proposal from Gotham
Property Acquisitions, LLC (Gotham) and The DeNunzio Group for the redevelopment of the City Hall Site in
Downtown Clearwater, as submitted in April 2023, along four key lines:
(a) Review Gotham’s revised plans, financial model, and financial assumptions to assess their accuracy in
light of the site and current market conditions;
(b) Based on that analysis, confirm or disconfirm the extent of the financial feasibility gap claimed by Gotham
in that revised proposal;
(c) Assess the economic and fiscal benefits that would be created by the project to provide a clear accounting
of costs and benefits to the City of Clearwater; and
(d) Outline considerations and recommendations around the City’s response to the revised proposal.
HR&A reviewed materials that Gotham provided pertaining to their Original Proposal submission in July 2022,
their Due Diligence Analysis, and their Revised Proposal with Reduced Purchase Price submitted in April 2023 and
evaluated changes in the proposal’s programmatic and financial assumptions, economic and fiscal impacts, and
overall financial offer. This memo provides a summary of our core findings.
Background
In response to the City’s Call for Development Concepts in June of 2022, Gotham’s initial proposal (the “Original
Proposal”) offered a $15.4 million purchase price and proposed a two-tower concept that would deliver 600
residential units and 25,000 square feet of retail. This proposal was accepted by the City and formalized in a
Development Agreement between the City, Gotham, and The DeNunzio Group that established a minimum
threshold of 500 residential units and a purchase price of $15.4 million, among other terms. After undergoing a
due diligence period as part of that development agreement, Gotham presented a Revised Proposal to the City
Council in April of 2023, responding to changing real estate market conditions and tighter capital markets which
were impacting the financial viability of the Original Proposal, noting that there was approximately an $80 million
gap in project feasibility. The proposed modifications to the plan included changing the design from two towers to
one, reducing the number of units from the minimum of 500 in the Development Agreement to 400, retaining the
initial parking subsidy as noted in the development agreement and seeking an additional subsidy of $4 million,
and proposing two approaches to altering and deferring payment to close the full financial gap.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 2
Key Findings
HR&A reviewed Gotham’s financial models and conducted independent benchmarking exercises across a wide
range of assumptions, including residential rents, insurance costs, operating expenses, property taxes, impact
fees, cap rates, financial return metrics, and development costs. To support a review of construction costs, HR&A
retained Dharam Consulting, a construction cost estimation consulting firm. Below, we highlight five key findings
from our analysis, which are expanded upon in the body of this memo.
1. Based on HR&A's review of Gotham’s financial model, most real estate market assumptions
employed are in alignment with market trends, industry standards, and prior transactions.
Recognizing that there is complexity and nuance in real estate assumptions, HR&A found three items
worth further discussion:
a. Cap Rates.1 Gotham’s underwriting of cap rates is reasonable and reflective of current market
conditions but could be seen as overly cautious, as the metric is meant to approximate valuation
farther out in the future. The 5.25% cap rate assumption is justified in today’s market, but could
compress in future years closer to the building’s sale, generating greater returns for Gotham, and
decreasing the size of the overall financial gap. Based on HR&A’s research and understanding of
the market, we do not believe that negotiating with Gotham on cap rate assumptions is likely to
be seen as a source for closing the financial gap.
b. Operating Expenses. Gotham’s operating expense assumptions were provided by a property
management consulting firm with access to proprietary property management data. While
Gotham’s operating expense estimates are higher than those that HR&A could evaluate with
public data, it is assumed that Gotham’s vendor’s dataset is a more accurate source of
information. Nonetheless, because the proprietary data was not provided to HR&A, it could not
be reviewed in detail and verified for applicability to the project, and therefore our analysis is
deemed inconclusive.
c. Construction Cost Estimates. In its review of construction cost estimates, Dharam Consulting
identified assumptions in Gotham’s estimate that are lower than they would estimate, including
relatively low contingencies, suggesting a low level of risk tolerance in their estimates in this early
design stage. Any increases to their construction cost estimates would possibly outweigh all
savings produced by adjusting cap rates and operating expenses. These have since been
reviewed with Gotham and their construction firm, both who stand by their working estimates,
and Gotham has committed to stipulations that it would accept construction cost risk.
2. HR&A’s review of Gotham’s financial model and independent research into market conditions
identified a financial gap of approximately $76.5 to $80.0 million under the Revised Proposal.
Under the April 2023 Revised Proposal, Gotham stated a financial feasibility gap of approximately $80
million, identifying two alternatives with a series of potential approaches to fill the gap:
a. Reduction of the building program to a single tower with 400 units that allows for reduced
construction costs, shorter construction period, and faster lease up (reduction of $55.5 to $56.0
million);
b. Maintaining the City’s parking contribution of $17 million, that would otherwise be reduced
proportionally with the reduced program’s decrease in parking spaces ($4.8 million);
c. One of the following approaches to land pricing and timing of payment:
1 A cap rate is the ratio of a property’s income over its cost or value, and is used to calculate the potential rate of return of a real estate
investment.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 3
i. Reduction in the purchase price of the site from $15.4 million to $7.6 million (reduction of
$7.8 million), to be repaid upon stabilization and no later than five years after closing
(savings of $3.4 million);
ii. Purchase money mortgage for full purchase price of $15.4 million, with no interest for 10
years;
d. An additional City contribution ($4 million);
e. An additional commitment from the development team to close the remaining gap, ranging from
$500,000 to $4 million, depending upon (c)i or (c)ii.
Based on HR&A’s review of financial assumptions, assuming variable assumptions on a cap rate given the
discussion above, we believe a financial gap of approximately $76.5 to $80.0 million is substantiated.
3. The proposed reduction in apartment units is warranted given market dynamics. In addition to
reducing construction costs and development timeline, reducing the number of units right-sizes the
development to account for absorption of new residential units in the market. 400 units is on the larger
end of residential projects in the surrounding market and, assuming the need to retain a one-tower
development scheme, delivery of an even greater number of units at once brings risk of oversupply and
slow absorption.
4. While fiscal impacts of the Revised Proposal are less than the Original Proposal given the
reduction in scale, they remain net positive to the City. The table below summarizes the total value of
payment of purchase price, total cost of subsidy, inclusive of parking, impact fees, an additional City
contribution, and total fiscal impact. The purchase money mortgage structure introduces a risk of non-
payment to City, which is discussed further on page 26 of this memo, and totals are therefore shown
including and excluding the payment.
Table 1: Financial Offer Comparison (In Present Value Terms in Year 2023)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Original Purchase
Price)
Purchase Price PV2 $14,515,977 $6,364,880 $10,801,250
Subsidy (10-Year PV)3 ($15,187,225) ($19,997,668) ($19,997,668)
Fiscal Impact to City (30-Year PV) $37,432,739 $27,333,302 $27,333,302
Net Financial Impact to the City:
Impact without Purchase Money Mortgage
Payment (30-Year NPV) $22,245,513 $7,335,633 $7,335,633
Impact with Purchase Money Mortgage
Payment (30-Year NPV) $36,761,490 $13,700,514 $18,136,883
2 Assuming a 3% discount rate and 3% inflation.
3 In reviewing areas of potential subsidy, the City's $1 million contribution to the pedestrian bridge was considered. As the project
represents both a developer contribution and City capital contribution towards an offsite public improvement, HR&A has elected to
exclude the City's cost as public subsidy, as it is not a direct contribution to the private development project.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 4
Together with the adjacent Harborview site, the development of the City Hall site is intended to activate
Downtown Clearwater by generating new foot traffic and spending, including a new year-round
population to Downtown, as well as new visitors and workers. The project also represents a scale and
quality of development that Downtown has yet to see, and its presence creates a new market comparable
by which other projects can follow. The development of both projects is more than the sum of their parts
– collectively, they represent a seminal investment in Downtown Clearwater that builds upon the City’s
investment in Coachman Park.
In addition to fiscal impacts, the development of the old City Hall site will generate substantial economic
development benefits for the city of Clearwater. The Revised Proposal will result in $12.1 million in total
permanent economic impact, creating 85 permanent full-time-equivalent jobs across the region. The
construction period will create 2,395 jobs during that time, with a total one-time impact of more than
$322 million.
5. Building on a long-term coordinated plan to spur activity in Clearwater’s downtown, the
redevelopment of the old City Hall site represents an important part of that effort, and therefore
warrants further efforts by the City to explore if satisfactory terms can be reached with Gotham.
HR&A recommends the City negotiate a counterproposal with Gotham to address three areas of risk:
a. Financial Gap and Payment Timing: The City should work with Gotham to identify viable means to
close the financial gap, with both sides considering measures. Both approaches proposed by
Gotham involve a purchase money mortgage, which defers payment to the City for 5 and 10
years, respectively. Under these two approaches, the City would be upfronting all subsidies and
receiving payment from Gotham up to 10 years later. In addition, the purchase money mortgage
concept introduces the risk of non-payment if the developer were to default over the 10-year
period and/or if there were more senior lenders before the City that Gotham needed to make
whole. This risk needs to be properly mitigated, and HR&A details a variety of options on page 26
of this memo.
b. Re-negotiation: To avoid the risk of project delay through subsequent rounds of negotiations, the
City and Gotham should see the agreement reached as part of the negotiation of the Revised
Proposal from Gotham as a best-and-final offer. The amended Development Agreement should
clearly establish that Gotham will be responsible and absorb any real estate market, financial,
and construction risks moving forward. This is particularly important in the case of construction
costs, given that Dharam Consulting’s review suggested possibly low estimates and contingencies
in current estimated being used by Gotham. Following discussions with Gotham, they have
asserted confidence in their construction cost estimates and have agreed to absorb all
construction cost risk. They have also agreed that once the due diligence period is over, they will
not come back to the City for further negotiations or in request of further public subsidy.
c. Project Completion: The City should seek to establish firm construction commencement and
completion deadlines in the amended Development Agreement, particularly if Gotham does not
pay the City for the purchase of the site upfront, to minimize the risk of Gotham “sitting” on a
vacant site waiting for the market to turn, a situation where the City would have little to no
recourse under current terms. Gotham has provided closing conditions it would agree to,
including a completion guarantee, a guaranteed maximum price from a reputable general
contractor, and full entitlements.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 5
Background and Introduction
In May 2023, HR&A was hired to assist in the evaluation of a revised proposal from Gotham Property Acquisitions,
LLC (Gotham) and The DeNunzio Group for the redevelopment of the City Hall Site in Downtown Clearwater. Over
two decades, the City of Clearwater has sought various strategies to better leverage its waterfront and activate its
downtown.
HR&A has worked closely with the City over the years to reposition over 66 acres of Clearwater’s downtown
waterfront. HR&A led the original Imagine Clearwater master plan, which identified opportunities for catalytic
investment downtown, near Coachman Park, including three City-owned Bluff sites: a vacant lot, the City Hall Site,
and the Harborview site. Subsequently, in 2018, HR&A conducted feasibility analyses for the three Bluff sites to
inform the procurement of a development partner.
An initial solicitation in 2019 failed to identify a suitable development team. In 2021, over 50 local and national
developers were informally invited to submit conceptual ideas for redevelopment of the three Bluff sites. Only
two responses were received, with concerns voiced over the riskiness of developing when the future of other
nearby parcels is unknown. Finally, on June 9th, 2022, the City put forth a Call for Development Concepts
specifically for the City Hall and Harborview Sites.
The June 2022 Call for Development Concepts prompted 3 proposals. The proposal teams consisted of Chicago-
based GSP Development; Elevate Clearwater, a collective of various developers; and The Bluffs, comprised of New
York-based Gotham Property Acquisitions, LLC (Gotham) and local firm The DeNunzio Group.
Of the three proposals, the Gotham-DeNunzio proposal offered the most multifamily rental units, while Elevate
Clearwater had the most retail square footage. Both Elevate and Gotham-DeNunzio proposals offered a $15.4
million purchase price for the City Hall site, aligned with third-party appraisals the City had made available. In
contrast, GSP offered roughly $3.5 million for both sites and was not seeking incentives for their proposed mixed-
use development. Of note, Elevate Clearwater explicitly sought incentives and proposed using $5 million of City
CRA funds to build parking. The Gotham-DeNunzio proposal did not mention specific CRA funding, but it did say
they were interested in further discussion of how the development incentives mentioned in the RFP could be
used by the project. The Gotham-DeNunzio proposal also included two towers on the City Hall Site, with planned
green retail corridors and connectivity from Osceola Avenue to the park.
After extensive discussion, City staff ranked the Gotham-DeNunzio proposal first and Elevate Clearwater second.
The Clearwater City Council then decided to move forward with the Bluff proposal in June 2022. On August 4th,
2022, the City Council approved a 30-year Agreement between the City, Gotham, and The DeNunzio Group. This
Development Agreement established a minimum number of 500 multifamily units, a purchase price of $15.4
million and a holding term. It also set the City contributions to include up to $2 million for a pedestrian bridge, all
development fees, and $22 million to cover the cost of parking on both sites, with up to $17 million specifically for
600 spaces on the City Hall Site. The sale and development of these properties then went to a referendum, which
asked:
Shall the Clearwater City Charter be amended to allow the City, instead of selling the vacant City Hall and
a portion of the former Harborview sites to the highest bidder at a public auction, to sell the properties to
Gotham Property Acquisitions and The DeNunzio Group; who will create approximately 600 apartments
and 158-key hotel, retail, entertainment, restaurants and cultural uses available to all Clearwater
residents, as further described and limited by City Ordinance 9597-22?4
The referendum passed in November 2022 with support from more than 66% of residents.
4 “Downtown Bluffs Development Proposal and Nov. 8 Referendum,” City of Clearwater (November 2022).
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 6
On April 20, 2023, following months of exchanges with staff, Gotham presented a revised proposal to City Council
for the City Hall Site, responding to changing real estate market conditions and tighter capital markets, which
were impacting the financial viability of the original proposal. The modifications to the plan included changing the
design from two towers to one, reducing the number of units from the minimum of 500 in the Development
Agreement to 400, seeking additional subsidy of $4 million, and proposing two approaches to altering and
deferring payment to further close a financial gap, which is further detailed on page 26 of this memo.
In June 2023, HR&A was tasked with understanding the financial, economic, and fiscal implications of this revised
development proposal for the City Hall Site to support the City in its decision-making.
To evaluate the revised development proposal for the old City Hall site and recommend a path forward, HR&A
conducted the following tasks:
• HR&A reviewed materials provided by Gotham regarding the original and new program, including the
Development Agreement.
o This included architectural plans, hard cost estimates, operating expenses, and financial models
for the 525-unit proposal and the latest 400-unit proposal. In addition, a geotechnical engineering
report and updated market study conducted by Gensler were provided with materials for the
400-unit proposal.
o General plans for the Harborview site were reviewed for context only – this memo is not meant to
be an evaluation of the Harborview site proposal.
• HR&A conducted independent research into the current market conditions to evaluate Gotham’s
assumptions and model inputs.
o HR&A engaged with Gotham and DeNunzio to understand their assumptions and changes.
o HR&A also contracted with Dharam Consulting to perform a review of the construction costs from
Gotham. Dharam Consulting reviewed estimates from Moss and Coastal, two construction
companies from which Gotham solicited construction cost estimates, and produced a bottom-up
estimate that was reconciled with Coastal and Gotham over two work sessions.
o In addition, HR&A investigated comparable properties for information on common programs,
rents, vacancies, and lease-up periods.
• HR&A compared Gotham’s latest proposal to other publicly available transactions to understand the
fairness of the proposed changes.
• HR&A analyzed the economic and fiscal impacts and benefits of each proposal from Gotham.
• HR&A identified areas of sensitivity and potential risk for the City in moving forward with Gotham’s latest
proposal.
Throughout this process, HR&A engaged with City staff, as well as directly with Gotham and the DeNunzio Group.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 7
Proposal Evaluation
Summary of Proposals and Agreements
HR&A reviewed materials that Gotham provided pertaining to their Original Proposal submission in July 2022,
their Development Agreement from August 2022, the initial Due Diligence Analysis from January 2023, and their
Revised Proposal from April 2023. The Revised Proposal has two versions – one with the original purchase price
and one with the reduced purchase price. A timeline is shown below for reference.
Table 2: Timeline for Development of the Clearwater Bluff Sites
Timeline
June 2022 The City puts out a Call for Development Concepts for the old City Hall & Harborview Sites.
June 2022 Gotham-DeNunzio submitted its Original Proposal, suggesting Gotham build two multifamily towers
with 600 apartments on the City Hall Site.
August 2022 A Development Agreement was signed by the City & Gotham-DeNunzio.
November 2022 Clearwater voters approved the sale of the Harborview & City Hall Sites
December 2022 As part of its original due diligence period, Gotham solicits hard costs from two construction firms,
Moss and Coastal, for a 525-unit, two tower project with a plinth and three levels of an underground
parking garage.
January 2023 Gotham contacted the City to inform them that the costs for the 525-unit project created a
significant gap and requested additional time for due diligence to work on alternatives. The City
granted that additional time through April 30th.
March 2023 Gotham and the City met to discuss findings from Gotham’s pre-development planning work,
reviewing options to close the identified gap including the reduction of units, modification of
parking, and alternative funding options (including a purchase money mortgage). In addition,
Gotham solicited revised construction hard cost estimates from Moss and Coastal for a 400-unit,
single tower project.
April 2023 Gotham presents a Revised Proposal to the City with 400 units, one level of underground parking,
and a single tower. To move forward, Gotham presented two financial approaches involving a
purchase money mortgage. To provide the City time to review options for closing the gap, the City
Council approves the amendment for the contract extending due diligence through October 31st,
May 2023 HR&A is retained to review Gotham’s Revised Proposal.
Gotham began its due diligence period in November 2022, based on a 525-unit, two tower project. As the due
diligence period continued, changing market conditions led Gotham to consider the 525-unit project infeasible, so
they asked the City in January 2023 for additional time to investigate other options. This led to the creation of a
single tower scenario of 400 units, which is documented in their April 2023 financial model, and was presented to
the City in April 2023. As reported by Gotham, these changing market conditions included:
• Hard costs increased significantly since the June 2022 proposal due to inflation and site specifics (a
January 2023 geotechnical engineering report found that building more than one level of underground
parking is extremely expensive and thus cost-prohibitive).
• Operating insurance costs more than doubled, increasing overall operating expenses (excluding real
estate taxes).
• Rents decreased modestly across the Clearwater-Tampa-St. Petersburg region since Summer 2022.
• Securing equity and debt has become more challenging.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 8
• Interest rates increased 350 basis points (bps) since July 2022, making the project more expensive to
finance.
Due to these trends, Gotham noted that they were not able to see the returns they and their investors wanted
with the 525-unit, two tower project. With 525 units, Gotham was estimating a 4.5% Yield to Cost (YTC), as
opposed to their desired YTC of 6% or even their July 2022 estimate of an acceptable 5.5% return.5 Gotham thus
proposed a single tower, reducing construction by one year, and eliminating two levels of underground parking.
Gotham also decreased the number of multifamily units proposed to 400, despite this being a departure from the
requirements of the Development Agreement, which requires 500 to 600 units to be constructed at the site. The
change helped address challenges related to the prohibitive cost of building more than one level of underground
parking due to subsurface conditions.
When inquired about the possibility of incorporating additional units within a single tower concept, Gotham
expressed concerns with the ability of the market to absorb more than 400 units in a single leasing cycle,
considering the Heron in Tampa had 419 units and had a long leasing period, as well as research from their
consultant Gensler that recommended leasing cycles of no more than 250-300 units. Additionally, Gotham and
DeNunzio claimed that height was a major discussion point in the November 2022 referendum and that decided
to not exceed the height of the neighboring Water’s Edge in their one-tower concept.6
Table 3: Program Comparison
Assumption
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Development
Agreement
(August 2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Gross SF 998,000 SF - 1,080,097 SF 618,314 SF
Retail SF 25,000SF Up to 40,000 SF 14,000 SF 15,900 SF
Residential Units 600 units 500-600 units 525 units 400 units
Parking Spaces 600 spaces Subsidy contribution is
based on 600 spaces
548 spaces 440 spaces
Underground Parking 3 levels - 3 levels 1 level
Stories 27 stories Can be up to 289 ft tall 26 stories 28 stories
Source: Gotham
To meet a 6% yield-on-cost, Gotham proposed two approaches in an April 2023 presentation to City Council, both
for a single-400-unit tower with reduced parking:
• The first approach Gotham put forth for consideration would reduce the purchase price from $15.4M to
$7.6M, delivered as a purchase money mortgage at 0% interest, to be paid upon stabilization but not later
than 5 years from closing.7 Under this approach, Gotham also seeks an additional $4M in City
contributions and an exception to the Development Agreement to retain the entire $17M the City
committed for parking, despite now delivering less than 600 spaces. Gotham then committed to closing
the remaining financial gap, estimated at approximately $4M.
5 Yield to Cost (YTC) = Net Operating Income / Total Development Cost – net of subsidy and hard cost escalation. For more information
on the project’s estimated financial returns, see page 14.
6 The City, however, noted that this is not a major area of concern to them and that they would be comfortable and open to Gotham
exceeding the height of their Revised Proposal. This is in part because the Downtown Core is a zoning district intended for high density
use, and the district has no height limitation. In addition, the City Council and voters at the 2022 referendum expressed a desire for 600
housing units, and so the City understands that might mean a taller building is needed to accommodate the desired number of units.
7 According to Gotham, the net present value of the $7.6 million purchase money mortgage is $3.4 million.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 9
• Alternatively, Gotham’s second approach proposes a $15.4M purchase money mortgage with no interest
for 10 years.8 Gotham cites their ability to make this project viable due to changes to the program,
shorter construction and lease up duration, and value engineering. Similar to the first approach, this
strategy asks for an additional $4M City contribution. It also seeks to retain the entire $17M in parking set
aside in the Development Agreement, despite having less than 600 spaces.
Table 4: Development Budget Comparison
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Development
Agreement
(August 2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Original Purchase
Price)
Acquisition Costs
$15.4M $15.4M $15.4M $7.6M (with a
purchase money
mortgage)
$15.4M (with a
purchase money
mortgage)
Sources
Debt $227.8M - $204.4M $117.2M $122.1M
City Funds:
Parking + Other
- $17M (minus
$30,000/space if
fewer than 600
spaces are
delivered)
$15.44M $21M (including
additional $4M
ask)
$21M
City Funds:
Bridge
- Up to $2M $1M $1M $1M
City Funds: Permit
+ Impact Fees
$939.4K CRA will pay all
permit/impact fees
on Gotham’s
behalf (estimated
at $939.4K in
proposal)
$1.2M $952.3K $952.3K
Purchase Money
Mortgage
- - - $7.6M (fully paid in
Year 5)
$15.4M (fully paid
in Year 10)
Equity $122.6M - $118.7M $65.3M $61.5M
Total Sources $350.4M - $340.6M $213.1M $222.0M
Total City Funds
Requested
- Up to $19M +
permit/impact
fees
$17.64M $22.95M $22.95M
Levered Yield on
Cost (Untrended)
5.10% - 4.52% 5.87% 5.97%
IRR 17.0% - -6.0% 14.3% 14.2%
8 According to Gotham, the net present value of the $15.4 million purchase money mortgage is $12.2 million.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 10
City staff reported finding the proposal purchase money mortgage unsatisfactory, as the deferral of payment
presents some level of risk of nonpayment, explaining the following ramifications. While the purchase money
mortgage would be a legally binding agreement, and while we are unaware of Gotham defaulting on any such
commitments to date, if for some reason the City was not paid by Gotham, there could be political challenges for
the City to bring a lawsuit against a developer in its Downtown. This is especially true as the City is looking to
catalyze development Downtown and create a new market for investment. In addition, if the City were to
somehow pursue a lawsuit and win, the payment would likely not be easily accessible cash, with lenders likely
having first call, and the City’s main recourse could become possession of the building, which would not be
suitable for a City government that has no interest in managing an apartment building or disposing of a
challenged asset.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 11
Assumptions and Inputs Evaluation
HR&A reviewed materials that Gotham provided pertaining to their Original Proposal submission in July 2022,
their Due Diligence Analysis, and their Revised Proposal with Reduced Purchase Price submitted in April 2023.
Below is a summary of the evolution in key assumptions and inputs that have the greatest impact on the overall
financial performance of the development model. HR&A conducted benchmarking exercises to understand how
assumptions align with the Tampa metro area market and sensitivity analyses to understand how assumptions
may or may not drive a feasibility gap. A further review of all assumptions and their evolution across proposals
can be found in Appendix D.
In summary, HR&A found that most real estate market assumptions Gotham employs are aligned with market
trends, industry standards, and prior transactions we have analyzed. Recognizing that there is complexity and
nuance in real estate assumptions, HR&A found three items worth further discussion, which are discussed at
greater length in the table below among the other assumptions reviewed:
• Cap Rates. Gotham’s underwriting of cap rates is reasonable and reflective of current market conditions
but could be seen as overly cautious as the metric is meant to approximate valuation farther out in the
future. The 5.25% cap rate assumption is justified in today’s market but could compress in future years
closer to the building’s sale, generating greater returns for Gotham, and decreasing the size of the overall
financial gap. Based on HR&A’s research and understanding of the market, we do not believe that
negotiating with Gotham on cap rate assumptions is likely to be seen as a source for closing the financial
gap.
• Operating Expenses. Gotham’s operating expense assumptions were provided by a property
management consulting firm with access to proprietary property management data. While Gotham’s
operating expense estimates are higher than those that HR&A could evaluate with public data, it is
assumed that Gotham’s vendor’s dataset is a more accurate source of information. Nonetheless, because
the proprietary data was not provided to HR&A, it could not be reviewed in detail and verified for
applicability to the project, and therefore our analysis is deemed inconclusive.
• Construction Cost Estimates. In its review of construction cost estimates, Dharam Consulting identified
assumptions in Gotham’s estimate that are lower than they would estimate, including relatively low
contingencies, suggesting a low level of risk tolerance in their estimates in this early design stage. Any
increases to their construction cost estimates would possibly outweigh all savings produced by adjusting
cap rates and operating expenses. These have since been reviewed with Gotham and their construction
firm, both who stand by Gotham’s working estimates, and Gotham has committed to stipulations that it
would accept construction cost risk.
Table 5 provides a detailed summary of the assumptions reviewed and HR&A’s findings.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 12
Table 5: Assumptions and Inputs Evaluation
Assumption
Gotham
Assumption
(Revised
Proposal) HR&A Opinion
Residential
Rents
$3.61 per square
foot
According to conversations with Gotham on June 22, they indicated that
because there are no direct comparable properties in Clearwater itself,
they identify rents by looking to the mature markets in Tampa and St.
Petersburg. They approached a rent assumption by assuming a 15%
discount on prevailing St. Petersburg rents and a 20% discount on
Tampa rents, equal to $2.97 for St. Petersburg and $3.44 for Tampa.
While Gotham’s assumption of $3.61 slightly exceeds the high end of
this range, it is in line with a discount on individual comps, including the
Heron in Tampa (20% discount is equal to $3.76) and the Asher in
Tampa ($3.44). Compared to the most comparable multifamily product
in Clearwater, 1100 Apex and The Nolen, Gotham’s assumed rents
represent an approximately $1.40 premium, or 65-70%, over existing
product. Because of the unprecedented nature of this project, these
rent estimates represent some risk for Gotham in its execution of the
project. Understanding Gotham’s approach to the project, and the
product it seeks to deliver, the $3.61 represents a reasonable
assumption for rents per square foot for Gotham’s underwriting of a
new construction, top-of-the-market product that does not currently
exist in Clearwater.
HR&A Opinion: Sound
Insurance $1,800 per unit HR&A found that average insurance premiums per multifamily unit
were lower than this in the Tampa metropolitan area at roughly $700-
$730 per unit.9 However, insurance premiums have increased
dramatically in the past year across states with climate-related risk,
with a particularly sharp surge in Florida. Estimates of projected
increases over the course of 2023 vary from 20% to 50%, suggesting
insurance costs per unit could reach $1,100 if on par with the larger
region. Gotham’s insurance assumptions could fall within the realm of
feasibility given the rapid escalation and uncertainty around insurance
premiums into the future but are currently relatively high.
HR&A Opinion: Higher than existing, but reasonably sound given rapid
escalation
Operating
Expenses
$8,039 per
unit/year
(exclusive of taxes
and inclusive of
insurance)
Gotham’s operating expense assumptions originate from the property
management consulting firm Greystar, whose estimates are based on
~30 comparable properties across Florida.10 HR&A has not seen
detailed operating expense data for this set of properties due to
confidentiality. In a benchmarking exercise, HR&A identified alternative
9 CoStar; Trepp, “Impact of Rising Insurance Costs in Major Coastal Multifamily Markets,” June 2023.
10 Comparable properties include 31 properties with an average of 324 units per property located in Southwest Florida, Southeast
Florida, and North Florida markets.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 13
Assumption
Gotham
Assumption
(Revised
Proposal) HR&A Opinion
operating expenses that are slightly lower than Gotham’s. HR&A found
that prevailing annual operating expenses, inclusive of insurance, but
exclusive of taxes in the Tampa metropolitan area are roughly $6,100 -
$6,700 per unit, according to CoStar.11 Operating expenses per unit in
the Central Pinellas and North Pinellas submarkets fall on average in
the middle of this range, at $6,500 exclusive of taxes.12 Using the
Central/North Pinellas average, with an additional 35% premium on the
costs of insurance to account for recent substantial increases in
insurance premiums in Florida (as described in the row above), results
in an average operating expense of about $6,700 per unit, or 20% less
than Gotham’s assumption.13
HR&A assumes that Greystar’s proprietary dataset is more
comprehensive and reliable than the data available on CoStar, but
because Greystar has not provided the detailed data on their 30-
property comp set, it is not possible to evaluate whether the dataset is
appropriate for the project under consideration.
HR&A Opinion: Inconclusive, likely sound but trending conservative
Property
Taxes
$5,750 per
unit/year
Gotham employs an income approach to estimating property tax. Given
the Pinellas County Property Appraiser’s practice of leaning heavily on
an income approach, HR&A conducted an independent calculation of
the projected property tax revenue based on an income approach,
which provided a similar result to Gotham’s assumptions. The use of an
income approach and the resulting estimated property taxes are
reasonable.
HR&A Opinion: Sound
Impact Fees $663,495 Per the Development Agreement, the Community Redevelopment
Authority will pay the City all impact fees incurred by the development
on behalf of Gotham. The assumed impact fees account for multi-
modal impact fees and water and wastewater impact fees. Multi-modal
impact fees are calculated based on the project program, with a
designated fee per unit by use. The Revised Proposal calculates multi-
modal impact fees based on the Original Proposal program, with 600
residential units and 25,000 square feet of retail. Estimated impact fees
based on the program in the Revised Proposal are approximately
11 CoStar; HR&A Analysis for Florida Apartment Association, 2020
12 CoStar; average operating expenses per unit for 4 and 5-star multifamily properties in the Central Pinellas and North Pinellas
submarkets. The City Hall site is located on the border between these two submarkets. The average of operating expenses per square
foot exclusive of property taxes for the two submarkets, $5.57, is close to the average for the overall Tampa market of $5.70. The
Tampa market includes the City of Tampa, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Dunedin, and extends north to Spring Hill and east to Plant City.
The Central/North Pinellas submarket average is 9% below the high mark of $6.08 per square foot in North Tampa.
13 Insurance premium based on National Multifamily Housing Council (NHMC) 2023 State of Multifamily Risk Survey and Report
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 14
Assumption
Gotham
Assumption
(Revised
Proposal) HR&A Opinion
$450,800. While an almost 50% difference, updating impact fees based
on the updated program has minimal to no impact on return metrics.
HR&A Opinion: Relatively high, but limited in material impact to
findings on financial valuation
Cap Rates 5.25% Gotham assumes a 5.25% cap rate in its Revised Proposal, up from
5.00% in the Due Diligence Analysis, a significant increase that impacts
the project’s internal rate of return and presumably, the target yield to
cost, as explained in the next paragraph. Nationally, multifamily cap
rates have increased, from 3.80% - 4.25% at the beginning of 2022 to
4.7% - 5.3% in Q1 2023, and 80% of investors project an increase in
multifamily cap rates in the Southeast US over the next year.14
Gotham’s cap rate assumptions align with cap rates for the Tampa and
St. Petersburg markets, which had cap rates of 4.90% and 5.00% in Q1
2023, respectively. While understanding current and short-term trends
in cap rates is important, the cap rate is used to calculate the property’s
exit value at least 10 years in the future, as well as refinancing at
stabilization. Given the projected expansion of the multifamily market
in the Tampa market over the next several years, further cap rate
compression could occur; decreasing cap rates would generate a higher
IRR.15 A return to a 5.00% cap rate would generate a 15.1% IRR, 40 basis
points above Gotham’s current projected IRR of 14.7%. The 5.25% cap
rate assumption is justified in today’s market but could compress in
future years closer to the building’s sale, generating greater returns for
Gotham, and decreasing the size of the overall financial gap.
HR&A Opinion: Reasonable given current market dynamics but
potentially conservative
Financial
Returns
6% YTC Gotham uses Yield to Cost (YTC), a metric representing the net
operating income divided by the total development cost, as its primary
metric of feasibility and to determine the size of the gap in feasibility.
Shifts in assumptions that impact the YTC, including changes in the
residential market impacting operating revenue, and changes in
construction costs and financing impacting the development cost,
reduce the YTC. Conversely, increasing net income or decreasing
development costs increases the YTC, and therefore reducing the gap
in feasibility and need for subsidy. Gotham requires a 6% YTC return
threshold, based on a risk premium applied at a risk-free rate. There is
typically a relationship between the risk-free rate, cap rate, and YTC.
14 PWC National Investor Survey, Q1 2023.
15 Ibid.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 15
Assumption
Gotham
Assumption
(Revised
Proposal) HR&A Opinion
HR&A typically sees developers use anywhere between 75-150 basis
points as a premium over a cap rate to arrive at a YTC threshold. 16
HR&A Opinion: Sound
Development
Costs
$210.5 million
(inclusive of
acquisition costs,
hard costs, soft
costs, and
financing costs)
Gotham is assuming hard costs of $175 million, inclusive of $160
million in direct costs, general conditions, and general contractor
insurance, based on information from the cost estimate provided by
the construction firm Coastal; $2 million for the elevated bridge; $4.8
million for a 3% escalation and $8.2 million as 5% contingency. Coastal
is a preeminent builder in the region with a substantial track record of
estimating and building large-scale multifamily projects.
Dharam Consulting, a professional cost consultant, undertook a review
of Coastal’s estimate. They found that direct trade cost estimates could
be $29 million higher than what Coastal is projecting, largely because of
higher plumbing, electrical and finishes costs. When applying the same
contingencies and markups that Gotham and Coastal employ in their
estimates, the $175 million in Gotham’s model would compare to $195
million in Dharam Consulting’s estimate, an increase of $20 million.
Dharam Consulting recommends higher contingencies than Gotham
and Coastal have assumed, specifically given that the project is early in
the design stage. If Dharam Consulting’s recommended escalations and
contingencies were to be used, total hard costs would be in the $227
million range, $52 million higher or a 30% increase from the $175
million in Gotham’s model.
Following Dharam’s initial review, findings were presented and
discussed with Gotham at the end of August, and Gotham expressed
disagreement with Dharam’s estimates. Gotham argued that Moss and
Coastal are active builders in the region and have more reliable and
current data, and that the process of seeking initial bids served to
compare two independent sources, which relatively aligned. Gotham
also expressed concerns with the contingencies Dharam Consulting
had used, indicating Gotham could handle and absorb the construction
risk.
HR&A found soft costs and financing costs ratios relative to hard costs
to be aligned with typical market ratios.
16 When HR&A spoke with Gotham on June 22, they indicated that they assumed a premium of 100 bps over cap rate to arrive at YTC.
They departed from this assumption in the written notes that they provided following that call, in which they explained that the YTC is
driven by UST increases in recent quarters, and articulated that investors typically require a 6.5% YTC for a project like this in today’s
context. They explained that they are able to settle for 6% given that this project is located in an Opportunity Zone. Despite this
additional explanation, HR&A finds Gotham’s original rationale of cap rate plus premium to be a stronger and more sound explanation
of how they arrive at the YTC threshold.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 16
Assumption
Gotham
Assumption
(Revised
Proposal) HR&A Opinion
Further discussion of this topic appears in the Risk Assessment and
Recommendations section of this memo, and HR&A believes that
commitments by Gotham could remove construction cost overages as a
risk to the City if formalized into the development agreement.
HR&A Opinion: Hard costs, particularly contingencies and escalation
assumptions, could be low, underestimating potential changes and
trade cost shifts. Commitments made by Gotham adequately address
risk.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 17
Fiscal Impact Comparison
In order to help gauge the costs and benefits of the project for the City of Clearwater, HR&A estimated the annual
recurring sales, property, and utility tax revenues that the redevelopment of the old City Hall site will create for
the City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, the State of Florida, and other local taxing jurisdictions. Sales, property,
and utility taxes and franchise fees represent the most impactful public revenue streams. Tax revenue estimates
assume that all taxes in the City, County, and State that would now apply to the Project would remain in place
over the next 30 years, and that these taxes would retain the same tax formulas and rates now in effect. Sales
taxes measure the impacts of spending both onsite at the Clearwater Bluffs site and offsite in retail areas in
proximity to the site, such as Cleveland Street, created by introducing new residents to downtown. Property taxes
measure the impacts of net new residential units and retail space. Utility taxes and fees measure the impacts of
net new residential units. This analysis does not examine fiscal impacts from the proposed redevelopment of the
former Harborview site.
Sales Tax: HR&A estimated retail spending onsite by assuming average retail sales of $706 per square foot across
retail space at the Old City Hall site.17 This results in roughly $110,000 in annual County sales tax revenue and
$670,000 in annual State sales tax revenue from the Revised Proposal. The City receives an annual
reimbursement of State and County sales taxes, HR&A estimates the amount of that reimbursement in Table 14
on page 22.
In addition to direct spending at retail onsite, HR&A estimated the offsite retail spending potential that could
occur from the project’s new residents at nearby retail establishments within the City of Clearwater. This is
expected to have the greatest impact in Downtown Clearwater, including Cleveland Street retail, as well as
support new retail establishments to be developed at the Harborview site. HR&A estimated that this spending
would generate approximately $80,000 in total annual sales taxes for Pinellas County.
Table 6: Sales Tax Revenue from Direct Onsite Spending (Stabilized Year)
Original Proposal
Due Diligence
Analysis Revised Proposal
Onsite Retail Square Footage 25,000 14,000 15,900
State Sales Tax (6%) $1,060,000 $590,000 $670,000
County Sales Tax (1%) $180,000 $100,000 $110,000
Total $1,240,000 $690,000 $780,000
17 Retail Maxim Annual Store Productivity Survey, 2019, adjusted for 2023 dollars.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 18
Property Tax: Gotham estimated property tax revenue generated by new development based on an income
capitalization methodology. This methodology closely aligns with the approach favored by the Pinellas County
Appraiser’s Office. Gotham estimates $5,750 in property taxes per unit in 2022 dollars, which translates into
$6,675 per unit in 2029, the first full year of operations after stabilization. These assumptions generate $2.6
million in total property tax revenue per year starting the first full year of operations after stabilization for the
Revised Proposal across the City, County, and CRA18. Approximately $1.5 million of that revenue, including taxes
levied by the County for its General Fund and Health Department, and the City’s General Fund, goes to the
Clearwater Redevelopment Authority (CRA) until it sunsets in 2035. After 2035, CRA contributions revert to the
respective taxing authorities unless the CRA is renewed.
Table 7: Annual Property Tax Revenue (2022 $)
Original Proposal
Due Diligence
Analysis19 Revised Proposal
Residential Units 600 525 400
Total Mill Rate 20.3621 20.3621 20.3621
Total Property Tax per Unit $5,750 $5,750 $5,750
Total Annual Property Tax Revenue $3,440,000 $3,020,000 $2,300,000
Table 8: Annual Property Tax Revenue by Entity (2022 $)20
Original Proposal
Due Diligence
Analysis Revised Proposal
Annual CRA Revenue (through 2035)21 $1,815,000 $1,585,000 $1,210,000
Annual City Tax Revenue (after 2035)22 $995,000 $870,000 $665,000
Annual County Tax Revenue (after 2035)23 $815,000 $715,000 $545,000
Annual School Board Revenue $1,010,000 $885,000 $675,000
Annual Other Tax Revenue $620,000 $550,000 $415,000
Total Annual Tax Revenue $3,440,000 $3,020,000 $2,300,000
Breakdown by Taxing Authority:
County – General Fund $800,000 $705,000 $530,000
School Board $1,010,000 $885,000 $675,000
County – Health $15,000 $10,000 $10,000
City – General Fund $995,000 $870,000 $665,000
Other – Downtown Development $160,000 $145,000 $110,000
Other24 $460,000 $405,000 $310,000
Total Annual Tax Revenue $3,440,000 $3,020,000 $2,300,000
18 HR&A conducted an independent analysis of projected property tax revenue also using an income capitalization methodology and
generated comparable projected property tax revenue.
19 For the Due Diligence Analysis, Gotham uses income approach to valuation until stabilization, after which a cost approach is used.
Due to the established preference of the Pinellas County Property Appraiser for an income approach, this analysis assumes taxes
consistent with income approach for duration of 30-year period for the Due Diligence Analysis.
20 Rounded to the nearest $5,000.
21 Revenue directed to the CRA through 2035 includes revenues for the City General Fund, County General Fund, and County Health
Department.
22 City tax revenue after the CRA’s expiration in 2035 includes City General Fund revenue.
23 County tax revenue after the CRA’s expiration in 2035 includes County General Fund and County Health Department revenue.
24 Other includes revenues directed to the Pinellas County Planning Council, Emergency Medical Services, Southwest Florida Water
Management District, Juvenile Welfare Board, and the Suncoast Transit Authority.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 19
Local Utility Taxes and Franchise Fees: Assuming an average monthly electric bill of $250 and an average
monthly water bill of $100, HR&A estimated electric tax (10%), water tax (10%), and electric franchise fees (6%)
generated by onsite residential units that would accrue to the City. For the 400-unit in the Revised Proposal, this
amounts to $240,000 in annual utility taxes and fees.
Table 9: Annual Utility Taxes and Franchise Fees Accruing to the City (2022 $)
Original Proposal
Due Diligence
Analysis Revised Proposal
Annual Electric Tax Revenue $180,000 $157,500 $120,000
Annual Water Tax Revenue $72,000 $63,000 $48,000
Annual Electric Franchise Revenue $108,000 $94,500 $72,000
Total Annual Utility Taxes and Fees $360,000 $315,000 $240,000
Economic Impact Comparison
High-level economic impact projections for the construction and ongoing operations of the Clearwater Bluffs’
mixed-use multifamily development were developed for each program provided: the Original Proposal
submission from July 2022, the Due Diligence Analysis from January 2023, and the Revised Proposal from April
2023 (focusing on the version with the reduced purchase price). HR&A utilized the IMpact analysis for PLANning
(IMPLAN)25 input-output model for Pinellas County to develop estimated results from each proposal. This analysis
does not examine economic impacts from the proposed redevelopment of the old Harborview site.
HR&A’s analysis estimates the following economic impact of the Revised Proposal:
• During the construction period, the Revised Proposal will provide about $198M in one-time economic
activity, with an estimated 2,395 full time equivalent (FTE)26 jobs supported during the construction
period.
• Permanently, the Revised Proposal will provide about $6.8M of economic activity annually, with 57
permanent FTE jobs supported.
The Revised Proposal shows a clear reduction in one-time jobs and economic impact compared to prior
proposals, as shown in the tables below. This mostly stems from the reduction in construction costs, though the
smaller unit count also has some effect. While the total labor income has decreased, the average income per
worker remains constant across the proposals.
25 IMPLAN (IMpact Analysis for PLANning) is a widely recognized modeling tool developed at the University of
Minnesota with the U.S. Forest Service’s Land Management Planning Unit. It generates estimates of economic output as well as
secondary and induced employment and output based on a series of inputs. IMPLAN traces the pattern of commodity purchases and
sales between industries that are associated with each dollar’s worth of a product or service sold to a customer, analyzing interactions
among 546 industrial sectors for each region, individual counties or groups of counties, and each state in the nation. IMPLAN is used
for the preparation of economic impact analyses by many public and private entities throughout the United States.
The economic impact analysis estimates economic output, job creation, and wages/income paid to employees at the following levels:
• Direct impacts: resulting from project construction and operations spending;
• Multiplier impacts:
o Indirect impacts: resulting from industry-to-industry transactions from project construction and operations;
o Induced impacts: resulting from employee spending in the economy, including employees of directly and indirectly
affected businesses.
26 Full-time equivalent employment is the number of full-time equivalent jobs, defined as total hours worked divided by average annual
hours worked in full-time jobs.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 20
Table 10: One-Time Jobs Supported in Pinellas County (FTE)
Category
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Direct Impact 2,745 2,690 1,710
Multiplier Impact 1,100 1,080 685
Total 3,845 3,770 2,395
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
Table 111: One-Time Economic Impact in Pinellas County (NPV) 27
Category
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Direct Impact $318,000,000 $312,000,000 $198,000,000
Multiplier Impact $200,000,000 $196,000,000 $124,000,000
Total $518,000,000 $508,000,000 $322,000,000
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
The Revised Proposal shows a similar number of FTE jobs supported by ongoing operations as resulting from the
Due Diligence Analysis. Overall economic impact is relatively close between the two proposals, as is the total
direct income. The relative small change despite the reduction in residential program is due to a larger retail
program that creates 5 additional jobs from the Due Diligence Proposal. The modest differences in average
income per worker are explained by the lower wages from retail jobs compared to residential-driven jobs. The
Due Diligence Analysis provides the highest average income because it has the least retail square footage and
thus the least retail jobs. In general, the proposals offer relatively close estimates for permanent, ongoing impact.
Table 12: FTE Jobs Permanently Supported in Pinellas County
Input Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Direct Jobs 88 56 57
Multiplier Jobs 42 30 28
Total 130 86 85
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
Table 13: Permanent Economic Impact in Pinellas County (Stabilized Year) 28
Input Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Direct Impact $10,400,000 $7,600,000 $6,800,000
Multiplier Impact $8,200,000 $5,800,000 $5,300,000
Total $18,600,000 $13,400,000 $12,100,000
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
27 NPV stands for net present value. This table shows how much spending could occur in terms of today’s dollars.
28 Stabilized year refers to the year the property meets certain occupancy rates, usually at least 80%.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 21
Summary of Evaluation
Gotham’s financial model inputs and assumptions are generally aligned with market trends, industry standards,
and prior transactions we have analyzed. Based on this review, HR&A identified a financial gap of approximately
$76.5 to $80.0 million under the Revised Proposal, given the variability identified in potential cap rate
assumptions, in comparison with the approximate $80 million financial gap that Gotham identified.
Table 14 on the following page presents a summary of the collective impacts of purchase price, subsidy requests,
and fiscal revenue streams on the City’s balance sheet under the various iterations of Gotham’s proposals. HR&A
estimates that the net financial impact to the City of the Original Proposal was north of $39.5 million, when
accounting for the purchase price, the various subsidies and public support, and the revenue from property, local
sales taxes and utility taxes over a 30-year period. This amount diminishes to between $13.7 and $18.1 million in
the Revised Proposal assuming the payment of the purchase money mortgage, largely because of the reduced
Purchase Price, the additional public subsidy request of $4 million, and the reduction in tax revenue from a
smaller development program. Without the payment of the purchase money mortgage, it diminishes further to
$7.3 million for both alternatives of the Revised Proposal. While the Revised Proposal still results in positive fiscal
impact to the City over the long term, this is reduced by more than half from the Original Proposal, and much of
the City revenue is backloaded, while subsidies are disbursed upfront.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 22
Table 14: Financial Offer Comparison (In Present Value Terms in Year 2023)
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Original Purchase
Price)
Purchase Price PV29 $14,515,977 $14,515,977 $6,364,880 $10,801,250
Subsidy (10-Year PV)30
Parking
(Disbursed 2025) ($15,557,408) ($14,129,787) ($15,557,408) ($15,557,408)
Permit and Impact Fees
(Disbursed 2024) ($1,071,525) ($1,057,438) ($669,877) ($669,877)
Additional City Subsidy
(Disbursed 2024) $0 $0 ($3,770,384) ($3,770,384)
Total City Subsidy ($16,628,933) ($15,187,225) ($19,997,668) ($19,997,668)
Fiscal Impact to City (30-Year PV)
CRA Revenue (through 2035) $11,514,881 $10,983,575 $7,148,634 $7,148,634
City Revenue (after 2035) $16,450,914 $15,150,757 $11,208,309 $11,208,309
Utility Taxes & Franchise Fees $10,485,437 $9,174,757 $6,990,291 $6,990,291
Estimated Sales Tax
Reimbursement31 $3,129,789 $2,123,649 $1,986,068 $1,986,068
Total City and CRA Revenue $41,581,020 $37,432,739 $27,333,302 $27,333,302
Net Financial Impact to the City
Impact without Purchase
Money Mortgage Payment
(30-Year NPV)
$24,952,087 $22,245,513 $7,335,633 $7,335,633
Impact with Purchase
Money Mortgage Payment
(30-Year NPV)
$39,468,064 $36,761,490 $13,700,514 $18,136,883
Based on this analysis, HR&A presents a series of recommendations following a risk assessment in the next
section.
29 Assuming a 3% discount rate and 3% inflation.
30 In reviewing areas of potential subsidy, the City's $1 million contribution to the pedestrian bridge was considered. As the project
represents both a developer contribution and City capital contribution towards an offsite public improvement, HR&A has elected to
exclude the City's cost as public subsidy, as it is not a direct contribution to the private development project.
31 The City receives a reimbursement of State and County sales taxes. Working with the City of Clearwater, HR&A identified an
assumption of a reasonable level of reimbursement, which is equivalent to 50% of the County’s annual sales tax revenue.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 23
Risk Assessment and Recommendations
In response to the revised proposal from Gotham, the City has various alternatives. On one hand, the City could
accept the proposal as is in the interest of project expediency and focus on introducing guardrails into a revised
Development Agreement to minimize risks to the City moving forward. On the other hand, the City could present
a counterproposal to Gotham that revises certain material terms of the Revised Proposal (e.g., number of units,
purchase price, or amount of public subsidy), including seeking alternate arrangements to the Purchase Money
Mortgage. If the City and Gotham failed to reach agreement under any of those two avenues, the City and
Gotham could terminate their Development Agreement and the City could seek to re-procure the redevelopment
opportunity.
Summary of Alternatives
This section provides a summary of the risks of each alternative and provides recommendations on a possible
way forward.
Table 15: Summary of Alternatives
Considerations Accept Counterproposal Re-Procure
Description
City accepts revised proposal
from Gotham and moves to
producing an addendum to the
Development Agreement that
focuses on minimizing risks
moving forward.
City prepares a series of
requests to Gotham to
negotiate alterations to the
proposal and works to execute
an addendum to the
Development Agreement.
Should the City ultimately fail
to reach agreement with
Gotham on any of the other
two alternatives, the City
engages second place
respondent Elevate Clearwater
and/or opens new
procurement process to find a
new developer.
Considerations
Timeline Accepting the revised proposal
from Gotham and working on
an addendum to the
Development Agreement
accordingly should present the
fastest timeline.
The renegotiation of a proposal
and production of an
addendum to the Development
Agreement could take between
two to three months,
depending on the substance of
the counterproposal from the
City.
Engaging Elevate Clearwater
and/or reopening a
procurement process could
add another 6 to 18 months to
the process before a new
Development Agreement is
fully negotiated and executed
and a Due Diligence period is
concluded.
Financial The net financial impact to the
City of this proposal is $13.7-
$18.1 million, per analysis
presented in prior sections. The
main issue with this option is
that the City would be
disbursing close to $22 million
upfront in the form of parking,
and gap subsidy, and only
accruing financial benefits over
time, with a payment for the
site that could not occur until 5
to 10 years from the moment
Through the negotiation of
certain elements of the revised
proposal from Gotham, the City
could aim to increase the
present value of the purchase
price and/or reduce the
subsidy request, resulting in a
net financial benefit to the City
greater than the current $13.7-
$18.1 million. This could be
achieved by renegotiating the
timing of the purchase price
payments from Gotham, which
The financial impact on the City
under this scenario is
unknown. While the presence
of the new Coachman Park and
its early success improves the
marketability of these sites, the
financial challenges facing the
project are real and unlikely to
be solved by another
development partner, as they
are not unique circumstances
to Gotham or their concept but
rather broader real estate
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 24
Considerations Accept Counterproposal Re-Procure
of transaction. As identified by
City staff, the structure of the
purchase money mortgage
may carry meaningful risk of
nonpayment. The lack of
commitment to a minimum
hold period also increases
repayment risk, so it is
important that the City
formalizes Gotham’s
commitment to absorbing
construction cost risks into any
revised version of the
development agreement.
could include a payment
installment strategy. HR&A’s
analysis suggests that receiving
payment sooner could reduce
overall risk to the City, though
comes at a cost to Gotham.
market conditions. The City
could wait and reprocure in the
coming months or years, but
there is no clarity as to whether
or when construction costs and
interest rates will fall relative to
rents. In fact, the robust
regional pipeline for residential
development in the region,
with 18,500 units under
construction in Tampa and
2,500 units in St. Pete, and
large-scale projects in planning
such as the Historic Gas Plant
District in St Pete and Water
Street Phase 2 and GasWorx in
Tampa, suggest significant
housing supply coming online,
keeping up with population
growth.
Economic
Development
The revised proposal will result
in $12.1 million in total
permanent impact, creating 85
permanent full-time-equivalent
jobs across the region. The
construction period will create
2,395 jobs during that time,
with a total one-time impact of
more than $322 million.
The City could explore with
Gotham the possibility of
increasing the number of
residential units from 400
closer to 500 in the
Development Agreement,
which would result in a greater
one-time and ongoing
economic impact than the one
of the revised proposal, but it is
unlikely to exceed that of the
original proposal. This would
suggest a taller building, and
also may drive other cost
implications that impact
financial performance, such as
a longer absorption period (see
note at right on the size of the
project relative to comparables
in the market) and carry
additional project viability risks.
The degree of economic activity
of a new proposal from
another developer is unknown.
It is possible that the
residential program in a
revised proposal would not
exceed the one derived from
the 400 units Gotham
proposes, given high marks in
the region, like the Heron in
Tampa are already 419 units,
and exceeding that market
presents uncertainties with
absorption.
Political and
Reputational
The current proposal is a
departure from the number of
units in the Referendum and
the Development Agreement,
which may have implications
for public perception of the
project and the City.
The renegotiation of Gotham’s
proposal could show the City is
being thorough in the
evaluation of project risks and
feasibility and possibly mitigate
any negative public perceptions
of the outcomes versus stated
goals under the referendum.
Delays in the project pre-
development stages could
present a political risk to
Council and City staff. Inversely,
they could also be seen as the
City fulfilling its fiduciary duty if
renegotiation is not successful.
There is risk to the future
attraction of developers to the
Clearwater market if the
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 25
Considerations Accept Counterproposal Re-Procure
market perceives this outcome
negatively, having completed
two rounds of solicitation.
Downtown Clearwater is
already seen by the market as a
challenging place to develop.
Summary of Main Risks
• The City would be
disbursing close to $22
million upfront in the form
of parking, bridge, and gap
subsidy, and only accruing
financial benefits over
time, with a payment for
the site that could not
occur until 10+ years from
the moment of transaction
with risk to the City for
nonpayment.
• Construction costs could
be higher than what
Gotham is assuming,
further challenging project
feasibility and this risk
should be fully transferred
to Gotham.
• The public opinion on the
deviation from the
referendum unit count and
Development Agreement
could have political and/or
reputational implications
for the City and the
project.
• In the renegotiation of the
proposal, the City should
establish guardrails and
conditions that protect it
from any future revisions
from Gotham to returns,
programs, and
assumptions.
• A renegotiation with
Gotham could be
unsuccessful and the City
could find itself having to
decide between the other
two alternatives in a few
months.
• In the renegotiation of the
proposal, the City should
establish guardrails and
conditions that protect it
from any future revisions
from Gotham to returns,
programs, and
assumptions.
• Given the current
development climate,
there is a great degree of
uncertainty about what the
outcome of a re-
procurement would be
both in terms of financial
compensation to the City
as well as the development
program. The City would
embark into a 6- to 18-
month process without a
strong hypothesis on the
outcome.
• Future attraction of
developers to the
Clearwater market could
be challenging if the
market perceives this
outcome negatively,
having completed two
rounds of solicitation.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 26
Summary of Risks and Recommendations
Given the evaluation and analysis presented by HR&A above, our recommendation to the City would be to
prepare and negotiate a counterproposal with Gotham, focused on a limited set of terms. Building on a long-term
coordinated plan to spur activity in Clearwater’s downtown, the redevelopment of the old City Hall site represents
an important part of that effort, and therefore warrants further efforts by the City to explore if satisfactory terms
can be reached with Gotham. The process to arrive at an addendum to the Development Agreement could take
between two to three months. At the end of that process, the City could still decide to re-procure the site if the
terms of the revised Agreement were not acceptable. The negotiation with Gotham should be centered around
minimizing three main areas of risk for the City:
1. Financial Gap and Timing of Payment: Both approaches proposed by Gotham involve a purchase money
mortgage, which defers payment to the City to 5 and 10 years, respectively. Under these two approaches,
the City would be upfronting all subsidies, including subsidies for the cost of parking, reimbursement of
permit and impact fees, and an additional $4 million to fill the financial gap. The City would only receive
payment from Gotham up to until 10 years later.
In addition, the purchase money mortgage concept introduces the risk of non-payment if the developer
were to default over the 10-year period and/or if there were more senior lenders before the City that
Gotham needed to make whole, and was concluded as unacceptable by City staff for that reason. While it
is perhaps viable to manage risk around Gotham’s sale of the property to an unknown third party, by
requiring full payment at project sale or refinancing, such stipulations does not control for situations
whereby Gotham finds itself under financial hardship and/or defaults on the payment.
Risks associated with the financial gap and timing of payment can be mitigated by a variety of options,
including:
a. The City could consider reducing the purchase price if justified based on the appraisal of the
City Hall site for a 400-unit single tower project, given the prior appraisal’s assumption of condo
use at a larger scale of development.
b. The City could investigate varying program mixes, including the addition of condos and further
reductions in density, to help close the feasibility gap. Further reductions in density may require
soliciting new approvals from the public due to the acceptance of the originally proposed project
by voters in November 2022. While reducing the financial gap, further reductions in density
would also reduce fiscal returns.
c. The City and Gotham could explore an alternative form of conveyance to alleviate some of
Gotham’s pressure to disburse for the purchase of the site upfront in full at the moment of close,
while ensuring the City captures the upside that may result from public investment in Downtown
and a changing market in the mid- and long-term. The City should explore internally and with
Gotham the possibility of entering into a purchase and development agreement with phased
payments over the short- and mid-term, participation and claw back clauses. While we
understand a long-term ground lease would require a new referendum, the purchase and
development agreement could be designed in a way that replicates synthetically the risk profile
and cash flows of a ground lease. This could also help address the lack of a commitment to a
minimum hold period.
HR&A and the City team also engaged Gotham on potential additional options, which were deemed not
satisfactory or of limited benefit. These included reducing the amount of residential parking and/or
moving some of the parking spaces offsite or above ground, as well as shared and dedicated parking
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 27
arrangements with Gotham on the adjacent pipeline 550-space public garage at the site formerly owned
by Peace Memorial Church.
2. Re-negotiation risk: To avoid the risk of project delay through subsequent rounds of negotiations, the City
and Gotham should see the agreement reached as part of the negotiation of the Revised Proposal from
Gotham as the final terms of the transaction. With the due diligence period completed, the amended
Development Agreement should clearly establish that Gotham will be responsible and absorb any real
estate market, financial, and construction risks moving forward. Any unfavorable deviations in those
areas should not form the basis for a request for additional public subsidy, a reduction or meaningful
alteration of the program in the Revised Proposal, or a concept with quality standards and/or designs that
deviate from those discussed and agreed with the City. As of communications during a meeting on
Tuesday, August 29 and a subsequent email communication dated Friday, September 22, Gotham has
agreed that once the due diligence period is over, they will not come back to the City for further
negotiations.
As part of this, it is particularly important to offer the City protection in case construction costs were to
depart from the current estimate presented by Gotham, given the differences of opinion on costing
between Dharam and Coastal. The City should find ways to reflect in the revised Development Agreement
that none of the construction cost risk can be transferred to the City, via claims for unforeseen market
conditions and escalation, unforeseen ground conditions, or similar findings. As of communications on
August 29, 2023, Gotham has agreed to assume all construction cost risk, and closing requirements will
include provision of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract from their construction firm, among
other items.
The City should also seek to establish in the addenda to the Development Agreement that the current
proposal from DeNunzio for the Harborview site is also a best-and-final offer and that the developer
should absorb any real estate market, financial, and construction risks on that site moving forward.
3. Project completion risk: The City should seek to establish firm construction commencement and
completion deadlines in the amended Development Agreement, particularly in the event that Gotham
does not pay the City for the purchase of the site upfront, to minimize the risk of Gotham “sitting” on a
vacant site waiting for the market to turn, a situation where the City would have little to no recourse
under current terms. Gotham has provided closing conditions it would agree to, including a completion
guarantee that they will need to provide to their construction lender, and have agreed to have a
reputable GMP and be fully entitled and permitted for development.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 28
Appendices
A. Information Reviewed and Received
HR&A received materials from Gotham related to the original proposal and 525-unit program (called “Original
Program Materials,” as well as materials for the 400-unit program (called “Revised Program Materials”). Materials
received are shown below for each program.
Table 16: Original Program Materials
Material Author Type of Material Date Submitted
Due Diligence Analysis City
Hall Site 1.3.2023
Gotham Financial Model 1.3.23
Civil Due Diligence Estimates Stantec Civil 12.9.22
Geotechnical Engineering
Report
Universal Engineering
Sciences, Inc.
Geotechnical 1.6.23
ROM Estimates Coastal Hard Costs 7.15.22
Probable Project Costs Stantec Hard Costs 7.5.22
Due Diligence Project Costs Coastal Hard Costs 12.22.22
Proposal Response for
Preconstruction Services
Moss Hard Costs 12.22.22
Insurance Budget Custom House Insurance 12.12.22
525-unit Highrise Stabilized
Model
Greystar Operating Expenses NA
Clearwater Market Analysis Gensler Residential Market Study 5.12.22
The Bluffs Complete
Proposal
Gotham RFP Submission 6.9.22
Old City Hall Site Survey City Title and Survey 11.7.22
City Hall site title Chicago Title Insurance
Company
Title and Survey NA
Development Agreement Pinellas County Development Agreement 7.28.22
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 29
Table 17: Revised Program Materials
Material Author Type of Material Date Submitted
City Hall Site 4.17.23 Reduced
Purchase Price
Gotham Financial Model 4.17.23
City Hall Site 4.17.23 Original
Purchase Price
Gotham Financial Model 4.17.23
Updated Architectural Plan Behar Peteranecz Geotechnical 3.30.23
Residential Tower ROM Coastal Hard Costs 3.13.22
Singel Tower Order of
Magnitude Estimate Summary
Moss Hard Costs 3.3.23
400 unit Highrise Stabilized
Model
Greystar Insurance NA
Clearwater Presentation
4.17.23
Gotham Presentation to the City 4.17.23
Clearwater Market Analysis
Update
Gensler Residential Market Study 12.20.22
B. Economic Impact Sources/Methodology
HR&A utilized the Impact analysis for PLANning (IMPLAN) input-output model for Pinellas County, created by MIG,
Inc. (formerly Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.), to analyze the project’s economic impacts from both construction
and annual ongoing operations at full development buildout. For each dollar of spending in the economy, IMPLAN
traces the pattern of commodity purchases and sales between 546 industries within the specified geography. The
IMPLAN model is used to conduct economic impact analyses by leading public and private sector organizations
across the United States.
The economic impact analysis estimates economic output, job creation, and wages/income paid to employees at
the following levels:
• Direct impacts: resulting from project construction and operations spending;
• Multiplier impacts:
o Indirect impacts: resulting from industry-to-industry transactions from project construction and
operations;
o Induced impacts: resulting from employee spending in the economy, including employees of
directly and indirectly affected businesses.
HR&A conducted an economic impact analysis measuring the above impacts of future development at the Bluffs
for each proposal. HR&A also examined the fiscal impact of the development. IMPLAN inputs used are below.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 30
Table 18: IMPLAN Inputs for Annual Recurring Economic Impacts from Operations
Category Code IMPLAN Description
Residential 61 Maintenance and repair construction of residential structures
Retail 412 Retail–- Miscellaneous store retailers
Restaurant 509 Full-service restaurants
Table 19: IMPLAN Inputs for One-Time Economic Impacts from Construction
Category Code IMPLAN Description
Construction 58 Construction of new multifamily residential structures
One-Time Impacts from Construction
HR&A developed a series of assumptions to model the one-time economic impacts of construction of each of the
three proposals. The program mix for each proposal and their proposed construction costs are presented below.
Table 20: Program Mix and Construction Costs
Input
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Residential Units 600 525 400
Retail SF 25,000 14,000 15,900
Parking Spaces 600 548 440
Construction Cost (excl. land cost) $318,044,952 $311,590,899 $197,774,515
Source: Gotham
Based on the information above, and using a set of IMPLAN inputs, HR&A estimated direct and multiplier impacts
on employment, economic spending, and personal income attributable to construction of the project. These
impacts will only be felt during the construction period and will accrue across Pinellas County, given the mobility
of workers from their homes to their employment locations. Some of this activity will directly benefit Clearwater
residents.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 31
Table 21: One-Time Labor Income in Pinellas County32
Category
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Annual Direct Impact $163,000,000 $159,000,000 $101,000,000
Average Direct Income/Worker $59,000 $59,000 $59,000
Annual Multiplier Impact $62,000,000 $61,000,000 $39,000,000
Average Multiplier Income/Worker $57,000 $57,000 $57,000
Total $225,000,000 $220,000,000 $140,000,000
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
Permanent Annual Impacts from Operations
HR&A used the proposed vertical development program mix and estimates of employee density specific to use
(see below) to support estimates of retail and residential employment and impact.
Table 22: Impact Assumptions
Assumptions
Residential 25 units per residential worker
Retail $679 retail spending per square foot
Source: HR&A Analysis
Deriving IMPLAN inputs from the information above, HR&A estimated direct and multiplier impacts (indirect and
induced impacts) across Pinellas County based on the proposals for the City Hall Site. HR&A looked at impacts on
employment, economic spending, and personal income attributable to the ongoing operations of the project.
Table 23: Summary of Labor Income from Operations in Pinellas County (Stabilized Year)
Category
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Direct Income $3,500,000 $2,400,000 $2,300,000
Direct Income/Worker $40,000 $43,000 $41,000
Multiplier Income $2,500,000 $1,800,000 $1,600,000
Multiplier Income/Worker $59,000 $59,000 $58,000
Total $6,000,000 $4,200,000 $3,900,000
Source: IMPLAN, HR&A Analysis
32 Labor income includes all forms of employment income, including employee compensation (wages, salaries, and benefits) and
proprietor income.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 32
C. Fiscal Impact Sources/Methodology
In addition to direct spending at retail onsite, HR&A estimated retail spending offsite by residents of the project at
nearby retail establishments in Downtown Clearwater, including Cleveland Street retail. Based on household
spending patterns for households located within a 3-mile radius of the site, HR&A estimated that the average
household would spend approximately $25,000 annually on retail goods, and that 78% of that spending would
take place locally.33 In turn, this would generate $400-$600,000 in sales tax revenue.
Table 24: Sales Tax Revenue from Indirect Offsite Spending (Stabilized Year)
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Offsite Retail Spending $7,830,000 $6,650,000 $4,950,000
State Sales Tax (6%) $470,000 $400,000 $300,000
Local Sales Tax (1%) $160,000 $130,000 $100,000
Total $630,000 $530,000 $400,000
Property Tax: Property tax revenue generated by new development is estimated based on an income
capitalization methodology. This methodology closely aligns with Gotham’s methodology as well as the approach
favored by the Pinellas County Appraiser’s Office. This methodology generates $5,750 in property taxes per unit in
2022 dollars, which translates into $6,675 per unit in 2029, the first full year of operations after stabilization.
Table 25: Annual Property Tax Revenue (2022 $)34
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis35
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Residential Units 600 525 400
Total Mill Rate 20.3621 20.3621 20.3621
Total Property Tax per Unit $5,750 $5,750 $5,750
Annual Property Tax Breakdown by Authority
County – General Fund $800,000 $705,000 $530,000
School Board $1,010,000 $885,000 $675,000
County – Health $15,000 $10,000 $10,000
City – General Fund $995,000 $870,000 $665,000
Other – Downtown Development $160,000 $145,000 $110,000
Other36 $460,000 $405,000 $310,000
Total Annual Property Tax Revenue $3,440,000 $3,020,000 $2,300,000
33 ESRI Retail Marketplace Profile and Household Budget Expenditures, 2023.
34 Rounded to the nearest $5,000.
35 For the Due Diligence Analysis, Gotham uses income approach to valuation until stabilization, after which a cost approach is used.
Due to the established preference of the Pinellas County Property Appraiser for an income approach, this analysis assumes taxes
consistent with income approach for duration of 30-year period for the Due Diligence Analysis.
36 Other includes revenues directed to the Pinellas County Planning Council, Emergency Medical Services, Southwest Florida Water
Management District, Juvenile Welfare Board, and the Suncoast Transit Authority.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 33
Annual Property Tax Breakdown by Entity
Annual CRA Revenue (through 2035)37 $1,815,000 $1,585,000 $1,210,000
Annual City Tax Revenue (after 2035)38 $995,000 $870,000 $665,000
Annual County Tax Revenue (after 2035)39 $815,000 $715,000 $545,000
Annual School Board Revenue $1,010,000 $885,000 $675,000
Annual Other Tax Revenue $620,000 $550,000 $415,000
Total Annual Property Tax Revenue $3,450,000 $3,020,000 $2,300,000
HR&A conducted an independent analysis of project property tax impacts, based on an income methodology.
HR&A used the same assumptions for this analysis with the exception of two: 1) cap rate, for which HR&A used a
5.00% assumption, rather than Gotham’s 5.25%, based on the supposition that cap rates could decrease in the
Clearwater market over the next several years, before the property is sold, and 2) operating expenses, for which a
$7,000 per unit expense assumption. Based on this analysis, HR&A’s estimated property tax impacts were $7,257
per unit, slightly higher than Gotham’s.40
Local Utility Taxes and Franchise Fees: To calculate water tax, electric tax, and electric franchise fee revenue,
HR&A used monthly utility bill assumptions sourced from the City, including $250 for electricity and $100 for
water.
Table 26: Annual Utility Fee and Tax Revenue
Original Proposal
Due Diligence
Analysis Revised Proposal
Residential Units 600 525 400
Estimated Annual Fee per Unit41
Electric Tax (10%) $300
Water Tax (10%) $120
Electric Franchise Fee (6%) $180
Total Utility Fee and Tax Revenue $360,000 $315,000 $240,000
37 Revenue directed to the CRA through 2035 includes revenues for the City General Fund, County General Fund, and County Health
Department.
38 City tax revenue after the CRA’s expiration in 2035 includes City General Fund revenue.
39 County tax revenue after the CRA’s expiration in 2035 includes County General Fund and County Health Department revenue.
40 HR&A’s analysis of Gotham’s model for the January 2023 Due Diligence Analysis identifies that the model mistakenly shows a cost
approach used after year 2028 to estimate property taxes, instead of the income approach used in years 2022 through 2027.
41 City of Clearwater.
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 34
D. Comparison of Inputs and Assumptions Across Proposals
Table 27: Comparison of Program and Timing Across Proposals
Program Assumption
Original Proposal
(July 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Residential (SF) 540,000 650,470 466,784
Retail/Commercial (SF) 25,000 14,000 15,900
Parking (SF) 210,000 231,930 135,630
Total SF 775,000 1,080,097 689,424
Residential Units 600 525 400
Parking Spaces 600 spaces 548 spaces 440 spaces
Parking Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.1
Stories 25 stories on a shared
podium deck 26 stories 28 stories
Construction Period 30 months 36 months 27 months
Hold Period (Post-Stabilization) 0 months 0 months 80 months
Total Project Duration 6.1 years 6.0 years 11.8 years
Table 28: Comparison of Financial Uses Across Proposals
Original Proposal
(July 2022)
Development
Agreement
(August 2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase Price)
Uses
Acquisition Costs $15,400,000 - $15,400,000 $7,600,000
Hard Costs $284,680,200 - $277,782,500 $175,040,000
Soft Costs $39,947,962 - $32,680,509 $22,528,229
Financing Costs $5,451,264 - $2,964,111 $2,192,260
Interest Reserve $11,529,911 - $11,035,558 $5,508,116
Operating Deficit $1,426,126 - $727,890 $206,687
Total Uses $350,426,126 - $340,590,568 $213,074,892
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 35
Table 29: Comparison of Financial Sources Across Proposals
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Development
Agreement (August
2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase Price)
Sources
Debt $227,776,982 - $204,354,341 $117,191,190
City Funds – Parking + Other -
$17M (minus
$30,000/space if less
than 600 spaces are
delivered
$15,440,000 $21,000,000 (including the
additional $4M ask)
City Funds – Bridge - Up to $2M $1,000,000 $1,000,000
City Funds – Permit + Impact
Fees - CRA covers all fees $1,121,836 $952,311
Purchase Money Mortgage - - - $7,600,000
Equity $122,649,144 - $118,674,391 $65,331,390
Total Sources $350,426,126 - $340,590,568 $213,074,892
Project Financing: Key differences in Gotham’s financial assumptions among the three proposals include
increased cap rates and interest rates, decreased selling costs, and a lower LTC ratio. The Revised Proposal
includes an assumed refinancing in Year 6.
Table 30: Proposal Comparison–- Financing Assumptions
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
Purchase Price)
Disposition
Exit Cap Rate Retail + Parking Not provided 5.00% 5.25%
Exit Cap Rate Residential Not provided 5.00% 5.25%
Selling Costs Not provided 2.00% 1.50%
Financing
Construction Financing LTC 65% 60% 55%
Construction Financing Interest 5.00% 6.50% 6.50%
Permanent Financing Interest Not provided 5.00% 5.00%
Refinance Year NA NA Year 6 (Upon stabilization)
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 36
Operations, Hold Period, and Exit Strategy: Gotham is assuming a shorter construction period and a faster
lease-up in its Revised Proposal, followed by a refinancing after stabilization, after which it will hold the property
for 6.5 years. Gotham is required, per the Development Agreement, to not dispose of the property until the City
Hall or Harborview project is substantially complete. Gotham underwrote a hold period of at least 10 years, and
they confirmed that they intend to adhere to this hold to maximize the 10-year benefit of the project’s location in
an Opportunity Zone. Gotham plans to use Greystar or an equivalent reputable property manager to manage the
property while they remain as property owner and asset manager.
Table 31: Proposal Comparison–- Timeline
Timing
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model – Reduced
PP)
Pre-Closing Period 24 months 24 months 20 months
Pre-Construction Period 0 months 0 months 0 months
Construction Duration 30 months 36 months 27 months
Time Until Stabilization 20 months 20 months 13 months
Months from Lease-Up to Refi 0 months 3 months 3 months
Hold Period (Post-Stabilization) 0 months 0 months 80 months
Total Project Duration 6.1 years 7.0 years 11.8 years
Residential Uses: In addition to reducing the overall number of residential units down to 400, the Revised
Proposal does not include any affordable units. The Original Proposal and the Development Agreement mention
the potential allocation of 10% of apartments as workforce housing for residents earning up to 120% of area
median income (AMI), to be provided at the discretion of the Developer. Affordable units are not included in the
Original Proposal, the January 2023 Due Diligence Analysis, or in the April 2023 Revised Proposal. Without
designated workforce units, units are unaffordable for those making 120% of the Pinellas County AMI of $89,400,
requiring 36% of annual income for rent. HR&A understands that the City is not pursuing the inclusion of
affordable units at this time. Gotham has confirmed that they do not have interest in using the Live Local
Program and per HR&A’s independent analysis, it appears that there would be no financial benefit to pursuing the
program given the rents and real estate taxes Gotham is projecting in market-rate units.
Parking Uses: Gotham’s approach to parking shifted from the Due Diligence Analysis, in which they proposed 548
spaces in a parking garage with three underground levels, to the Revised Proposal, in which they provide 440
spaces in a garage with one underground level and one ground-floor podium level. Underground parking is
important for this site due to the desire to keep viewsheds and provide connectivity from Osceola Street to the
park. The Development Agreement allocated a total of $22 million in parking subsidy (or $30,000 per space), with
$17 million for the City Hall site, roughly $15 million of which was used in the Due Diligence Analysis. The Revised
Proposal requests the same level of subsidy for parking but with a decrease in the number of parking spaces
provided, increasing the requested subsidy per parking space.
Public Realm: The Original Proposal articulated an approach to the project’s urban design and public realm plan,
including plans for a transition to Coachman Park and to the street. There are two key public offsite
improvements related to the City Hall Site:
a. South Bluff Walk to integrate the City Hall site with Coachman Park (1.54 Acres)
b. Pedestrian bridge spanning Cleveland Street and connecting the North and South Bluff Walks (16 ft wide,
550 ft long)
In the Original Proposal, Stantec estimated the cost of improvements to the public open space within the City Hall
Site at $3.4 million, including $400,000 for site preparation and $3 million for on-grade site improvements,
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 37
including site furnishings, retaining/seating walls, pedestrian lighting, landscaping, hardscaping, art, and signage.
The Revised Proposal does not include an updated estimate of public realm improvement costs.
The Revised Proposal maintains the $1 million subsidy request to fund the construction of a pedestrian bridge
connecting the City Hall and Harborview sites. However, the cost of pedestrian bridge construction is not broken
out in the construction cost estimates provided.
Residential Operating Assumptions: Between the Due Diligence Analysis and the Revised Proposal, the
residential vacancy factor increased by 50 basis points to 6%, which was consistent with the vacancy assumption
in the Original Proposal from July 2022. Residential rent per month per SF of $3.61 remained largely unchanged
from the Due Diligence Analysis to the Revised Proposal, but it is still below the $3.75 assumption in the Original
Proposal. HR&A investigated the assumed decrease in residential rents by looking at rents per square foot for
comparable properties in Clearwater, Tampa, and St. Petersburg using CoStar. It is expected that this project will
represent a more premium product than currently exists in Clearwater, where there are few recent high-end
multifamily rental properties and, therefore no appropriate local comparable projects. The two existing
comparable properties, the Apex and the Nolen, have a weighted average rent per square foot of $2.17.
Table 32: Clearwater Comparable Multifamily Properties
Building
Name Address City Units Stories Year Built
Effective
Rent PSF Vacancy
1100 Apex 1100 Cleveland St Clearwater 134 15 2019 $2.15 4%
The Nolen 949 Cleveland St Clearwater 240 4 2017 $2.19 13%
Weighted Average $2.17
Tampa and St. Petersburg have a greater number of comparable multifamily rental properties. Premium product
in Tampa has a weighted average rent per SF of $4.30, while St. Petersburg has rents of $3.50 per SF.
Table 33: Tampa Comparable Multifamily Properties
Building Name Address City Units Stories
Year
Built
Effective
Rent PSF Vacancy
The Mav Channelside 601 N 12th St Tampa 324 19 2022 $3.44 50%
Heron 815 Water St Tampa 419 26 2021 $4.70 20%
Cora 1011 E. Cumberland Ave Tampa 388 23 2021 $4.03 15%
Asher 1050 Water St Tampa 393 22 2022 $4.30 7%
Weighted Average $4.30
Table 34: St. Petersburg Comparable Multifamily Properties
Building Name Address City Units Stories
Year
Built
Effective
Rent PSF Vacancy
Ascent St. Petersburg 225 1st Ave N St. Petersburg 357 36 2023 $3.76 59%
EVO 334 2nd Ave S St. Petersburg 220 24 2023 $3.58 59%
Camden Central 855 Central Ave St. Petersburg 368 15 2019 $3.48 3%
Waterview Echelon City
Center 100 Main St N St. Petersburg 226 15 2021 $2.81 8%
Weighted Average $3.50
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 38
Table 35: Proposal Comparison–- Return Metrics
Original Proposal
(June 2022)
Due Diligence
Analysis
(Jan 2023 Model)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Original Purchase
Price)
Revised Proposal
(April 2023 Model –
Reduced Purchase
Price)
Target Return (YTC) 5.50% 6.00% 6.00% 6.00%
Modeled Returns
IRR 17.00% - 6.00% 14.20% 14.30%
YTC 5.53% 4.52% 5.97% 5.87%
E. Research notes on precedent for public subsidy
Public-private partnerships incentivizing the development of desired land uses and public infrastructure are
common practices nationwide to promote economic development and attainable housing.
In Florida, public-private partnerships and public subsidies are used to accomplish a variety of economic
development goals, including the development of desired infrastructure, affordable units, and parking spaces. In
Tampa in 2017, a $21.5M tax-exempt bond was issued to the Tampa Heights Community Development District.42
This bond was intended to pay for infrastructure in the new 43-acre waterfront mixed-use community being built
around the historic Armature Works building. This includes the construction of new roads, sidewalks, the Tampa
Riverwalk, parking garages, and other infrastructure. The bond funds are backed by tax increment financing
through the City of Tampa.
Public-private transactions in St. Petersburg have been focused on increasing the number of public parking
spaces while also encouraging the construction of Class A office space or workforce housing. In the last few years,
the City of St. Petersburg has agreed to pay for public parking spaces in 2 mixed-use projects that also align with a
citywide goal to increase high-quality office square footage. In the first, a hotel-office project at 450 1st Avenue
North, the City of St. Petersburg will pay up to $28.7K/parking space for a minimum of 240 public parking spaces
that the City will lease long-term. The City of St Petersburg will also pay up to $20K/parking space for a minimum
of 400 public parking spaces in a project with Edge Central Development Partners. That project includes at least
100K square feet of Class A office space and at least 30 workforce housing units. The City has agreed to provide a
purchase money mortgage for the portion of the property with the workforce housing so that a promissory note
for $2M can be secured.
Gotham has, in the past, relied on public support in projects in the New York Metro area. One example Gotham
provided is a $150M+ project in the village of Mount Kisco, Westchester County, NY. The project includes
approximately 25,000 sf of retail, 750 structured parking spaces, and 220 housing units, 7% of which are set aside
for households at 90% AMI of the Westchester County median income. To achieve this level of below-market
homes offered, in addition to the significant number of parking spaces desired, in 2020, the Westchester County
Industrial Development Agency approved financial incentives of about $40M, including a payment in lieu of taxes
(PILOT), sales tax exemption on building materials, and a mortgage recording tax exemption. This project is still
currently under discussion, as a proposal in 2021 was initially rejected by the Mount Kisco Village Board due to
concerns over density and parking.43
42 “The Heights Receives $21.5 million in funding,” Armature Works (2017). “Tampa Heights project gets $231.5 million in funding,”
Tampa Bay Times (2017).
43 ”Mount Kisco Says No to Reworked Kirby Commons Development Plan,” The Examiner News (August 2021).
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 39
Given the relatively untested nature of mixed-use and multifamily development in Downtown Clearwater, it is not
unreasonable to expect the City to provide some type of support to the Bluff Sites.
F. Research notes on the current development climate in the region
The Bluffs is not the only project in the region experiencing delays due to unfavorable changes to market
conditions and hard cost inflation. The second phase of the Camden Pier District apartments in St. Petersburg has
recently been indefinitely put on hold.44 The original aim was for Camden to build a 95-unit, 18-story multifamily
development next to its adjacent development, the 357-unit Camden Pier District Apartments. The existing
apartments currently have a 97% occupancy rate, with average rental rates of $3,465. Despite these positive
numbers, the hard costs for the 95-unit building are currently too high for Camden to commit to a timeline.
A Dunedin mixed-use project is also currently on hold due to increased costs.45 This project was set to offer 90
residential units, restaurant/retail spaces, and a 79-room hotel. However, increasing construction and borrowing
costs have made the project unfeasible. According to a July 2023 article, the developer received new April 2023
bids from two national multifamily construction firms that were very similar to each other but more than double
the budget. The local developer is now working with the City of Dunedin to provide an updated proposal.
44 Brezina, Veronica, “Inflation puts 18-story tower project on hold,” St. Petersburg Catalyst (August 2023).
45 Willimas, Breanne, “Dunedin mixed-use development ‘unviable’ as costs rise”, Tampa Bay Business Journal (July 2023).
HR&A Advisors, Inc. Clearwater Bluff Sites City Hall Proposal Evaluation | 40
General and Limiting Conditions
Any person who relies on or otherwise uses this Study is required to have first read, understood, and accepted
the following disclosures, limitations, and disclaimers and will, by reason of such reliance or other use, be deemed
to have read, understood, and accepted the same.
1. HR&A Advisors, Inc. (HR&A) has been engaged and compensated by the City of Clearwater to prepare this
Study. In preparing this Study, HR&A has used its independent professional judgment and skills in good
faith, subject to the limitations, disclosures, and disclaimers herein.
2. This Study is based on estimates, assumptions, and other information developed by HR&A, Gotham/DNG,
and other third-party consultants. Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the data
contained in this Study are accurate as of the date of this Study; however, factors exist that are outside
the control of HR&A and that may affect the estimates and/or projections noted herein. HR&A neither
guarantees any results nor takes responsibility for their actual achievement or continuing applicability, as
actual outcomes will depend on future events and circumstances beyond HR&A’s control.
3. HR&A reviewed the information and projections provided by third parties using its independent
professional judgment and skills in good faith but assumes no liability resulting from errors, omissions, or
any other inaccuracies with respect to the information provided by such third parties referenced in this
Study.
4. HR&A also relied on data provided by or purchased from sources, including the Minnesota IMPLAN Group
and Retail MAXIM, in order to generate estimates of employment and economic output. HR&A assumes
no liability resulting from errors, omissions, or any other inaccuracies with respect to the information
provided by these parties.
5. In addition to relying on data, information, projections, and forecasts of others as referred to above,
HR&A has included in this Study estimates and assumptions that HR&A believes are appropriate, but
HR&A makes no representation that there will be no variances between actual outcomes and such
estimates and assumptions.
6. No opinion is intended to be expressed, and no responsibility is assumed for any matters that are legal in
nature or require legal expertise or specialized knowledge beyond that of a real estate consultant.
7. This Study may be relied on and otherwise used only by persons who receive this Study from HR&A or
with HR&A’s prior written consent and only for the purpose stated in writing in conjunction with such
receipt or consent. No reliance on or other use of this Study by any person or for any purpose other than
as stated in the previous sentence is permitted. HR&A disclaims all responsibility in the case of any
reliance on or other use of this Study in conflict with the above portions of this paragraph.
8. If the Study is referred to or included in any offering material or prospectus, the Study shall be deemed to
have been included for informational purposes only, and its use shall be subject to these General and
Limiting Conditions. HR&A, its directors, officers, and employees have no liability to recipients of any such
offering material or prospectus.
This Study is qualified in its entirety and should be considered in light of these General and Limiting Conditions.
By use of this Study, each party that uses this Study agrees to be bound by all of the General and Limiting
Conditions stated herein.
DRAWING INDEXLOCATION MAPNORTHBLUFF RESIDENTIALA-000 COVER SHEETA-001 BELOW GRADE PARKING PLANA-004 TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN - LEVELS 3-18SOUTH OSCEOLA PARKCITY OF CLEARWATERPINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDAA-002 LEVEL 1 PLAN - AT GRADEA-003 LEVEL 2 - AMENITY LEVEL PLANA-005 TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN - LEVELS 19-28A-006 ROOFTOP AMENITY PLAN - LEVEL 29A-007 ENLARGED TYPICAL PLANSA-008 CONCEPTUAL SECTION A-009 ELEVATIONA-010 ELEVATIONA-011 ELEVATIONA-012 ELEVATIONA-013 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-014 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-015 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-016 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-017 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-018 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSPIERCE STS OSCEOLA AVE Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNCOVER SHEETA-000
283 SPACES24'-0"111117171716161919191920121534434DRIVEWAYABOVE4111BUILDINGABOVE24'-0"24'-0"18'-0" (TYP.)9'-0"(TYP.)24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"cocoSDARTFDC24'-0"24'-0"HCEASEMENT PLPLPLPLBluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNBELOW GRADEPARKING PLANA-001NBELOW GRADE PARKING PLAN1:501
cocoSDARTFDC157 SPACESLOADINGSOLID WASTERESIDENTIALLOBBYTERRACEEMPLOYEELOCKERROOMBATHMANAGEROFFICELEASINGAREABATHVENDINGAREA 150 SFBATHMAIL &PACKAGEROOMCONCIERGEAACOMMERCIAL12,400 GSF24'-0"BICYCLESTORAGEMT111611111743411121216HCHCHCHCHC17224'-0"24'-0"24'-0"18'-0" (TYP.)9'-0"(TYP.)24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"EASEMENTS OSCEOLA AVENUEPIERCE STREET
DROP-OFF ONLYPARK ACCESS PLAZA BICYCLESTORAGEEXTENT OF PARKINGBELOWBluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNLEVEL ONE PLAN- AT-GRADEA-002NLEVEL ONE PLAN -AT GRADE1:501
cocoSDARTFDCGREEN ROOFROOF OFCOMMERCIALBELOWCAFE AWNINGAMENITY&POOLTERRACE~19,075 SF(EXT ONLY/GARAGEROOF)LOBBYT
M1-1BR+8504-1BR7852 - 2BR1,1003-2BR1,200AMENITYW/MMECHANICAL SPACES& BOH
POOL3,300 SFPLANTEREXTENT OF PARKINGBELOWPARKINGBELOWBUILDINGBELOWEASEMENTS OSCEOLA AVENUEPIERCE STREET BUILDING STEPBACK
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNLEVEL TWO -AMENITY LEVELPLANA-003NLEVEL TWO1:501
cocoSDARTFDCROOF OFCOMMERCIALBELOWCAFEAWNINGLEVELS 3-18LOBBYT M1-2BR1,1405-1BR 6506-1BR6702 - 2BR1,0503-2BR1,1504-1BR7357-1BR 7358-1BR73510-2BR97011-2BR1,18012-3BR1,30014-1 BR65415 -2BR990 1BR / DEN8349-1BR73413-1 BR950 16POOL3,300 SFS OSCEOLA AVENUEPIERCE STREET
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNTYPICAL FLOORLEVEL PLAN -LEVELS 3-18A-004NTYP. FLOOR PLAN (LEVELS 3-18)1:501
cocoSDARTFDCROOF OFCOMMERCIALBELOWCAFEAWNINGEXTERIOR DESK @L-19LOBBYT M1-2BR1,1406-1BR6702 - 2BR1,0503-2BR1,1504-1BR7357-1BR 7358-1BR73510-3BR1,30012-1 BR6542BR9901BR / DEN8349-1BR73411-3BR1,50014135-1BR 650POOLBELOWS OSCEOLA AVENUEPIERCE STREET
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNTYPICAL FLOORLEVEL PLAN - LEVELS19-28A-005NTYP. FLOOR PLAN (LEVELS 19-28)1:501
cocoSDARTFDCROOF OFCOMMERCIALBELOWLOBBYT
MMEXTERIOR DESK @L-29 ROOF3,500 SFAMENITY2,400MECHANICALEQUIPMENTAREAS OSCEOLA AVENUEPIERCE STREET
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNROOF TOP AMENITYPLAN - LEVEL 29A-006NROOF AMENITY PLAN1:501
LEVEL 2LEVELS 19-28EXTERIOR DESK @L-19LOBBYT M1-2BR1,1406-1BR6702 - 2BR1,0503-2BR1,1504-1BR7357-1BR 7358-1BR73510-3BR1,30012-1 BR6542BR9901BR / DEN8349-1BR73411-3BR1,50014135-1BR 650LOBBYT
MMEXTERIOR DESK @L-29 ROOF3,500 SFAMENITY2,400MECHANICALEQUIPMENTAREALEVELS ROOFLEVELS 3-18LOBBYT M1-1BR+8504-1BR7852 - 2BR1,1003-2BR1,200AMENITYW/MMECHANICAL SPACES& BOHLEVELS 3-18LOBBYT M1-2BR1,1405-1BR 6506-1BR6702 - 2BR1,0503-2BR1,1504-1BR7357-1BR 7358-1BR73510-2BR97011-2BR1,18012-3BR1,30014-1 BR65415 -2BR990 1BR / DEN8349-1BR73413-1 BR950 16Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNENLARGED TYPICALLEVEL PLANSA-007NTYP. FLOOR PLANS1:301
G-112ROOFTOPCOMMERCIALGREEN ROOF/ AMENITYPIERCE ST.LOBBIESAMENITYUNITS3456789101112131416171819202122232425262728LOADINGLOBBIESEXIST'G GRADE15MECH.ROOF /MECH.10'-0"13'-0"LEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5LEVEL 6LEVEL 715'-0"14'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"LEVEL 8LEVEL 9LEVEL 10LEVEL 11LEVEL 12LEVEL 13LEVEL 14LEVEL 15LEVEL 16LEVEL 17LEVEL 18LEVEL 19LEVEL 20LEVEL 21LEVEL 22LEVEL 23LEVEL 24LEVEL 25LEVEL 26LEVEL 27ROOF /MECH.10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"G 1LEVEL 2810'-0"ROOF TOP294'-0"El. 0.00Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNN-S SECTIONA-008CONCEPTUAL SECTION - NORTH / SOUTH1:501
ROOF /MECH.10'-0"13'-0"LEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5LEVEL 6LEVEL 715'-0"14'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"LEVEL 8LEVEL 9LEVEL 10LEVEL 11LEVEL 12LEVEL 13LEVEL 14LEVEL 15LEVEL 16LEVEL 17LEVEL 18LEVEL 19LEVEL 20LEVEL 21LEVEL 22LEVEL 23LEVEL 24LEVEL 25LEVEL 26LEVEL 27ROOF /MECH.10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"G 1LEVEL 2810'-0"ROOF TOP294'-0" FACADE AREA: 75,986 SFGLASS AREA: 34,004 SF = 45%GARAGEENTRYGARAGEENTRYSVCSVCBluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNSOUTHELEVATIONA-009SOUTH ELEVATION - PIERCE STREET1/32" =1'-0"1
ROOF /MECH.10'-0"13'-0"LEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5LEVEL 6LEVEL 715'-0"14'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"LEVEL 8LEVEL 9LEVEL 10LEVEL 11LEVEL 12LEVEL 13LEVEL 14LEVEL 15LEVEL 16LEVEL 17LEVEL 18LEVEL 19LEVEL 20LEVEL 21LEVEL 22LEVEL 23LEVEL 24LEVEL 25LEVEL 26LEVEL 27ROOF /MECH.10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"G 1LEVEL 2810'-0"ROOF TOP FACADE AREA: 80,039 SFGLASS AREA: 35,547 SF = 44%Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNNORTH ELEVATION1/32" =1'-0"1NORTHELEVATIONA-010
ROOF /MECH.10'-0"13'-0"LEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5LEVEL 6LEVEL 715'-0"14'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"LEVEL 8LEVEL 9LEVEL 10LEVEL 11LEVEL 12LEVEL 13LEVEL 14LEVEL 15LEVEL 16LEVEL 17LEVEL 18LEVEL 19LEVEL 20LEVEL 21LEVEL 22LEVEL 23LEVEL 24LEVEL 25LEVEL 26LEVEL 27ROOF /MECH.10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"G 1LEVEL 2810'-0"ROOF TOP294'-0"FACADE AREA: 28,190 SF GLASS AREA: 13,331 SF = 47%Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNEAST ELEVATION - S. OSCEOLA AVENUE1/32" =1'-0"1EAST ELEVATIONA-011
ROOF /MECH.10'-0"13'-0"LEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5LEVEL 6LEVEL 715'-0"14'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"LEVEL 8LEVEL 9LEVEL 10LEVEL 11LEVEL 12LEVEL 13LEVEL 14LEVEL 15LEVEL 16LEVEL 17LEVEL 18LEVEL 19LEVEL 20LEVEL 21LEVEL 22LEVEL 23LEVEL 24LEVEL 25LEVEL 26LEVEL 27ROOF /MECH.10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"12'-0"G 1LEVEL 2810'-0"ROOF TOP294'-0"FACADE AREA: 26,585 SF GLASS AREA: 9,744 SF = 37%Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNWEST ELEVATION - PARK / WATER SIDE1/32" =1'-0"1WEST ELEVATIONA-012
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNA-013AERIAL VIEW OF APPROVED PROJECT NTS1AERIAL VIEW OF PROPOSED PROJECT NTS2CONCEPTUALRENDERINGS
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNA-014WEST VIEW OF APPROVED PROJECT NTS1WEST VIEW OF PROPOSED PROJECT NTS2CONCEPTUALRENDERINGS
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNA-015VIEW FROM PARK OF APPROVED PROJECT NTS1NTS2VIEW FROM PARK OF PROPOSED PROJECT CONCEPTUALRENDERINGS
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNA-016PIERCE ST OF APPROVED PROJECT NTS1NTS2CONCEPTUALRENDERINGSVIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE ANDPIERCE ST OF PROPOSED PROJECT VIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE AND
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNCONCEPTUALRENDERINGSA-017VIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE NTS1NTS2OF APPROVED PROJECT VIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Bluffs ResidentialISSUED DRAWING LOG:PROJECT NO:THE INFORMATION HEREON IS THE PROPERTY OFBEHAR PETERANECZ, INC. USE, DUPLICATION ORTRANSMITTAL WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION ISPROHIBITED.BeharPeteranecz
ARCHITECTURE INTERIORSSOUTH OSCEOLA DRIVE
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2430 TERMINAL DRIVE SOUTH | ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 33712
(727) 800-5300 | ARCHITECTUREBP.COM | AA26001704 IB26001074DRAWING TITLE:ISSUE DATE:SHEET NUMBER:25 JAN 2024ISTVAN L. PETERANECZAR94533FLORIDA23.009EDITION:DRAFT-CONCEPT DESIGNCONCEPTUALRENDERINGSA-018NTS1NTS2PARK ACCESS PLAZA OF APPROVED PROJECT VIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE ANDPARK ACCESS PLAZA OF PROPOSED PROJECT VIEW FROM S OSCEOLA AVE AND
Cover Memo
City of Clearwater Main Library - Council
Chambers
100 N. Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
File Number: ID#24-0326
Agenda Date: 3/18/2024 Status: Agenda ReadyVersion: 1
File Type: Action ItemIn Control: Community Redevelopment Agency
Agenda Number: 4.3
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Citizens Advisory Committee Policy.
SUMMARY:
On May 23, 2023, the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area (NGCRA) was formally
established as a community redevelopment area under the purview of the City of Clearwater Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA). Originally, the NGCRA was proposed by the Clearwater Urban Leadership
Coalition in 2019. The City of Clearwater and the CRA then moved forward with the approval of a required
Finding of Necessity Study, identifying, and ultimately establishing the NGCRA boundaries (840.88 acres
or 1.31 square miles), and the creation of the NGCRA Plan. The NGCRA Plan is the guiding document for
implementation strategies and policies to eliminate slum and blight in the NGCRA.
To ensure the Plan is implemented in continuous collaboration with the community, the Plan, sections 5.4
and 5.5, states the city will establish a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), a “recommending body,”
comprised of residents, business owners, property owners, and non-profit organizations located in the plan
area. Once established, the CAC will aid staff and the CRA Trustees to administer the implementation of
the NGCRA Plan.
Prior to CRA staff conducting a robust CAC member recruiting campaign, CAC policies and guidelines
must first be in place. Staff is requesting approval of the attached “North Greenwood Community
Redevelopment Area Citizens Advisory Committee Policy.” The purpose of the Policy is to establish
uniform guidelines under which the CAC for the NGCRA will be organized, comprised, and administered. It
also provides guidelines the CAC will follow unless relevant circumstances justify an alternative approach
acceptable to and approved by the CRA Trustees.
The CAC will consist of five members, with three members appointed by the City of Clearwater City
Council (City Council) and the remaining two members appointed by the Pinellas County Board of County
Commissioners (Section 5.5, NGCRA). CAC members will serve without compensation.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
Page 1 City of Clearwater Printed on 3/12/2024
1
City of Clearwater
Community Redevelopment Agency
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area
Citizens Advisory Committee Policy
1. Policy Purpose
The purpose of this Policy is to establish uniform guidelines under which the Citizens Advisory
Committee (CAC) for the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area (NGCRA) shall be
organized, comprised, and administered. It also provides guidelines the CAC shall follow unless
relevant circumstances justify an alternative approach acceptable to and approved by the City
of Clearwater Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees (the “CRA Trustees”).
2. The Purpose of the Citizens Advisory Committee
The purpose of the CAC is to provide the CRA Trustees with recommendations in connection
with key decisions to be made by the CRA Trustees relating to the North Greenwood
Community Redevelopment Area Plan (NGCRA Plan) implementation, Plan amendments,
annual NGCRA budget, and the adoption of programs (Sections 5.4 and 5.5, NGCRA Plan). The
CAC shall have the authority to initiate research to develop new program ideas, evaluate
existing programs, and convene meetings to solicit neighborhood input on CRA activities
(Section 5.5, NGCRA Plan).
3. Appointment
The CAC shall consist of five members, with three members appointed by the City of Clearwater
City Council (City Council) and the remaining two members appointed by the Pinellas County
Board of County Commissioners (Section 5.5, NGCRA). CAC members shall serve without
compensation.
4. Composition
The NGCRA shall be represented by a CAC comprised of homesteaded residents, business
owners, property owners, and non-profit organizations located in the NGCRA boundary (Section
5.4, NGCRA Plan). In addition, one member of the CAC shall represent a CRA Trustees approved
Ex Officio Organization, which is identified in section 6. In making its appointments, the City
Council shall review the following:
• Completed NGCRA CAC Application – interested applicants shall submit a completed
CAC application, in a form approved by the City of Clearwater City Clerk’s Office.
• Applicant Presentation – applicants shall be afforded the opportunity to make a non-
mandatory three-minute presentation to the City Council prior to the City Council’s
decision on his or her appointment to the CAC.
2
• Letter of Nomination from Ex Officio Organization – for the Ex Officio member, proof of
the Ex Officio member’s nomination by the Ex Officio Organization’s Board of Directors
shall be provided, in the form of an official letter signed by the leading officer of the
approved Ex Officio Organization, to the City Council for review and consideration.
5. Term of Service
The length of a term for each CAC member shall be two years unless a member begins their
term after October 1st then their term shall be less than two years. Terms expire on September
30th, in the second year. No member shall be appointed for more than two consecutive terms.
Upon completion of the maximum allowable two terms, no CAC member shall be eligible for
reappointment to the CAC for a period of two years. The term limits in this section also apply
to the Ex Officio member and members appointed by the Pinellas County Board of
Commissioners. In the event a CAC member resigns or is removed from the CAC, a new
appointed member shall serve the remainder of the original CAC member’s term.
6. Ex Officio Member
The CAC shall include one Ex Officio member that represents the Clearwater Urban Leadership
Coalition, Inc. (Ex Officio Organization), an organization located within the NGCRA geographic
area of influence and recognized as providing services and having significant influence and
standing in the NGCRA. With no exceptions, the Ex Officio member must be employed by the Ex
Officio Organization or serve as either a Board Member, Officer, or Director for the Ex Officio
Organization. The Ex Officio member is a voting CAC member who was nominated by the Ex
Officio Organization for City Council consideration and approval. If an Ex Officio member has
served two consecutive terms, then the Ex Officio Organization must recommend a new
representative to serve on the CAC. If the Ex Officio Organization fails to recommend a member
for approval by the City Council prior to the end of the existing Ex Officio member’s term in
compliance with this Policy, then the Ex Officio CAC seat shall default to an At Large position for
a two-year term at which time the City Council shall appoint a new At Large member to the CAC
in a manner otherwise consistent with this Policy. The Ex Officio Organization may nominate a
new representative (subject to City Council approval) once that At Large member’s two-year
term is complete.
7. Initial Terms of CAC Members
To reduce the impact of a complete turnover of members to the CAC, the initial terms of the
members shall be staggered. The following shall be the initial terms of CAC members:
• Two members shall serve initial terms that expire on September 31, 2024.
• Two members shall serve initial terms that expire on September 31, 2025.
• One member shall serve an initial term that expires on September 31, 2026.
3
8. Officers – Chair and Vice Chair
The officers shall be a Chair and a Vice Chair. Each officer shall serve for a term of one year or
until a successor is elected. At the first meeting of the Fiscal Year the CAC shall nominate from
the floor and elect a Chair, and a Vice Chair to act in the Chair’s absence. The CRA Director, or
designee, shall facilitate the nomination and election process. The Fiscal Year begins on October
1st and ends on September 30th. In the absence of the Chair and Vice Chair, the most senior
member of the CAC present at the meeting shall assume the duties of the Chair. A person shall
be elected to the office of Chair or Vice Chair for no more than two consecutive one-year terms.
If there are no candidates for the Chair or Vice Chair positions, the term limitation may be
waived by the CRA Trustees.
9. Duties of the Chair
The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the CAC and shall have the duties normally conferred
by parliamentary usage of such officers. The Chair shall have the authority to decide points of
order and run all agenda items. Any ruling by the Chair may be reversed by a majority vote of
the CAC. The Chair shall preserve order. The Chair may call to order any member who violates
any of the rules; and shall decide all questions of order, subject to a majority vote on a motion
to appeal. The Chair shall recognize all members who seek the floor under correct procedure.
The Chair shall not make or second a motion. The Chair shall maintain an effective working
relationship with the CRA Director, or designated liaison, who represents their area. The Chair
shall guide the CAC in its advisement of community needs consistent with the NGCRA Plan and
state law to the CRA Director, or designee, the CRA Trustees, and the City, as appropriate. From
time to time, the Chair, or CAC approved designee, shall be required to report updates to the
CRA Trustees or City Council.
10. Committee Membership
If a CAC member has more than two unexcused CAC meeting absences within a twelve-month
period, that member’s service may be recommended for termination to the City Council or the
Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. Members shall notify the CRA Director, or
designee, if they are unable to attend a meeting. In addition, the City Manager shall have the
power to remove any member because of excessive CAC meeting absences, misconduct, or
neglect of duty. Additionally, if a CAC member knowingly violates the provisions in this Policy,
their service may be terminated by the City Manager or recommended for termination to the
City Council or Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. Finally, all CAC members serve
at the pleasure of the City Council, and the City Council may dismiss any member of the CAC at
the City Council’s sole and absolute discretion if the City Council believes it is in the best
interest of the NGCRA.
11. Relationship of CAC to Staff and CRA Trustees
The City’s Community Redevelopment Agency Department shall provide staff support to the
4
CAC. Staff support includes, but is not limited to, meeting advertisements, taking minutes,
making the minutes available for public inspection upon request, drafting agendas, verifying
quorums, inviting quest speakers, meeting venue arrangements, and providing technical
support regarding Robert’s Rule of Order, Sunshine, NGCRA Plan, Budgets, and the Florida
Community Redevelopment Act of 1969. The As a matter of routine practice, the CAC shall relay
community input to the CRA Director, or designee. This shall be the Director’s, or designee’s,
primary source of input in serving the community. The community’s involvement in this process
is critical to the success in NGCRA. Nothing about this working relationship between the CRA
Director, or designee, and CAC shall or is intended to preclude interaction between the CAC and
the CRA Trustees. The CRA Director shall use the CAC’s recommendations along with input from
City departments and other internal and external stakeholders in preparing a proposed CRA
budget, NGCRA Plan amendments, or other reports for presentation to the CRA Trustees in
accordance with any financial and administrative adopted policies by the CRA Trustees and City.
The CRA Trustees shall consider the recommended CRA Budget or other recommendations in
publicly noticed meetings.
12. Rules of Order
All CAC meetings shall be conducted under the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order
Newly Revised unless otherwise provided by applicable law or policy herein.
13. Meetings
The CAC shall hold meetings, at least on a quarterly basis, in a public location which is
appropriate and noticed to the public. The time and location may be changed by the CRA
Director who shall provide at least two weeks advance written notice to CAC members and the
City Clerk’s Office. The order of business at the CAC meetings shall be generally as follows,
unless otherwise presented by the CRA Director or the CRA Trustees:
• Call to Order
• Roll Call
• Public Comment
• Approval of Minutes
• Unfinished Business
• New Business
• CRA Director Report
• General Discussion
• Announcements
• Adjournment
Members of the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the CAC at
regular CAC meetings. Members of the public shall be entitled to speak during the public
comments portion of the meeting for an amount of time not to exceed two minutes per person.
5
Additional time may be permitted at the discretion of the Chair with the consent of the
majority of CAC members present.
14. Communications
The CAC speaks as a body only through voted consensus motions of the CAC. Public
announcements and public communications by the CAC shall be reviewed and approved by the
CRA Director before issuance. CAC members are free to speak for themselves concerning CAC
matters but shall make it clear that they speak as private individuals and that their views are
not representative of the CAC. The CAC may specifically authorize a member to speak on its
behalf after giving the member explicit directions concerning a particular matter.
15. Quorum Requirements
Three CAC members must be physically present at a CAC meeting to constitute a quorum and
for any official action to be taken by the CAC including, without limitation, any motion or vote
by the CAC. No meetings shall be called to order without a quorum present. In the event a CAC
meeting loses a quorum for any length of time, the meeting shall be immediately paused, and
no CAC business shall be discussed or transacted until such time that a quorum is back in place.
If a CAC meeting loses a quorum for more than 15 minutes, the meeting shall be adjourned.
16. Sunshine and Public Records Laws Applicable
The CAC shall operate in the “Sunshine” in accordance with Florida Statutes, Chapter 286.
Operating in the “Sunshine” means, among other things, that when there are meetings,
workshops, informal discussions, telephone conversations, and other forms of communications
involving two or more members of the CAC regarding any proposed recommendations by the
CAC to the CRA Trustees or any matter which may be considered by the CAC that: 1) those
meetings, workshops, discussions or conversations must be open to the public, 2) reasonable
notice of the meetings, workshops, discussions or conversations must be given to the public in
advance, and 3) minutes of those meetings, workshops, discussions or conversations must be
taken by a CRA staff member (or designee), and retained as a public record open to public
inspection. In addition to the minutes, all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes,
photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software, or other material, regardless of
the physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission (including emails and texts), made
or received by CAC members in connection with the conduct of business by the CAC is
considered a public record and subject to Florida’s public records laws (Chapter 119, Florida
Statutes). This means, among other things, that CAC members must retain and maintain any
such CAC related documents, records and written communications and allow members of the
public to inspect and copy such records unless the City Attorney’s Office advises that such
records are exempt from inspection and copying by members of the public.
6
17. Ethics Code Compliance; Conflicts of Interest
CAC members shall be subject to and must comply with the City of Clearwater's Ethics Code.
The City’s Ethics Code, among other things, addresses potential conflicts of interests that might
arise in connection with the conduct of business by members of the CAC. One of the purposes
of the City’s Ethics Code is to allow CAC members to manage potential conflicts of interest
successfully when a potential conflict of interest occurs. The conflict-of-interest provisions shall
also apply to any formed CAC subcommittees and its members. Without limiting the scope and
application of the City’s Ethics Code, CAC and subcommittee members shall comply with the
following:
• No member of the CAC (or subcommittee thereof) shall participate in any official action
directly or indirectly affecting a business in which he, she, or any member of his or
immediate family or close personal relation has a financial interest.
• No member of the CAC (or subcommittee thereof) shall have or acquire a financial
interest in any enterprise, project, business entity or property when he or she believes
or has reason to believe that his or her financial interest shall be directly affected by his
or her official Advisory Committee or subcommittee recommendation or action.
• No member the CAC (or subcommittee thereof) shall have any interest, financial or
otherwise, direct, or indirect, or engage in any business or activity or incur any
obligation of any nature which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his
or her duties in the public interest.
18. Prohibited Voting Conflicts
(a) No CAC member shall vote or participate in his or her official capacity on any matter if
that member knows or should know that doing so would inure, either directly or
indirectly, to:
• His or her special private gain; or
• The special private gain of any person by whom he or she is retained, or
• The parent or subsidiary organization thereof; or
• The special private gain of a relative of the CAC.
In connection with this provision, please note the following:
• The term “special private gain” for this policy is defined as “economic benefit of any
kind which inures to the individual, as opposed to a class of similarly situated
individuals.”
• The term “person” is defined for this policy as “any individual, firm, business entity,
company, corporation (profit and not-for-profit), professional corporation or
associations, group, organization, joint venture, partnership, limited partnership,
agency, estate, trusts, business trust, syndicate, fiduciary, or other body having an
7
independent existence and all other groups or combinations however constituted.”
• The term “relative” is defined for this policy as “an individual who is related to the
subject official or employee [in this case, the CAC member] as father, mother, son,
daughter, grandfather, grandmother, grandchild, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first
cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law,
daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson,
stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half-brother, or half-sister, or anyone who is
engaged to be married to the subject official or employee [in this case the CAC
member], or anyone who is a domestic partner as defined by the City of Clearwater
Codes.
(b) No member of the CAC shall vote or participate on any matter in which the member has
or holds a contractual relationship with an individual, business entity or agency subject
to the regulation of the CAC to which that member is appointed. In addition to any
other provision of these CAC policies, a CAC member may be removed from the CAC
upon which he or she serves by the City Manager or City Council if such member has
disclosed a conflict of interest pursuant to this policy or the City’s Ethics Code in ten
percent or more of the matters that come before the CAC on which the member serves.
(c) Disclosure. A CAC member who is prohibited from “voting and participating on any
matter pursuant to this section above, shall:
• Publicly state to the CAC the nature of his or her interest in the matter in which he
or she is prohibited from voting and participating; and
• Disclose the nature of his or her interest in the matter from which he or she is
prohibited from voting and participating within fifteen days after the vote occurs in
a memorandum filed with the CRA Director. The memorandum shall also be
incorporated in the minutes of the CAC meeting.
19. Waiver or Modification of Policy and Other
Unless required by state law or City of Clearwater Codes, the CRA Trustees reserve the right to
waive (on a case-by-case basis) or permanently modify any portion of this Policy. In the event of
any inconsistencies, ambiguity, or conflicts between this policy and City of Clearwater or
Community Redevelopment Agency policies, rules, and regulations the City or Agency’s policies,
rules, and regulations shall prevail.
Date approved by CRA Trustees: _________________
Adopted: Month, Day, 2023; Ordinance xxxx-23
Amended
Page i
Acknowledgments
Clearwater City CouncilMayor Frank HibbardVice-Mayor Kathleen BeckmanMark BunkerDavid AllbrittonLina Teixeira
Clearwater City AdministrationJon Jennings, City ManagerMichael L. Delk, AICP, Assistant City ManagerJennifer Poirrier, Assistant City ManagerMicah Maxwell, Assistant City Manager
Clearwater Planning & DevelopmentGina L. Clayton, DirectorLauren Matzke, AICP, Assistant DirectorJayme Lopko, AICP, Long Range Planning ManagerKyle Brotherton, Senior PlannerDylan Prins, PlannerTammy Vrana, AICP, Vrana Consulting, Inc.
Clearwater Economic Development and HousingDenise Sanderson, DirectorChuck Lane, Assistant Director
Clearwater Community Redevelopment AgencyAmanda Thompson Jaquez, AICP, DirectorMatt Jackson, Assistant Director
Consultant TeamVHBAriel Business GroupGoodwyn Mills CawoodMichael M. English, AICP
North Greenwood Steering CommitteeMuhammad Abdur-Rahim, Clearwater Urban Leadership CoalitionJoyce Aldridge, Clearwater Neighborhood Housing ServicesBrian Andrus, Property Owner/Developer, Old Bay Gloria Campbell, Clearwater Urban Leadership CoalitionKimberly Crawford, Willa Carson CenterChelsea Marie Gird, Plaza Park NeighborhoodDavid Habib, Yo Mama’s FoodsJai Hinson, Clearwater Urban Leadership CoalitionAshley Lowery, Homeless Emergency Project (HEP)Marilyn Turman, Clearwater Urban Leadership CoalitionHoward Warshauer, Clearwater Garden ClubPastor Williams, Mt. Olive Church
North Greenwood Technical TeamOmar Atallah, Clearwater Traffic EngineeringShaun Beasley, Clearwater Parks & Recreation Rodney Chatman, Forward PinellasGreg Dixon, Clearwater Planning & Development Code ComplianceMichael Fuino, Clearwater Assistant City AttorneyBryant Johnson, Clearwater Solid Waste Evan Johnson, Pinellas County Housing & Community DevelopmentRoger Johnson, Clearwater Stormwater EngineeringBob Lasher, Pinellas Suncoast Transit AuthorityRobert Napper, Clearwater Public CommunicationsJay Ravins, Clearwater FinanceHeather Sobush, Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority
Page ii
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .....................................................................11.1 Plan Summary .............................................................................21.2 What is a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)? ....21.3 Navigating this Plan .................................................................41.4 Equity Statement .......................................................................4
2. Existing Conditions .......................................................72.1 Community Context & History ............................................82.2 Finding of Necessity Study ....................................................92.3 Establishment of CRA Boundaries ......................................92.4 Pinellas County CRA Score ..................................................112.5 Existing Conditions by Planning Category ....................112.6 Public Engagement and Outreach ....................................792.7 Existing Conditions Summary.............................................87
3. Vision, Goals, & Redevelopment Policies ...............913.1 Vision ..........................................................................................923.2 Goals & Objectives ................................................................933.3 Redevelopment Policies ......................................................94
4. Plan Implementation ..................................................974.1 Overview .....................................................................................984.2 TIF Projections ..........................................................................984.3 Funding Recommendations .............................................1014.4 Diagrammatic Plan & Area Descriptions ....................1024.5 Plan Implementation ..........................................................132
5. Governance ..................................................................1515.1 Overview ..................................................................................1525.2 State Requirements .............................................................1525.3 Pinellas County Requirements ........................................1525.4 City CRA Administration ....................................................1535.5 Citizens Advisory Committee ..........................................153
Appendices ......................................................................155Appendix A ....................................................................................156Appendix B .....................................................................................157Appendix C ....................................................................................160Appendix D ....................................................................................162Appendix E .....................................................................................164
Page iii
List of Figures
Figure 1 Finding of Necessity Subareas ...............................................3Figure 2 Location of the Old Bay District within the North Greenwood CRA ..........................................................................5Figure 3 CRA Boundaries ........................................................................10Figure 4 Race and Ethnicity Chart .......................................................12Figure 5 North Greenwood Population Pyramid ..........................12Figure 6 Distribution of Household Income Ranges ...................13Figure 7 Comparison of Median Incomes .......................................13Figure 8 Number of Housing Units ....................................................15Figure 9 Vehicle Ownership by Household Type ..........................16Figure 10 Year Structure Built ..................................................................18Figure 11 Where Employees Live and Work ......................................19Figure 12 Workers by Age ........................................................................19Figure 13 Workers by Income .................................................................20Figure 14 Percentage of Workers per Industry .................................20Figure 15 Combined Health Risk ...........................................................24Figure 16 Parks and Recreation Facility Locations ..........................26Figure 17 Cultural, Community, and Historic Places ......................33Figure 18 Churches and Church-Owned Properties .......................34Figure 19 North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue Corridor ............36Figure 20 Potential Redevelopment Properties ...............................37Figure 21 North Fort Harrison Avenue Corridor ..............................38Figure 22 North Betty Lane Corridor ....................................................39Figure 23 Industrial District ......................................................................40Figure 24 Unincorporated Enclaves ......................................................42Figure 25 Existing Land Use .....................................................................43Figure 26 Future Land Use .......................................................................45Figure 27 Zoning Districts ........................................................................47Figure 28 Vacant Properties .....................................................................49Figure 29 Property Acreage by Tax-Exempt Status .........................51Figure 30 Public and Semi-Public Properties ....................................52Figure 31 Taxable Property Value ..........................................................53Figure 32 Coastal High Hazard Area and Coastal Storm Area ...56Figure 33 FEMA Flood Zones ..................................................................57
Figure 34 Wetlands .....................................................................................59Figure 35 Roadway Jurisdiction ..............................................................61Figure 36 Functional Classification ........................................................63Figure 37 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities .........................................64Figure 38 PSTA Routes and Stops ..........................................................66Figure 39 Stormwater Infrastructure ....................................................68Figure 40 Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure ..............................................69Figure 41 Potable Water Infrastructure ...............................................70Figure 42 Reclaimed Water Infrastructure ..........................................71Figure 43 Natural Gas Infrastructure ....................................................72Figure 44 Non-Violent Crime by Type and Year ..............................73Figure 45 Violent Crime by Type and Year .........................................73Figure 46 Crime Incident Trends by Year ............................................74Figure 47 Crime Hotspots .........................................................................75Figure 48 Top Five Code Violation Categories .................................77Figure 49 Top Five Structural Violation Categories .........................77Figure 50 Code Enforcement Hotspots ...............................................78Figure 51 What amenities do you want most in the neighborhood? .........................................................................84Figure 52 What type of housing units are most needed? ...........84Figure 53 What recreational uses should be along Stevenson Creek? ...........................................................................................84Figure 54 What are the biggest challenges facing North Greenwood? ...............................................................................84Figure 55 Infill Residential Development ............................................86Figure 56 Diagrammatic Plan ................................................................103Figure 57 Emphasis Area A Zoning .....................................................105Figure 58 Emphasis Area B Zoning .....................................................107Figure 59 Emphasis Area C Zoning .....................................................108Figure 60 Emphasis Area D Zoning .....................................................109Figure 61 Emphasis Area E Zoning .....................................................111Figure 62 Emphasis Area F Zoning ......................................................112Figure 63 Emphasis Area G Zoning .....................................................113Figure 64 Emphasis Area H Zoning.....................................................115Figure 65 Emphasis Area I Zoning .......................................................117
Page iv
List of Tables
Table 1 Indicators of Blight Conditions ..............................................9Table 2 Housing Cost Burden by Tenure Type .............................14Table 3 Median Building Age ..............................................................17Table 4 Health Conditions by Geography ......................................23Table 5 Existing Land Use by Acres and Percentage..................41Table 6 Future Land Use by Acres and Percentage ....................44Table 7 Zoning District by Acres and Percentage .......................46Table 8 Summary of Major Roads .....................................................60Table 9 Study Area Fire/EMS Call Rate ............................................76Table 10 Study Area Fire/EMS Calls Proportional Allocation ....76Table 11 TIF Projections .........................................................................100Table 12 Recommended TIF Expenditures .....................................101Table 13 Recommended ARPA Expenditures ................................101Table 14 Emphasis Area Recommendations ..................................120Table 15 CRA Implementation Table ................................................132Table 16 CRA Emphasis Area TIF Expenditures by Year ............165Table 17 First Five Years of TIF Expenditures, Capital Improvements and Goals ...................................................170Table 18 Years 6-10 of TIF Expenditures, Capital Improvements and Goals ..................................................................................177
Page v
Page intentionally left blank
1. Introduction
1.1 Plan Summary | 1.2 What is a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)?1.3 Navigating this Plan | 1.4 Equity Statement
Page 2 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
1.1 Plan Summary
The North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan (CRA Plan) is created to assist residents, property owners, organizations, and officials in identifying and implementing solutions to underlying social and physical conditions that have affected the physical health and economic mobility of the neighborhood for decades. North Greenwood is located north of Downtown Clearwater and is home to over 6,600 residents. It is recognized as a center of African American culture and history in Pinellas County. Its development pattern is similar to many Clearwater neighborhoods developed in the post-World War II (WWII) era. It has a gridded street network with small single-family residences, limited retail uses, and most employment is outside the neighborhood. It has numerous churches and other community assets important to its sense of place. However, as one of the five identified “at-risk zones” in Pinellas County, it experiences a higher and sustained poverty rate than the remainder of the county. It continues to be affected by the associated social impacts, including higher crime rates, lower business opportunities, lower education attainment, increased rates of chronic disease, and a lack of safe and affordable housing.
This plan is a direct result of the leadership efforts of the Clearwater Urban Leadership Coalition who encouraged the city and county to undertake the process of creating a community redevelopment area. Extensive community engagement has continued to shape the CRA Plan. It includes implementation strategies designed to promote the improvement of North Greenwood’s social and physical conditions within the future 20-year planning horizon. The neighborhood benefits from many physical assets (e.g., recreational facilities, library, schools, infrastructure, etc.) created through past public investments. The CRA Plan recognizes the community's desire to leverage its physical assets to improve social conditions through financial investment in programming and coordination among service providers.
1.2 What is a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)?
The state created community redevelopment areas in 1969 to provide local governments with a tool to direct tax revenue in a defined geographic area towards addressing blight, inadequate public infrastructure, brownfields, and vacancy to incentivize redevelopment by the private sector. Local governments have evolved CRAs to use them as a planning and coordination mechanism to blend people- and place-based approaches to improve economic mobility and provide affordable housing. This plan recognizes that the state and county have different restrictions on how tax increment revenues may be used and those are noted in the implementation section of the plan.
To establish a new CRA, the city must comply with provisions of Chapter 163.330, Florida Statutes, and the newly established Pinellas County Ordinance 21-48, which provides additional local guidance. The Florida Redevelopment Association summarizes the steps to create a CRA as follows:
1. Adopt the Finding of Necessity Study. This will formally identify the blight conditions within the targeted area and establish the area boundary.2. Develop and adopt the Community Redevelopment Plan. The plan addresses the unique needs of the targeted area and includes the overall goals for redevelopment in the area, as well as identifying specific projects.3. Create a Redevelopment Trust Fund. Establishment of the trust fund enables the Community Redevelopment Agency to direct the increase in real property tax revenues back into the targeted area.
The first step was completing a Finding of Necessity Study. The city’s August 2020 Finding of Necessity Study identified blighted area conditions and established the need for redevelopment. As shown in Figure 1, the study analyzed six subareas within a larger North Greenwood area. Only five of the subareas, those hatched in Figure 1, met the statutory qualifications to be included within the CRA. Three were ultimately recommended to be included in the 840.77-acre CRA Plan’s limits, and are the North Greenwood Core (green), North Fort
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 3
Introduction
Harrison/Osceola (purple), and Downtown (blue). A total of 40.59-acres of the CRA Plan’s geography is located within the unincorporated limits of the county, and the city may grant property owners future voluntary annexations.
The next step is the creation of this CRA Plan that further documents existing conditions and community preferences and establishes a vision, goals, and strategies to address the blighted area conditions.
Once it is approved by both the city and county, a companion CRA trust fund will be established by an agreement with all three parties as a funding mechanism for future CRA projects. The trust fund establishes a “base year” that sets a floor of taxable value for the CRA. As the total taxable value of the area increases, the increased value exceeding the base year, or the increment, is allocated to the trust fund. The Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is this increased value above the base year. Revenues are allocated to the trust fund on an annual basis as part of the city’s budget. TIF revenues must be spent on projects that reduce blight as defined by Florida Statutes. In addition to the future TIF revenues, the city has allocated $5 million of its 2021 American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding towards implementation of the North Greenwood CRA Plan. Since the increase in taxable value grows slowly over time, the ARPA funding will allow plan implementation to begin in the first year.
TIF Creation TIF TerminationAssessed Value (AV)Base Value = Value Taxable by city & county@ TIF Creation - Remains for TIF Duration
IncrementValue Used to PayProject Costs
NEW PostProject AVIncreasedTaxable ValueReturned tocity & county
How Does a TIF Work?
Drew St
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge StNOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveUnion St
Sunset Point Rd
Palmetto St Kings HwyN Betty LnN Highland AveDowntown
Non Low-Mod Area
North Fort Harrison/Osceola
North Greenwood Core
North Greenwood Extension
North Osceola
Figure 1 Finding of Necessity Subareas
Page 4 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
1.3 Navigating this Plan
This North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan is a requirement in the CRA establishment process put forth in Chapter 163 Part III of the Florida Statutes. It will serve as the guiding document for city staff, residents, developers, and partner organizations who will participate in the redevelopment of this area. It may be amended in the future to reflect changing conditions or community desires by the City Council upon recommendation of the Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees.
The CRA Plan was created, recognizing the existing contributing conditions contained within the adopted Finding of Necessity Study and through the completion of additional planning assessments. It was produced in a collaborative approach between residents, businesses, community organizations, city staff, and dedicated community members.
Participants at a Community Workshop
Chapter 2 Existing Conditions provides an overview of the history of this area, summary of the Finding of Necessity Study, population and environmental data, Pinellas County CRA funding analysis, and summary of the community engagement efforts that shaped this plan. It closes witha summary of the major redevelopment issues that will be addressed in the plan recommendations.
Chapter 3 Vision, Goals and Redevelopment Policies includes the adopted vision for the redevelopment of the North Greenwood CRA and redevelopment goals and policies that will guide plan implementation.
Chapter 4 Plan Implementation includes the specific strategies and funding sources that the city, Community Redevelopment Agency staff, and community partners will use to achieve the CRA’s redevelopment goals.
Chapter 5 Governance summarizes state and county requirements for CRA administration. It outlines how the city will administer CRA operations, plan implementation, plan revisions, and ongoing community engagement.
This plan includes several appendices that fulfill state and county legal requirements including the legal description of the CRA area, the Pinellas County CRA scoring criteria, the statement of neighborhood impact, and TIF expenditures.
1.4 Equity Statement
Ensuring Equitable Development
The defined legislative purpose of a community redevelopment area in Florida is to reduce blight, vacancy, and restore the functioning of a private market. CRAs are sustained by tax increment funds that are generated through increased property taxes from new development or increasing property values. They are a financial tool that depends on changing the physical character of a neighborhood to increase property values. In short, everything the city does to improve the appearance and quality of life in this area will result in an increase in property values which can have positive and negative impacts on current residents.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 5
Introduction
PolicyLink (www.policylink.org) is a national non-profit organization that has studied community redevelopment extensively. They define gentrification as, “the process by which higher income households displace lower income residents of a neighborhood, changing the essential character and flavor of that neighborhood.” They define equitable development as, “the creation and maintenance of economically and socially diverse communities that are stable over the long term, through means that generate a minimum of transition costs that fall unfairly on lower income residents.” Typically, as property values and property taxes increase, the increased costs are passed along to renters and property owners in the form of increased rent and increased property taxes for both residential and commercial properties. These increased costs are transition costs that disproportionately impact lower income residents. Low-income renters are most likely to be displaced because property owners have a strong financial incentive to sell their property for development once the property value exceeds the market rental rate.
As part of the planning process, the residents of North Greenwood have repeatedly shared their primary goal of reducing poverty and concerns of gentrification and displacement if the redevelopment of the community is not conducted in a thoughtful manner. These concerns are valid. Even without the creation of a CRA, this area is likely to gentrify over the next ten years. It contains all the amenities of walkability, proximity to the water, affordable single-family lots, and proximity to public areas like the Seminole Boat Ramp and Coachman Park found in desirable urban neighborhoods. As the Old Bay District, shown in Figure 2, and North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor develops it will increase the neighborhood’s desirability. Currently, over half of the residents in the CRA are renters and 57% of those renters are cost burdened (meaning spending more than 30% of their household income on housing). Almost 40% of owner-occupied properties are cost burdened. Even small changes in property values could cause displacement of current residents.
The policies and recommended strategies in this plan are designed to ensure equitable development. They are intended to minimize the negative impacts of gentrification and displacement with a focus on the most vulnerable populations who are low-income, people of color.
Eldridge St
Jones StNOsceolaAve N Myrtle AveOld Bay District
North Greenwood CRA
Seminole Boat Ramp
Figure 2 Location of the Old Bay District within the North Greenwood CRA
2. Existing Conditions
2.1 Community Context & History | 2.2 Finding of Necessity Study | 2.3 Establishment of CRA Boundaries2.4 Pinellas County CRA Score | 2.5 Existing Conditions by Planning Category2.6 Public Engagement and Outreach | 2.7 Existing Conditions Summary
Page 8 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Source: Black America Series, Clearwater, Florida, Arcadia Publishing, 2002
Suncoast Barbers Association Luncheon, 1957
2.1 Community Context & History
The North Greenwood CRA is located in northwestern Clearwater, consisting of 840.77 acres directly north of Downtown. The neighborhood is primarily residential, with some commercial, institutional, and recreational uses. The community has a rich and long history that stretches from some of the city’s earliest moments.
Clearwater’s settlement originated with the establishment of Fort Harrison in 1841 near Druid Road in what is now the Harbor Oaks Subdivision. More than 1,300 settlers came after the Second Seminole Indian War, with the United States government issuance of 160 acres to any man 18 or older who would bear arms and cultivate the land.
The Orange Belt Railroad arrived in 1888. Early African American pioneers settled near the railroad tracks in the North Greenwood area. The City of Clearwater was incorporated in 1915, and Downtown land occupation expanded substantially in the post-WWII settlements. The North Greenwood area grew to include numerous churches and local businesses. A large percentage of housing units in North Greenwood were constructed in the post-WWII period, and as such, the area contains a significant number of aging structures.
North Greenwood is a recognized center of Clearwater’s African American culture. It grew from the earliest settlers to become a vibrant community that included housing, education, employment, and social organizations providing most of its resident’s daily needs. Residents include multi-generational families that have contributed to the community for decades. They respect the community’s past while actively seeking advancement for future generations.
In order to increase the quality of life and appeal of the neighborhood, city efforts removed deteriorating housing units that have left many vacant properties needing redevelopment. Contributing to the vacancy and underutilization of properties is the effect that past public roadway widening improvements along portions of North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue in the 1990-2000s have had in reducing front yard commercial parcel depths and parking spaces. Furthermore, the high amount of private vacant, publicly owned, and other tax-exempt (e.g., churches, community use, not-for-profits, etc.) properties have resulted in reduced tax generation in the CRA Plan area.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 9
Existing Conditions
2.2 Finding of Necessity Study
The Finding of Necessity Study is used to determine the appropriate CRA boundaries and if there are enough blighting factors within those boundaries to warrant establishing a redevelopment area. The Finding of Necessity Study completed in August 2020 showed that the incidence of crime in the area was higher than the remainder of the city and there was a greater number of violations of housing and property maintenance standards. It also found that the area, compared to the city overall, had a higher rate of poverty, a lower median household income, lower median household value, and a higher rate of households spending 35% or more of their income on housing costs. Table 1 shows the indicators of blight in the planning area. Chapter 4 Plan Implementation identifies how the city will address the blight factors.
Indicator Unified Study Area Citywide
Poverty 29%16%
Median Household Income $34,540 $47,070
Median Household Value $159,100 $191,600
Housing Vacancy 18%19.7%
Affordable Constrained Housing Payments (Owner)44%27%
Substandard Housing Conditions 3.7%2.8%
Overcrowded Housing Conditions 0.3%1.4%
Crime (Incidents per 1,000 population)100.5 52.9
Fire/EMS (Calls per 1,000 population)285.7 211.2
Code Enforcement (Percent of All Cases)18.7% in 4.4% of Total City Area
Taxable Property Value Growth 43%37%
Table 1 Indicators of Blight Conditions
2.3 Establishment of CRA Boundaries
Based on the unified study area in the Finding of Necessity Study, the CRA was established as shown in Figure 3. Generally, the CRA is bounded by Sunset Point Road to the north; Kings Highway to the east; Palmetto Street, CSX Railway, and Jones Street to the south; and North Osceola Avenue, North Fort Harrison Avenue, and Clearwater Harbor to the west. The boundaries are described formally in Appendix A - Legal Description. All plan recommendations must be implemented in or benefit residents and businesses located in this defined area.
Big Jim's BBQ
Page 10 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 3 CRA Boundaries
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnNorth Greenwood CRA
Pinellas Trail
CSX Rail Line
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 11
Existing Conditions
2.4 Pinellas County CRA Score
In 2021, Pinellas County adopted new regulations and funding guidance for the creation of community redevelopment areas in the county. The full policy and scoring methodology are contained in Appendix B - CRA Local Assessment. The county priorities for TIF expenditures are based upon the county’s comprehensive plan, strategic plan, and other policy initiatives that have been approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Three priority areas have been identified and are described below.
• Affordable Housing: Create, preserve, or improve income-restricted affordable housing units and prevent displacement• Economic Development & Employment: Increase quality employment opportunities, particularly in the county target industries• Mobility: Improve transit, walking, and biking options and access to transit
If this CRA plan is approved by the county, they will establish a category and accompanying TIF funding level. The county will also establish baseline performance measures and require a review of the CRA’s progress at the ten-year mark (2033). There are 12 factors across five categories used to assess the CRA. Using the assessment, the North Greenwood CRA meets the “Urban Revitalization” designation with a score of 78 points. The county defines urban revitalization areas as those that are most economically distressed, where poverty is endemic, and where other programs, such as Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), have targeted funding. This designation qualifies it to receive a 20-year redevelopment period and up to 95% of the county generated TIF revenue as long as 50% of total TIF revenues are dedicated in the county’s priority areas.
2.5 Existing Conditions by Planning Category Population and Demographics
Demographic Analysis Methodology
Data in this section is sourced from the American Community Survey (ACS) 2020 5-Year Estimates unless otherwise stated. This ACS data is aggregated by Census Block Groups or Census Tracts that do not align precisely with the CRA boundaries. A total of six Census Block Groups overlap the boundaries. Four of these Block Groups fall entirely within the CRA, one is 25.54% in the CRA, and one is about 10% within the CRA. The overlapping portions of these partial block groups were referenced against total households Census data and housing unit data from the Pinellas County Property Appraiser’s Office (PCPAO) to calculate an adjustment factor used to weight the data from the areas.
Because certain census datasets are not available at the block group level, a similar adjustment was applied to Census Tracts where necessary.Information provided by the PCPAO is available on a parcel level and therefore is aligned to CRA boundaries.
Socioeconomic Information
Current Population
The CRA has an estimated population of 6,619 people which is approximately 4.8% of the City of Clearwater’s total population. 1,814 people, or 27% of the CRA population, are aged 18 and younger.
Page 12 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Population Trends
Based on Decennial Census data, the population of the CRA increased from 6,188 to 6,955 between 2000 and 2010 and decreased from 6,955 to 6,462 between 2010 to 2020. It is unclear why the population declined during this time.
Race and Ethnicity
Residents of the North Greenwood CRA are a majority Black/African American. The North Greenwood area is approximately 57% Black/African American, 27% white (non-Hispanic), 8% Hispanic or Latino, 7% multi-racial, and 1% Asian. Based on Decennial Census data from 2020, 2010, and 2000, the share of both Black and white residents has been slowly decreasing while the share of Hispanic or Latino and multi-racial has been slowly increasing.
Age Distribution
The age distribution of male and female residents within the CRA boundaries indicated a diverse range of age groups. The community is not facing a ‘population bubble’ as many communities throughout the state, where a large portion of the community is entering retirement age simultaneously.
This distribution indicates a robust community where individuals of all ages can fill various community roles (e.g., students, parents, workers, mentors, and community leaders). The age distribution reinforces the importance of needs communicated by the community through this planning process: youth activities, education, job development, and the ability to age in place.
Figure 4 Race and Ethnicity Chart Figure 5 North Greenwood Population Pyramid
0
5,000
5,500
6,500
6,000
7,000
6,188
6,955
6,462
20002010 2020
Population trends
Black/African American
White (non-Hispanic)
Hispanic or Latino (Any Race)
Multi-Racial
Asian
57%27%
8%7%
1%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1%
85 and Over
80 to 84
75 to 79
65 to 69
70 to 74
60 to 64
55 to 59
45 to 49
25 to 29
20 to 24
15 to 19
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
50 to 54
10 to 14
5 to 9
Under 5
Male
Female
0
5,000
5,500
6,500
6,000
7,000
6,188
6,955
6,462
2000 2010 2020
Population trends
Black/African American
White (non-Hispanic)
Hispanic or Latino (Any Race)
Multi-Racial
Asian
57%27%
8%7%
1%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1%
85 and Over
80 to 84
75 to 79
65 to 69
70 to 74
60 to 64
55 to 59
45 to 49
25 to 29
20 to 24
15 to 19
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
50 to 54
10 to 14
5 to 9
Under 5
Male
Female
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 13
Existing Conditions
0 50 100 150 200 250 300150k to 199.9k125k to 149.9k100k to 124.9k75k to 99.9k60k to 74.9k50k to 59.9k45k to 49.9k40k to 44.9k35k to 39.9k30k to 34.9k25k to 29.9k20k to 24.9k15k to 19.9k10k to 14.9kLess than 10kMore than 200kHousehold income ranges
0 $20k $40k $60k
All Households Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
North Greenwood CRA
City of Clearwater
Pinellas County
Florida$35,277$50,335$56,419$57,703$51,026$62,457$67,097$69,195$27,129$37,805$42,066$41,6450 50 100 150 200 250 300150k to 199.9k125k to 149.9k100k to 124.9k75k to 99.9k60k to 74.9k50k to 59.9k45k to 49.9k40k to 44.9k35k to 39.9k30k to 34.9k25k to 29.9k20k to 24.9k15k to 19.9k10k to 14.9kLess than 10kMore than 200kHousehold income ranges
0 $20k $40k $60k
All Households Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
North Greenwood CRA
City of Clearwater
Pinellas County
Florida$35,277$50,335$56,419$57,703$51,026$62,457$67,097$69,195$27,129$37,805$42,066$41,645Households Below Poverty Level
Approximately 27.3% of households within the CRA are below the poverty level, compared to 13.4% of households in the city and 11% of households in the United States. The Census Bureau calculates poverty status based on the before-tax income of all persons living in a household compared to a poverty threshold determined by the number of individuals living in the household. In 2021, the poverty threshold for one person was $13,788, for three people was $21,559 and for five people was $32,865.
Median Annual Income
The weighted median annual household income for the CRA Plan area is $35,277. The distribution of households in specific income ranges is shown in Figure 6. This illustrates that a significant share of households live on little income, but a range of household incomes is common in the CRA.
The median annual income for owner-occupied households is $51,026 and $27,129 for renters. These income numbers are shown in Figure 7 for the CRA, city, county, and state. The median income of the CRA is about 30% lower than the city and 39% lower than the state. The median income of owner-occupied households within the CRA is 18% lower than the city and 26% lower than the state.
Renters and Owners
Approximately 35% of all residential properties in the CRA are owner-occupied, according to Homestead Exemption data published by PCPAO. When looking at only single-family residential units, about 47% are owner-occupied.
This indicates that about 65% of all residential units and 53% of single-family residential units in the CRA are renter-occupied. Providing programs to prevent displacement of renters and pathways for building equity will be important for this CRA to ensure equitable redevelopment.
Figure 6 Distribution of Household Income Ranges
Figure 7 Comparison of Median Incomes
Page 14 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Housing and Neighborhood
Housing
Housing Units and Typology
Pinellas County Property Appraiser data shows that the CRA contains 2,433 housing units. The distribution of units consists of approximately:
• 70% single-family units• 17% units within multifamily buildings that are less than 4-stories• 12% units within duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes• About 1% units within multifamily buildings greater than 4-stories
With an estimated CRA population of 6,619, the area has an average household size of approximately 2.42 people per household. As shown in Figure 8, a significant majority of the CRA is single-family units; therefore, funds for building rehabilitation, rental assistance, and affordable housing would be focused on this housing type. Home Values
The median home value for owner-occupied homes in the CRA is $219,000, which is slightly less than the city’s median home value of $225,600 and on par with the county’s value of $219,800. These numbers do not reflect the historic housing price increases seen since 2020. Increased home values can both prevent and support displacement of current residents. Property owners can use increased home value to obtain home equity loans to make improvements to their property to stay in their home. They may sell their home and realize a significant financial gain that enables them to purchase a new living unit without a mortgage. However, increased home values typically lead to increased property taxes that a property owner cannot afford causing them to sell or passing the costs onto a tenant that forces the tenant to move. The ability of a property owner or renter to absorb increased costs depends on their current cost burden which is discussed in the next section.
Cost Burden
The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines cost-burdened households as those “who pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing.” HUD includes mortgage and rent payments as well as other expenses such as utilities, taxes, maintenance fees, and insurance in this cost.
ACS 2020 estimates for housing costs show that just under 40% of owner-occupied households in the North Greenwood CRA are cost-burdened. Cost burden increases significantly when an owner has a mortgage. Owning a home without a mortgage decreases the likelihood of being cost burdened, compared to owners and renters where over 50% are cost burdened as shown in Table 2. Renters in North Greenwood are particularly vulnerable to displacement due to increased housing costs. As noted earlier, 65% of all residential units are renter-occupied and 57% of those renters are cost burdened.
`Total Burdened Households Percent Burdened
Owner-Occupied with Mortgage 700 358 51.14%
Owner-Occupied with No Mortgage 418 63 15.07%
All Owner-Occupied 1,118 421 37.66%
Non-Owner-Occupied 1,315 750 57.03%Source: 2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates
Table 2 Housing Cost Burden by Tenure Type
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 15
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnVacant
1
2 - 5
6 - 10
11 - 25
26 - 180
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 8 Number of Housing Units
Page 16 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Car Ownership
The employment data discussed later in this section shows that the majority of North Greenwood residents work in jobs outside of the neighborhood. Jobs are primarily in industries that require physical presence and do not accommodate remote work. These residents rely on public or private transportation to travel to their jobs. Figure 9 shows the vehicle ownership rates for owner-occupied, renter-occupied, and all households in North Greenwood.
Of 2,433 households, 16.6% do not have a vehicle available, 39.3% have one vehicle available and 36.1% have two vehicles available. When separating owner- versus renter-occupied households, the percentage of renters with no vehicle available jumps to 26.6% while owners is lower at 4.8%. In owner-occupied households, 37.0% only have one vehicle available and for renters the number is slightly higher at 41.4%. This is an indicator that many of the residents are vulnerable to missing work or unable to access high paying jobs because they are transit dependent. The majority of renters are cost burdened which results in low or no savings and in a one car household this often results in increased debt to address unexpected expenses like flat tires and increased gas prices that are necessary to maintain transportation to work. Over time the debt increases while wages remain stagnant and keeps residents in poverty. This data underscores the importance of providing jobs, childcare, health care, and educational and training opportunities within the CRA so residents can walk or bicycle to access them.
Figure 9 Vehicle Ownership by Household Type
No Vehicle Available
1 Vehicle Available
2 Vehicles Available
3 Vehicles Available
4 Vehicles Available
5+ Vehicles Available
26.6%
41.4%
29.0%
1.5%
1.6%
4.8%
37.0%
44.5%
10.3%
2.9%
0.5%
0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%All householdsOwner-OccupiedRenter-Occupied16.6%
39.3%
36.1%
5.5%
2.2%
0.3%
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 17
Existing Conditions
Building Type Median Age
All Structures 68
Single-Family 68
Multifamily 71
Commercial 62
Industrial 57
Other 50Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser
Table 3 Median Building Age
Building Age
The Pinellas County Property Appraiser identifies building age as the actual year the structure was first built, according to building permit information. Figure 10 shows the year built of a structure for each property.
The median structure in the CRA was constructed nearly seven decades ago and as structures age, an increasing level of investment is required to maintain livability, usability, and curb appeal. This reinforces the need for assistance to property and home owners for maintenance and repairs. Because the majority of residential units are occupied by renters (65%) any grant programs should be designed to incentivize property owners to renovate their rental properties and to maintain the current lease rate to prevent displacement of existing tenants.
Former Springtime Elks Lodge
Page 18 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty Ln1900 - 1920
1921 - 1940
1941 - 1960
1961 - 1980
1981 - 2000
2001 - 2020
2021+
No Structure
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 10 Year Structure Built
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 19
Existing Conditions
Businesses and Employment
Reducing poverty requires providing long-term affordable housing and access to jobs that provide a living wage. The community indicated that they wished to attract high wage jobs to North Greenwood. They were particularly focused on implementing workforce development and entrepreneurship programs to engage youth and prevent recidivism.
Employment Statistics
Employment data for the CRA was collected from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program. LEHD data is drawn from the US Census Bureau and the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reflects the number of employed persons in 2019. Note this does not include unemployed persons or children under the age of 18.
Figure 11 indicates that 2,017 residents of the CRA are employed outside of its boundaries. 730 non-residents are employed within the CRA, and only 24 both live and work in the CRA. The majority of CRA residents are traveling outside of the CRA for work. 16% of all occupied households have no vehicle. Lack of transportation can result in lost wages which disproportionally impacts low-income households. This indicates a need to support transit services to job centers and funding to assist low-income residents with traveling to their jobs.
Figure 12 compares the ages of workers who live within the CRA to workers who live outside the CRA. Both data sets show that about half of those who are employed are between the ages of 30 and 54. However, those who live outside the CRA skew slightly younger than those who live within the CRA. Conversely, the CRA contains a larger share of those workers that live within the CRA that are over 55 than those who live outside the CRA.
Figure 11 Where Employees Live and Work
Figure 12 Workers by Age
Age 29 or Younger
Age 30 to 54
Age 55 or Older
Local Workers
Non-Local Workers
23.2%
$35,227
24.6%52.2%
18.9%
31.4%49.6%
Lives in CRA,Works Outside CRA(2,017)
Lives Outside CRA,Works in CRA(730)
Lives andWorks inCRA(24)
$1,250 or Less
$1,251 to $3,333
$3,333 or More
Local Workers
Non-Local Workers
22.9%
28.4%
48.8%
27.7%
28.4%
43.9%
0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Health Care andSocial Assistance
Manufacturing
Retail Trade
Construction
Transportation andWarehousing
Professional, Scientific,and Technical Services
Other Services(excluding Public Administration)
All Other NAICS Sectors
Administration & Support,Waste Management and Remediation
Accommodation andFood Services
Educational Services
Management of Companiesand Enterprises
Wholesale Trade
Live in CRA Work in CRA
Age 29 or Younger Age 30 to 54 Age 55 or Older
Workers Livingwithin CRA Workers LivingOutside CRA
23.2%
24.6%52.2%
18.9%
31.4%49.6%
Page 20 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 13 Workers by Income
Similarly, Figure 13 details the income ranges of those workers who live within the CRA to those that live outside the CRA. For both data sets, most are making between $1,251 and $3,333 per month (or $15,012 and $39,996 per year). Of those who live within the CRA, more workers are making less than $1,250 per month (28.4%) compared to those who live outside the CRA (22.9%), whereas those making over $3,333 per month is higher for those who live outside the CRA (28.4%) compared to those who live within the CRA (27.7%).
Figure 14 shows the percentage of those workers who live within the CRA compared to those who live outside the CRA based on the industry they are employed in. Industries are based on North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. The largest industry for each group is Health Care and Social Assistance. There are several industries where one group has a significantly larger proportion of workers than the other.
While Health Care and Social Assistance have the largest percentages for both groups, the share of those workers who live outside the CRA is approximately twice as many than those who live within the CRA. Similarly, those in Manufacturing that live outside the CRA is larger than those that live within the CRA, with this difference being nearly four times as large. Other industries following this trend are Retail Trade, Construction, Transportation and Warehousing, and Other Services.
Figure 14 Percentage of Workers per Industry
$1,250 or Less $1,251 to $3,333 $3,333 or More
Workers Livingwithin CRA Workers LivingOutside CRA
22.9%
28.4%
48.8%27.7%
28.4%
43.9%
Age 29 or YoungerAge 30 to 54Age 55 or OlderLocal WorkersNon-Local Workers23.2%$35,22724.6%52.2%18.9%
31.4%49.6%
Lives in CRA,Works Outside CRA(2,017)Lives Outside CRA,Works in CRA(730)Lives andWorks inCRA(24)$1,250 or Less$1,251 to $3,333$3,333 or MoreLocal WorkersNon-Local Workers22.9%
28.4%
48.8%27.7%28.4%43.9%
0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Health Care andSocial Assistance
Manufacturing
Retail Trade
Construction
Transportation andWarehousing
Professional, Scientific,and Technical Services
Other Services(excluding Public Administration)
All Other NAICS Sectors
Administration & Support,Waste Management and Remediation
Accommodation andFood Services
Educational Services
Management of Companiesand Enterprises
Wholesale Trade
Live in CRA Work in CRA
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 21
Existing Conditions
Conversely, a higher percentage of workers in the Accommodations and Food Services industry live within the CRA at a rate of nearly 14 times higher than workers living outside of the CRA. All Other NAICS Sectors has the second highest difference with nearly five times as many workers that live within the CRA compared to those who live outside the CRA. Wholesale Trade, Management of Companies and Enterprises, Educational Services, Administration & Support, Waste Management and Remediation, and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services all have higher percentages of workers living within the CRA than those who only work in the CRA.
The recently adopted state minimum wage of $15 per hour, by 2026, generates $2,400 per month or $28,800 per year. In 2022, the minimum wage is $11 per hour. Securing a mortgage of approximately $80,000 requires an annual income of $33,000. With a median home value of $219,000 its clear that home ownership will be out of reach for the majority of residents without public subsidy or access to higher wages. Based on the number of residents in low wage jobs, attracting new jobs and preparing residents to secure high wage jobs will be critical for the neighborhood’s redevelopment.
Health Risk Assessment
Health Outcome Introduction
Within the United States, health outcomes largely depend on socioeconomic and environmental factors, with health care only shaping 20% of a community’s overall health. The built environment, such as access to jobs, cultural institutions, healthcare, housing, and active transportation; community design conducive to walking; and environmental pollutants can support healthy behaviors or create obstacles that contribute to health inequities, leading to populations with a disproportionate burden of chronic disease.
Chronic Diseases
The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) completed a 500 Cities Project between 2016-2019 that included an evaluation of chronic health diseases in the 500 most populated cities in the US. Population health equity is dependent on policy and planning decision-making. The determinants of health vary widely by place, and much of the place-based disparity is due to differences in demographics and regional economies. However, research also shows that affordability, urban design, the availability and quality of active means of transportation, and the accessibility of public services all play a large role in education outcomes, economic mobility, and other determinants of health. Urban form - residential density, walkable streets, public transit use, and safe streets - can be a health advantage as those elements can lead to greater physical activity and healthier lifestyles, which are related to the rates of a variety of health outcomes.
CDC data was utilized to complete a health and environmental determinant assessment for North Greenwood and compared their findings to the city, county, state, and nation as shown in Table 4. Six chronic health conditions are included in the geographic comparison and the CRA health risk assessment discussed below. These chronic health conditions are:
Page 22 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
High Blood PressureHigh blood pressure, also known as hypertension, is a risk factor for heart disease. Environmental factors that have been found to influence blood pressure include lead exposure and air pollution. Environmental factors can also influence related behavioral factors such as diet, stress, and lack of physical activity. AsthmaAsthma is an inflammatory condition of the lungs and one of the most common long-term diseases in children. Environmental factors that influence asthma include air pollution exposure and exposure to allergens and pests. Other related factors include weight. Coronary Heart DiseaseCoronary Heart Disease occurs when the arteries of the heart cannot deliver enough oxygen-rich blood to the heart and are often caused by high cholesterol. Air pollution, physical inactivity, stress, and an unhealthy diet can all increase the risk for coronary heart disease.
DiabetesDiabetes is a chronic health condition that influences how the body produces or uses insulin and, therefore, how the body’s cells have access to energy. Risk factors for diabetes include being overweight, physical inactivity, stress, and exposure to pollution. High CholesterolHigh cholesterol is when total blood cholesterol for adults screened in the past five years is greater than 200 mg/dL. This is a risk factor for heart disease and stroke. Increased physical activity, maintaining a healthy weight, and eating fresh greens can help prevent high cholesterol.
ObesityObesity is a chronic disease defined as an excessive amount of body fat that puts people at risk for other diseases, including those listed above, as well as others. Environments lacking healthy food options that do not promote physical activity and that contribute to high stress have been found to influence obesity.
Other Health Outcomes and Behaviors
The geographic comparison also includes other population health outcomes and behaviors closely linked to environmental conditions. These three factors are discussed below. Physical InactivityThe CDC defines physical inactivity as adults reporting no physical activity in their leisure time. This may not cover physical activity undertaken commuting or in daily life, but may capture much of the population that is not getting the CDC-recommended amount of exercise. Physical inactivity increases the risk for heart disease, diabetes, colon cancer, high blood pressure, obesity, osteoporosis, muscle and joint disorders, and symptoms of anxiety and depression.
Poor Physical HealthThe CDC defines poor physical health as adults who spend more than 14 days a month with poor physical health, including physical illness and injury. This self-reported measure may overlap with chronic disease but also capture other aspects of health.
Poor Mental HealthThe CDC defines poor mental health as adults who spend more than 14 days a month with poor mental health, which includes emotional, psychological, and social wellbeing. Population Health Outcomes Geographic Comparison
Results of this assessment are included in Table 4 and displayed on Figure 15. The table displays the crude prevalence of chronic diseases in each area. Green highlighted cells show where the CRA has better health outcomes than the city. In contrast, pink highlighted cells show where the population has worse outcomes. The map displays how each of the Census Tracts compares to the average of the city. Dark green Census Tracts received a better health risk rating than the city average, while dark red Census Tracts received a poor health risk rating compared to the city average.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 23
Existing Conditions
The results indicate that the CRA population has a higher prevalence percentage of health conditions in seven of the nine categories in comparison with the city, county, state, and national percentages. Figure 15 shows a higher combined health risk in portions of North Greenwood. Community wellness strategies are included in the North Greenwood CRA Plan to help address these conditions.
Chronic Disease CRA City Pinellas Florida National
High Blood Pressure 39.1%37.0 37.4 33.5 32.6
Asthma 10.7%8.9 8.5 7.3 8.9
Coronary Heart Disease 7.9%8.0 8.0 7.6 6.2
Diabetes 14.4%11.8 12.3 11.8 11.0
High Cholesterol 32.6%35.4 36.4 33.4 33.6
Obesity 37.0%30.2 29.7 28.4 31.3
Physical Inactivity 31.8%25.4 24.5 26.5 26.0
Poor Physical Health 19.2%15.7 15.0 10.3 12.5
Poor Mental Health 20.5%15.9 14.6 12.3 13.6Sources: CDC, Division of Population Health, PLACES Data, 2021; CDC, Division of Population Health, BRFSS Prevalence & Trends Data.
Table 4 Health Conditions by Geography
Willa Carson Health and Wellness Center
Page 24 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Good
Above Average
Average
Below Average
Concern
Poor
City of Clearwater
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 15 Combined Health Risk
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 25
Existing Conditions
Places
Parks and Recreation
Numerous high-quality parks and recreation facilities serve North Greenwood and are shown on Figure 16. These facilities range in amenities and services provided from playgrounds, passive recreation, athletic fields, event and gathering places, outdoor pool, boat access to Clearwater Harbor, youth development, mentoring, and other community services.
Many of these facilities could better serve the community through increased access and additional program offerings as described in the recommendations found in Chapter 4 Plan Implementation. Community Centers
North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
The North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex is the city’s largest recreation center. The complex has been an essential aspect of the North Greenwood community since opening in 2003. The North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex has a seasonal pool, a fitness center, a double wooden floor gymnasium, meeting rooms, and a catering kitchen. The facility is also home to several community services, including afterschool and summer programs, youth development activities, sports leagues, and several local non-profit organizations.
Clearwater Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center
The Clearwater Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center was a city-operated recreation center that closed in 2011 due to the economic downturn and the opening of a new city-owned aquatics and recreation complex. The non-profit Clearwater Martin Luther King Jr. Neighborhood Center Coalition Inc. was formed to prevent the loss of such an asset to the community. Because of the Coalition’s ongoing efforts, the Center continues to offer a wide range of programs and services to the North Greenwood neighborhood. These include mentorship programs, youth development, local political candidate forums, public speakers, a food pantry, and various other community events.
Source: Clearwater Martin Luther King, Jr. Neighborhood Center Coalition, Inc.
Clearwater Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center
Page 26 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
471210
3
11 8
1
9
6
5
2
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty Ln1 Atrium Park
2 Cherry Harris Park
3 Garden Avenue Park
4 Jack Russell Stadium
5 Martin Luther King Jr. Neighborhood Center
6 North Betty Lane Park
7 North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
8 Overbrook Park
9 Phillip Jones Park
10 Seminole Boat Ramp
11 Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex
12 Walter C Campbell Park
Pinellas Trail
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 16 Parks and Recreation Facility Locations
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 27
Existing Conditions
Recreation Facilities
Pinellas Trail
The Pinellas Trail, formally the Fred Marquis Pinellas Trail, is a 47-mile multi-use linear trail extending from St. Petersburg to Tarpon Springs. The trail runs through North Greenwood along the Blanche B Littlejohn Trail roadway. In 2016, Forward Pinellas implemented a series of eight electromagnetic and infrared sensors along the entire trail with funding from the CDC. There is one sensor within city limits located at Jones Street, at the southern-most point of the CRA boundary.
In 2021, a total of 1,945,427 counts were logged by the trail count sensors. The Clearwater segment accounted for 170,703 of those counts, or approximately 8.7% of all counts. This was the second lowest utilized segment, but the annual report notes that East Lake Tarpon's counter experienced technical issues for several months.
Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex
The Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex is home to Clearwater Shuffleboard Club, Inc. and the Clearwater Lawn Bowling Club. It is located in the northwest corner of the North Greenwood CRA limits along Stevenson Creek. Surface parking lots and interior-use-based buildings which do not utilize the waterfront are located on the property. Oak shade trees are located in upland areas and mangroves along the water edge. Fishing and kayak water access is seen in Stevenson Creek tributary as it closely connects with Clearwater Harbor under the North Fort Harrison Avenue bridge. However, there is a need for better access to the creek. In 2022, the Parks and Recreation Department began evaluating the property for redevelopment into a multi-generational facility, adding both active and passive recreation opportunities, including better access to Stevenson Creek.
Bicyclist on the Pinellas Trail
Page 28 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Seminole Boat Ramp
Boaters throughout the county widely use the Seminole Boat Ramp. It offers six paved ramps, courtesy docks, approximately 125 boat trailer parking spots, benches, picnic tables, and elevated restrooms. In 2019, the city completed parking and circulation improvements to better utilize the facility. The city created a new sidewalk connection from the North Fort Harrison Avenue intersection to the waterfront. This project also repaved and restriped the parking area, added green spaces, improved surface drainage, provided low-impact stormwater treatments, creating a waterfront boardwalk with educational displays, improved lighting, and provided a multi-use trail.
Jack Russell Stadium
Jack Russell Stadium is located just outside the CRA boundaries at the Palmetto Street and Phillies Drive intersection. In addition to being the past spring training facility for the Major League Baseball Philadelphia Phillies, the stadium previously housed concerts and is currently home to several local amateur, high school, and collegiate level baseball and softball teams. The stadium is within walking distance to the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor. There is an opportunity to connect these two locations through wayfinding signage and marketing programs that will bring customers from stadium events to local businesses.
Aerial View of Seminole Boat Ramp
Source: Nearmap
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 29
Existing Conditions
Parks
Cherry Harris Park
Cherry Harris Park runs along Marshall Street from North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue to Madison Avenue. The amenities in the park include three shelters with picnic tables and grills, a playground, a tree-lined walking path, restroom facilities, and on-street parking.
Garden Avenue Park
Garden Avenue Park is a small neighborhood park located on North Garden Avenue between Palm Bluff Street and Cedar Street. It includes a playground facility, benches, and a small-sheltered picnic table area.
Overbrook Park
Overbrook Park is located on the north side of Stevenson Creek at Stevenson Avenue and Overbrook Avenue. The park offers access to picnic tables in a wooded open space adjacent to the creek, although there is no direct access to the water. Philip Jones Park
Philip Jones Park is located at the intersection of Russell Street and Holt Avenue. The park has a large multipurpose turf field. Several youth sports leagues make use of the field, including the Greenwood Panthers football team. Walter C Campbell Park
The Walter C Campbell Park is a large multipurpose turf athletic field just south of the North Greenwood Library at the intersection of North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Seminole Street. In addition to numerous sporting events throughout the year, the park also hosts many community events, including the popular Saturday Morning Shoppe. The site is routinely fenced off from unstructured community access and use.
Community Event at Walter C Campbell Park
Page 30 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Other City-Owned Open Space/Unimproved Spaces
Atrium Park
Atrium Park is a triangular parcel located at the North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue intersection. The open space/park includes trees, landscaping, signage, lighting, and a row of on-street parking along the northbound side of North Fort Harrison Avenue.
North Betty Lane Park
The city acquired the lot on the southeast corner of the North Betty Lane and Overlea Street intersection to access Stevenson Creek with dredging machinery. This parcel does not currently serve as a dedicated recreation facility. It has the potential to be enhanced to provide improved open space and access to Stevenson Creek. Heavy equipment access to the waterfront must be maintained to provide the necessary maintenance to Stevenson Creek in the future.
Atrium Park Aerial
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 31
Existing Conditions
Cultural, Community, and Historic Places
The North Greenwood community has abundant cultural, community, and historical places which are shown on Figure 17. The CRA is home to numerous schools and other educational facilities, more than a dozen active churches and other community organizations, and several health care providers. This section will discuss a selection of these places and their importance to the community. How these places can be built upon to increase the quality of life of North Greenwood residents is discussed in the recommendations found in Chapter 4 Plan Implementation. North Greenwood Library
The first library in North Greenwood opened in 1950 and was located at Pennsylvania Avenue and Cedar Street. The rented library soon outgrew its space, and a new building opened on Palmetto Street next to Pinellas High School in 1962.
The current building was built in 2002 and serves as a prominent community landmark. The library houses the Edward Allen Henry, Jr. Special Collection on Negro Culture and History and is now known as the Christine Wigfall Morris African American Collection. The library offers free wireless internet and a meeting room. The library is currently closed on the weekend, although the city is exploring options to provide weekend hours on a limited basis. This facility could better serve the community through increased access and additional program offerings which are further described in the recommendations section.
Clearwater Garden Club
The Clearwater Garden Club is a small, non-profit organization located in the Old Bay District. Since 1950, it has conducted outreach programs, community projects, and social gatherings that promote the conservation and beautification of the environment. The Club's location is an attractive site for commercial redevelopment. If it does move, it is anticipated that the Club would like to stay in the North Greenwood area.
Schools and Other Educational Facilities
There are three Pinellas County Schools in North Greenwood. These schools are Sandy Lane Elementary School, Clearwater Intermediate School, and Calvin Hunsinger K-12 School. Several preschool, daycare, and other childcare facilities also exist within the CRA. Additionally, the neighborhood has two adult education centers: Operation Graduate and Clearwater Adult Education and Job Training Center.
Clearwater Intermediate School
Page 32 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Health Centers
There are three community health centers within the CRA. The largest of these is the Clearwater Health Department, the Clearwater branch of the Florida Department of Health in Pinellas County. Part of the county’s larger health system, the Department offers the broader community a wide range of programs and services. Another health center is the Turley Family Health Center, located on the corner of North Myrtle Avenue and Seminole Street. This local health clinic is part of the BayCare Health System.
The Willa Carson Health and Wellness Center is a non-profit, grant-funded clinic operating in North Greenwood since 1997. The Center focuses on improving the health of the underinsured and uninsured. It provides the community with essential health services, preventative care, and educational initiatives.
Churches
North Greenwood is home to more than a dozen churches of various sizes and denominations. Figure 18 shows the location of these churches and church-owned properties. Many of the neighborhood’s churches own additional properties surrounding their primary property for parking or other secondary purposes. The large cluster of church-owned properties in the southwest corner of the CRA is owned by the Church of Scientology, which is headquartered south of the CRA in Downtown Clearwater.
Mount Olive African Methodist Episcopal (A.M.E.) Church has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 1999 due to its significance to social history, Black heritage, and Gothic Revival architectural characteristics.
Mount Olive A.M.E. Church
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 33
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnAdult Education Center
Child Care Facility
Fire Station #51
Francis Wilson Playhouse
Health Center
North Greenwood Cemetery
North Greenwood Library
North Ward School
Curtis Museum
School Facility
Social Services
Clearwater Garden Club
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 17 Cultural, Community, and Historic Places
Page 34 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
8
12
15 10
7
4
11
6
9
13 15
3
2
14
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveNMyrtleAveKings HwySunsetPoint
R
d
N Betty Ln1 Alpha & Omega Church
2 Bethany Christian Methodist
3 Bethlehem Seventh-Day Adventist
4 Christ Temple Church PAW
5 Church of God By Faith
6 Everybody's Tabernacle
7 Mt. Carmel Baptist Church
8 Mt. Olive A.M.E.
9 North Bay Community Church
10 St. John Primitive Baptist
11 St. John's Missionary Baptist
12 St. Matthew Missionary Baptist
13 The Church Of The Kingdom Of God
14 The Refuge of Clearwater
15 True Vine Missionary Baptist
Church-Owned Properties
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 18 Churches and Church-Owned Properties
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 35
Existing Conditions
Historic Places
Pinellas County African American History Museum
The Pinellas County African American History Museum is headquartered in the former Curtis Elementary School at North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Marshall Street. The museum is often referred to as the Curtis Museum within the community. The museum was established in April 2000 and has served as a repository of historical and cultural information and physical artifacts primarily relating to African American History in Pinellas County.
North Greenwood Cemetery
In the 1940s and 1950s, an unnamed segregation-era African American cemetery was active on the site that would become the Palmetto Elementary School in 1962. In 2019, after a campaign from local community members, the City of Clearwater contracted an archaeological firm to investigate the site to determine if burial sites remain. The investigation determined that at least 55 burial sites remain on the property. An historical marker will be installed to memorialize the deceased and honor the cemetery’s history. More information on the North Greenwood Cemetery is available in the Archaeological Ground-truth Excavation of North Greenwood Cemetery Report published on July 12, 2021.
North Ward Elementary School
The North Ward Elementary School opened in 1915 and remained in operation as a school until 2009. The City of Clearwater purchased the property in 2019. In 2021, the school was placed on the National Register of Historic Places and received a local designation in April of 2022. The building is currently unoccupied and the city is seeking a development partner for the future rehabilitation and reuse of the school. A Certificate of Appropriateness from the Community Development Board will be required if major exterior alterations are proposed.
North Ward School, 1922
Historic Single-Family Homes
The plan area has several single-family homes of varying architectural styles that are eligible for historic designation. The city should prioritize local designation to preserve the visual character of the neighborhood and ensure compatible renovations. The 1995 North/South Greenwood Residential Infill Study by the Florida Center for Community Design and Research contains extensive block by block research documenting existing housing styles and recommendations for developing vacant lots in keeping with the scale and layout of existing homes.
Page 36 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Districts
Commercial Districts
North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue
North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue is the historic heart of North Greenwood. Originally named North Greenwood Avenue, the corridor once served as the community focal point, with many businesses and gathering spots. Many residents expressed their personal experiences with the corridor being a very active location and part of local business and community identity. With most of its businesses gone, vacant lots are prevalent, and the overall prominence in the community for routine retail commercial businesses is diminished. The corridor still serves as a cultural center for the neighborhood with the North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex, North Greenwood Library, the Pinellas County African American History Museum, a handful of local businesses, and several community services located along the street. Figure 19 displays these uses, vacant parcels, and city and county property ownership. Vacant property data was collected from the Florida Department of Revenue. These vacant and city-owned lands present an opportunity for this corridor to be revitalized in a way that serves the current community while honoring the corridor’s past.
This plan recommends focusing on restoring black entrepreneurship in this area of North Greenwood. More information on this strategy can be found in Chapter 4 Plan Implementation.
Figure 20 portrays the current massing and scale of buildings adjacent to the vacant lots on this street. It shows opportunities to assemble lots into larger development parcels and to place new buildings adjacent to the right of way to bring back a traditional, main street storefront experience. In Spring 2023, the city will use a grant from Forward Pinellas to conduct a community charette and accompanying form-based code to incentivize development of the city-owned properties on this corridor.
Carlton St
Palmetto St
Marshall St
Pennsylvania AveN MLK JrAvePalmetto ParkApartments
Rec Complex
ElksLodge
OperationGraduate
African AmericanHistory Museum
City Owned
County Owned
Vacant Property
Figure 19 North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue Corridor
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 37
Existing Conditions
Figure 20 Potential Redevelopment Properties
Page 38 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue
The intersecting streets of North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue are the two highest traffic volume roadways in the CRA with 18,000 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) and 13,500 AADT respectively. They are two of the primary connections between Downtown Clearwater and northern Pinellas County. Together they form a triangular assortment of parcels shown in Figure 21. This figure also shows more than 140 vacant, mostly privately owned, properties and buildings along this corridor. This area has significant potential for redevelopment due to the high traffic volume, proximity to Downtown, a considerable number of large vacant parcels, and a mixture of Downtown and Commercial zoning designations. This is the mostly likely area to see significant development in the CRA and where the city would anticipate requests for increased building height and density. N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge StNOsceola AveNMyrtleAveCity Owned
County Owned
Vacant Properties
North WardSchool
BoatRamp
Garden TrailApartments GasDept.
Jolley Trolley
Health Dept.
Figure 21 North Fort Harrison Avenue Corridor
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 39
Existing Conditions
North Betty Lane
The North Betty Lane corridor is a concentration of commercial properties clustered around the intersection of North Betty Lane and Stevenson Creek. Businesses in the area include neighborhood-scale retail and convenience stores, a car wash, a gas station, and a U-Haul dealer. On the west side of North Betty Lane is the Homeless Empowerment Program (HEP) and affiliated church and other facilities. This program provides a number of valuable social services to vulnerable people. Clearwater Fire Station #51 is located at the intersection of Overbrook Avenue and North Betty Lane. The Pinellas County Adult Education and Training Center is just off the corridor along Engman Street. This corridor has few vacant properties relative to the other two commercial corridors in the CRA.
Figure 22 North Betty Lane Corridor
Engman St
Fairmont St
Overlea StNBettyLnCity Owned
County Owned
Vacant Property
HEPFacilities
Fire Station#51
Adult Ed.Center
Betty LaneShopping Cntr.
ClearwaterIntermediateSchool andMartin LutherKing, Jr.Community Center
Marshall Street WaterReclamation Facility
Philip JonesPark
Page 40 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Industrial District
Eldridge Street
The industrial portion of the North Greenwood CRA is located along Eldridge Street north of the CSX Railway Line. The approximately five-block area is the only land in the CRA with the Industrial, Research, and Technology (IRT) zoning designation. This area contains a number of businesses in the marine industry, automotive repair and maintenance, various industrial shops, food shops, and a Duke Energy substation. The Armory Building is directly adjacent to the industrial district. N MLK Jr AveN Myrtle AveEldridge St
Vacant Properties
City Owned
County Owned
State of Florida
Industrial Zoning District
North Greenwood CRA
CSX Rail Line Armory
Figure 23 Industrial District
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 41
Existing Conditions
Land Use
Unincorporated Enclaves
The CRA boundaries include 40.59-acres of land that has not been incorporated into the City of Clearwater. This represents approximately 4.9% of the entire 840.77-acre CRA limits. As shown on Figure 24, these enclaves of unincorporated properties are located northeast of Stevenson Creek, mostly between Douglas Avenue and North Betty Lane. A smaller set of unincorporated parcels are located near the intersection of Woodbine Street and North Betty Lane. Residents in the unincorporated areas are generally served by septic systems and by the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office. Incorporation should be considered for these areas as a whole to provide a consistent point of contact for public safety through the Clearwater Police Department and to extend sanitary sewer systems to these properties. The city does not recommend individual parcels for annexation because a change in CRA boundaries would require approval by the City Council and Board of County Commissioners.
Existing Land Use
According to property use data provided by the Florida Department of Revenue, properties within the North Greenwood CRA are 48.07% single-family residential by acreage. A total of 58.37% of the acreage in the CRA is dedicated to residential uses. The next largest category is schools, which utilize 12.29% of property due to the three schools on two large properties. Industrial and storage use utilize 8.52% of the property, about half of which is the wastewater treatment plant. Vacant land comprises 8.22% of the property, government land 7.41%, apartments and condos 6.62%, and all other uses comprise less than 5%.
These uses are displayed in Table 5 and Figure 25. This information does not include right-of-way acreage. Seminole Boat Ramp, Stevenson Creek Shuffleboard and Lawn Bowling Complex, North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex, and Walter C Campbell Park are considered government use.
Land Use Acres Percentage
Single-Family 290.73 48.07%
Schools 74.33 12.29%
Industrial / Storage 51.50 8.52%
Vacant 49.70 8.22%
Government 44.81 7.41%
Apartment / Condo 40.05 6.62%
Duplex / Triplex / Fourplex 22.28 3.68%
Non-profit / Church 18.62 3.08%
Stores 4.28 0.71%
Office 3.45 0.57%Source: Florida Department of Revenue
Table 5 Existing Land Use by Acres and Percentage
Page 42 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnNorth Greenwood CRA
Unincorporated Enclaves
Figure 24 Unincorporated Enclaves
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 43
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnApartment / Condo
Duplex / Triplex / Fourplex
Single-Family
Stores
Restaurants
Office
Industrial / Storage
Non-profit/Church
Parks
Government
Schools
Marina
Vacant
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 25 Existing Land Use
Page 44 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Future Land Use
The Future Land Use designations within the CRA generally reflect the existing uses within the community. The southwest portion of the overall CRA is designated as Central Business District (CBD), allowing for moderate to high-density residential, office, commercial, and public uses, and is governed by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Development Standards. Table 6 and Figure 26 show the breakdown of the Future Land Use designations.
The most prevalent future land use category in the CRA is Residential Urban (RU) which allows residential uses at a moderate density, including detached single-family dwellings and attached dwellings. Institutional (I) is the second largest and accounts for a majority of the church and school locations within the CRA, as well as other non-profit or social service type uses.
Future Land Use Acres Percentage
Residential Urban (RU)261.42 39.73%
Institutional (I)89.15 13.55%
Central Business District (CBD)73.66 11.20%
Commercial General (CG)63.53 9.65%
Residential Medium (RM)52.39 7.96%
Recreation/Open Space (R/OS)27.62 4.20%
Water 24.04 3.65%
Transport/Utility (T/U)18.26 2.78%
Residential Low (RL)15.07 2.29%
Industrial Limited (IL)11.38 1.73%
Preservation (P)11.06 1.68%
Residential High (RH)9.36 1.42%
Residential/Office General (R/OG)1.04 0.16%Source: City of Clearwater
Table 6 Future Land Use by Acres and Percentage
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 45
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCentral Business District
Commercial General
Institutional
Industrial Limited
Preservation
Residential/Office General
Recreation/Open Space
Residential High
Residential Low
Residential Medium
Residential Urban
Transport/Utility
Water
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 26 Future Land Use
Page 46 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Zoning Districts
The CRA includes a wide variety of zoning districts. Table 7 shows the total acres and percentage of districts, shown in Figure 27, occurring within the CRA. Most of the neighborhood (52.2%) is zoned for residential development. These districts are generally located interior of CRA. The largest zoning district is the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District which is concentrated along the south side of Stevenson Creek and the southeast portion of the CRA. Palmetto Park Apartments is the only property zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR).
The CRA has a large concentration of properties zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) which allows for attached dwellings to be constructed. However, in most zoning districts residential uses require a minimum of two off-street parking spaces which could provide development challenges as the residential lot sizes in the CRA are smaller in nature, typically only 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep.
Business-related zoning districts, including Commercial, Downtown, and Office, are located along major corridors, including North Fort Harrison Avenue, North Myrtle Avenue, and North Betty Lane. The Institutional District is located throughout the CRA and is applied to schools, churches, city facilities, and certain vacant lands.
Zoning District Acres Percent
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)185.20 29.68%
Medium Density Residential (MDR)131.10 21.01%
Institutional (I)106.40 17.05%
Downtown (D)76.63 12.28%
Commercial (C)63.23 10.13%
Open Space/Recreation (OS/R)29.13 4.67%
Preservation (P)11.58 1.86%
Industrial, Research, and Technology (IRT)10.72 1.72%
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)8.23 1.32%
High Density Residential (HDR)1.12 0.18%
Office (O)0.70 0.11%Source: City of Clearwater
Table 7 Zoning District by Acres and Percentage
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 47
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCommercial
Downtown
High Density Residential
Industrial Research and Technology
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
Preservation
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 27 Zoning Districts
Page 48 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Vacant Lands
According to Pinellas County Property Appraiser data, there are 350 vacant properties within the CRA. Combined, these lots comprise 49.7 acres or 8.22% of the CRA area. The vacant properties are generally dispersed throughout the CRA, though concentrations are present along the North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue corridors. The development of vacant properties should be a top priority for the CRA because it does not cause direct displacement and can be developed in a way that aligns with the community’s goals. Vacant Housing Units
This data also indicates that the CRA has 386 vacant housing units. This is 15.5% of the CRA’s 2,433 total housing units. Its rate is lower than the overall city, which has an estimated 18.3% vacancy rate.
Vacant Corner Lot
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 49
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnVacant Property
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 28 Vacant Properties
Page 50 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Public and Semi-Public Property
Public and semi-public properties are shown on Figure 30 and are further detailed below by ownership.
City-Owned Lands
The City of Clearwater owns 64 parcels within the CRA. Together these parcels make up 83.33 acres. Most of these properties are parks or other recreational facilities. Several are public service sites, most notably the Marshall Street Water Reclamation Facility, Clearwater Gas Department, and Fire Station #51. Other city-owned properties were acquired for community enhancement purposes. See Table 15, CRA Implementation Table, for a description of potential future uses on these sites. Other Publicly Owned Lands
Pinellas County
The Pinellas County government owns 16 properties throughout the CRA. These include parcels along the Pinellas Trail, the Clearwater Health Department, the Garden Trail Apartments workforce housing, and a handful of residential lots in the unincorporated area.
Pinellas County Schools
Pinellas County Schools own four properties within the CRA. The largest is the site for Sandy Lane Elementary and Calvin A. Hunsinger Schools, located at the southwest corner of Kings Highway and Sunset Point Road. They also own property along Palmetto Street (Clearwater Intermediate School), the Adult Education Center to the northeast of Clearwater Intermediate School, and the Pinellas County African American History Museum property.
State of Florida
The State of Florida owns one property within the CRA. This property is the Armory Building, located at 706 North Missouri Avenue. In 2005, National Guard operations were relocated to the C.W. Bill Young Armed Forces Reserve Center in Pinellas Park. This site is now utilized by the City of Clearwater Parks and Recreation Department for equipment storage and operations.
Armory Building
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 51
Existing Conditions
Utility and Transportation Owned Lands
CSX Railroad
CSX Transportation, Inc. is an international transportation company that operates about 20,000 miles of rail line in the eastern United States. This includes the Clearwater Subdivision line, which runs from east of downtown Tampa, along the south side of the North Greenwood CRA and terminates in St. Petersburg.
Duke Energy
Duke Energy Florida is the electric utility provider for Pinellas County. It owns one property within the CRA on which a power sub-station is located.
Land Value
Taxable Value and Exempt Properties
The CRA has concentrations of relatively high-tax generating, low-tax generating, and tax-exempt lands. As shown on Figure 29, approximately 251 acres or 35.5% of the lands in the CRA are tax-exempt, and the remaining 64.5% are not tax-exempt. This does not include right-of-way or Stevenson Creek.
The taxable value of properties in the CRA, as estimated by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser’s Office, is displayed in Figure 31. The dark red-brown and red properties indicate clusters of properties with a high taxable value, primarily along the North Fort Harrison Avenue corridor, abutting Stevenson Creek, and the industrial area around Eldridge Street. The purple indicates properties that do not pay property taxes, mainly due to being owned by a governmental agency, religious institution, or other non-profit entity.
Figure 30 illustrates city-owned land that is suitable for development. Sites determined suitable for development have no known environmental issues, access to public water and sewer infrastructure, and zoning designations that allow for residential or commercial uses. There are opportunities for commercial development in the Old Bay District as
Figure 29 Property Acreage by Tax-Exempt Status
64.5%
35.5%Non-Exempt (590 acres)
Exempt (251 acres)
well as the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor. There is one potential site for residential development adjacent to the existing Fire Station #51 with appropriate environmental remediation. Properties that are closer to the water have the potential to develop at an increased density due to the underlying future land use category of Central Business District (CBD) having higher density and intensity than other areas of the CRA. This type of growth could provide increased tax revenue for the CRA to support programs in areas that will remain predominantly single-family housing.
The percentage of tax-exempt properties is not anticipated to change significantly and the institutions who own those properties are providing valuable community services. The CRA can provide coordination services among the institutions to ensure that plan goals are met in an effective manner.
Page 52 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCity of Clearwater
Pinellas County
Pinellas County Schools
State of Florida
Duke Energy
Sites Suitable for Development
Pinellas Trail
CSX Rail Line
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 30 Public and Semi-Public Properties
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 53
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnTax Exempt
$0.01 - $50,000
$50,000 - $150,000
$150,000 - $250,000
$250,000 - $1,000,000
$1,000,000 - $3,327,500
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 31 Taxable Property Value
Page 54 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Natural Environment
Stevenson Creek
Stevenson Creek is a prominent aquatic feature of North Greenwood. It is approximately 3.2-miles long, running from the south side of Clearwater, through the city and North Greenwood, and terminating in Clearwater Harbor northwest of the CRA. The one-mile stretch within and northwest of the CRA is the widest and most heavily vegetated portion of Stevenson Creek.
Community Use
There is currently no designated public water access point to Stevenson Creek. Many local residents use the creek for fishing and have suggested they would benefit from increased access to it for fishing and recreational activities. Most properties abutting the property are single-family residences, many of which have private docks on the creek. The Clearwater Shuffleboard and Lawn Bowling Complex property has about 1,200 feet of creek frontage. Several other city-owned properties are adjacent to the creek, including Overbrook Park, Fire Station #51, the Marshall Street Water Reclamation Facility, and North Betty Lane Park on the corner of Overlea Street and North Betty Lane used to access the creek with dredging equipment.
Waterbody Information
Water flows into Stevenson Creek Watershed from the creek’s three main branches: the Spring Branch, Hamon Branch, and Upper Stevenson Branch. The Pinellas County Water Atlas’ Water Quality Index scores Stevenson Creek as “Good” based on levels of water clarity, dissolved oxygen, oxygen demand, nutrients, and bacteria. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) identifies Stevenson Creek as “Impaired” due to the presence of fecal coliform.
Stevenson Creek
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 55
Existing Conditions
Coastal High Hazard Area
The Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) is an area particularly vulnerable to the effects of coastal flooding from hurricanes and other tropical storm events. It is defined by section 163.3178(2)(h)9, Florida Statutes, as the area below the elevation of the category one storm surge line as established by a Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm surge model. The State of Florida limits density in these areas and requires enhanced building standards.
The City of Clearwater has designated a Coastal Storm Area (CSA) within the Comprehensive Plan. The CSA includes the CHHA plus those parcels where the CHHA inundates 20% or more of a parcel or those portions of an island not inundated by the CHHA and areas of the FEMA Velocity Zone (VE) not included in Evacuation Zone A and parcels where the VE Zone occupies 20% or more of the parcel.
Figure 32 shows the CHHA and CSA within the CRA. The majority of CHHA and CSA within the CRA Plan area occurs in the northern section along Stevenson Creek and its tributary that stretches to Sunset Point Road. The Seminole Boat Ramp area and southward along the Clearwater Harbor coastline are also included. A total of 144.88-acres of CHHA exists with 368 parcels being impacted, of which 337 are residential. A total of 167.04-acres of CSA exists, with 432 total parcels being impacted and 395 of those being residential.
FEMA Flood Zones
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines flood hazard areas as areas with at least a 1% chance to flood in a 100-year storm event. The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map identifies the majority of flood hazard areas as those located in the northern half of the CRA along Stevenson Creek and its tributary that stretches to Sunset Point Road and onto the Pinellas County School owned property, as well as an area northwest of the North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Palmetto Street intersection. The Seminole Boat Ramp area and southward along the Clearwater Harbor and the residential area surrounding the North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex are also included. In addition to the increased risk of flooding, identified flood hazard areas can negatively affect property values and insurance costs.
The flood zones identified in the CRA are A, AE, and VE. The A and AE zones are areas with a 1% chance of annual flooding and a 26% chance of flooding over 30 years. There are 0.82 acres of Zone A and 160.95 acres of AE located in the CRA. The VE zone is coastal areas with a 1% or greater chance of flooding annually or are subject to additional hazard of storm waves as well as a 26% of flooding over 30 years. There are 6.74 acres of VE located in the CRA. There are a total of 168.44 acres impacted by flood zone, with a total of 427 parcels within the CRA are impacted by these zones, of which 315 are residential.
Page 56 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCoastal High Hazard Area
Coastal Storm Area
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 32 Coastal High Hazard Area and Coastal Storm Area
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 57
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnZone A
Zone AE
Zone VE
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 33 FEMA Flood Zones
Page 58 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Wetlands
Wetlands provide numerous economic, social, and ecological benefits. They provide habitat for various plant and animal species, reduce flooding, and support recreational activities. They are protected by multiple public agencies permitting requirements. There are several types of wetlands and deep water habitats in the CRA Plan area. Locations of these habitats, as defined by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Wetlands Inventory, are displayed in Figure 34. The habitats within the CRA are mostly part of Stevenson Creek, identifying its benefit to the community and potential to be enhanced through continued nuisance vegetation removal, installation of native plant species on public lands, and public education on the benefits of watershed resource protection on private properties. Small areas of wetland are also identified on the edges of the Seminole Boat Ramp.
The majority of mapped wetland areas within the CRA Plan area occur in the northern half along Stevenson Creek and its tributary that stretches to Sunset Point Road. A total of 32.07-acres of wetlands exist, with Estuarine and Marine Deepwater (17.05-acres), Estuarine and Marine Wetland (6.65-acres), Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland (4.11-acres), Freshwater Pond (2.51-acres), and Riverine (1.75-acres) designations.
Stevenson Creek Vegetation
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 59
Existing Conditions
Figure 34 Wetlands
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnEstuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Riverine
North Greenwood CRA
Page 60 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Streets and Transit
Road Network
Streets in the North Greenwood CRA are generally laid out in a grid network. The street network spans Stevenson Creek over three bridges on North Fort Harrison Avenue, Fairmont Street, and North Betty Lane. The highest traffic volume thoroughfare is Alt US 19. This route follows North Myrtle Avenue and becomes North Fort Harrison Avenue after its intersection with North Myrtle Avenue. This route runs from St. Petersburg north to Holiday in Pasco County before reconnecting with the primary US Route 19 highway. Other significant north-south roads within the CRA are North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, North Betty Lane, and Kings Highway. Significant east-west roads include Palmetto Street and Fairmont Street, which transitions into Douglas Avenue after crossing Stevenson Creek. Sunset Point Road provides a significant east-west route between North Fort Harrison Avenue and Safety Harbor. Information about these roadways is summarized in Table 8.
The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) is the approximate number of cars that pass through a roadway each day. These numbers are used in a wide range of decision-making processes, from transportation planning projects to where new businesses decide to open. Alt US 19/North Fort Harrison Avenue/North Myrtle Avenue has the highest AADT in the CRA. State, County, and Local Roads
Most of the roads located within the CRA are owned and maintained by the City of Clearwater. The exception to this is portions of Alt US 19 which is owned and maintained by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Additionally, Pinellas County owns and maintains portions of North Betty Lane, Overbrook Avenue, Douglas Avenue, Sunset Point Road, and Sylvan Drive. Private roads exist in the CRA and are controlled as part of private developments or subdivisions. The jurisdiction of roadways in the CRA is shown in Figure 35.
Road Name Directional Lanes AADT Class Jurisdiction
North Fort Harrison Avenue 1-2 18,000 Minor Arterial City / FDOT
North Myrtle Avenue 3-4 13,500 Minor Arterial FDOT
North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue 1-2 3,400 Collector City
North Betty Lane 1-2 6,500 Collector City / County
Kings Highway 1 No Count Minor Collector City
Palmetto Street 1-2 4,000 Collector City
Fairmont Street / Douglas Avenue 2-4 4,400 Collector City
Sunset Point Road 2 6,900 Minor Arterial CountySource: FDOT Transportation Data and Analytics Office
Table 8 Summary of Major Roads
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 61
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCity of Clearwater
Pinellas County
FDOT
Private
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 35 Roadway Jurisdiction
Page 62 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Functional Classification
Figure 36 shows the functional classifications of roadways within the CRA Plan area.
Arterial Roadways
Arterial roadways provide major connections between cities, urbanized areas, and major employment centers. These tend to have higher speed limits, more lanes, and more cars passing through. In the CRA, these include North Fort Harrison Avenue, North Myrtle Avenue/Alt US 19, and Sunset Point Road. Collector Streets
Collector streets provide connections between arterial networks and residential networks to residential districts and mid-sized commercial areas. There are several of these roadways in the CRA, including Fairmont Street, Douglas Avenue, Overbrook Avenue, North Betty Lane, North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, Kings Highway, and Palmetto Street. Local Streets
Local streets provide direct access to individual properties. They are not intended as primary throughways between non-local destinations, but are an integral part of the street grid, providing alternatives to other roadways. Roadways not classified as collectors or arterials are local streets.
Bike and Pedestrian Facilities
Existing Sidewalk Network
Sidewalks exist along at least one side of all but a few streets within the CRA and along both sides of most. Sidewalks are along all commercial corridors, arterial roadways, and across all three bridges. Gaps in the sidewalk network exist mostly in residential areas. Areas with major sidewalk gaps include:
• The residential area north of Palmetto Street between Pinellas Trail and Douglas Avenue• The residential area north of Overlea Street between North Betty Lane and Kings Highway• The unincorporated areas north of Overbrook Avenue along Sylvan Drive and Pineland Drive
The general areas of these gaps are shown as blue circles in Figure 37.
Bike Lanes and Paths
The main bicycle infrastructure within the CRA is the multi-purpose Pinellas Trail; however, a separated bike lane and sharrows do exist. The separated bike lane is on North Osceola Avenue between Seminole Street and Nicholson Street, and sharrows are on Nicholson Street from North Osceola Avenue to the Pinellas Trail. These two installations aimed at improving bike access and safety from the Pinellas Trail to the Seminole Boat Ramp.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 63
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveNMyrtleAveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnMinor Arterial
Collector
Minor Collector
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 36 Functional Classification
Page 64 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnPinellas Trail
Existing Sidewalks
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 37 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 65
Existing Conditions
Transit
Bus Routes and Stops
The Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) is the public transit provider for Pinellas County. PSTA contracts with Jolley Trolley, which operates trolley routes. Between PSTA and Jolley Trolley, four routes serve the North Greenwood CRA. These routes are described below and displayed in Figure 38.
Jolley Trolley Coastal Route
The route is operated by Jolley Trolley Transportation of Clearwater, Inc. (Jolley Trolley) through a contract with PSTA and multiple funding partners. It provides hourly service seven days a week from approximately 8:30am to 11:00pm Sunday through Thursday and from 8:30am to 1pm Friday and Saturday. It connects downtown Clearwater, Dunedin, Palm Harbor, and Tarpon Springs. Within the CRA, it runs along North Myrtle Avenue and shares stops with PSTA bus routes. The trolley has an integrated fare system with PSTA.
PSTA Route 61
Route 61 operates at 60 minute frequencies seven days a week from approximately 5:30am to 8:30pm Monday through Saturday and 7:20am to 6:30pm on Sundays. The route travels between Indian Rocks Shopping Plaza through Largo, Downtown Clearwater, and Dunedin to Countryside Mall. Within the CRA, it runs along North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. PSTA Route 66 Limited Stop (66L)
Route 66L operates Monday through Friday with limited morning and evening stops to supplement the Jolley Trolley Coastal Route. It provides connection between Downtown Clearwater and Tarpon Springs. Within the CRA, it runs along North Fort Harrison Avenue.
PSTA Route 78
Route 78 operates at 30 minute frequencies seven days a week from approximately 6am to 10pm Monday through Saturday and at a 35 minute frequency from approximately 8am to 8pm on Sundays. The route provides connections between Downtown Clearwater, Dunedin, and the Countryside Mall area. Within the CRA, the route travels along North Myrtle Avenue, Palmetto Street, and North Betty Lane.
Jolley Trolley Bus
Page 66 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveNMyrtleAveKings HwySunset Point Rd
Palmetto St
N Betty LnStops
61
66L
78
Jolley Trolley
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 38 PSTA Routes and Stops
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 67
Existing Conditions
Utilities and Infrastructure
Parking
Automobile parking was not identified as a deficiency in the CRA. Several relatively large public parking lots exist within the area, including the Seminole Boat Ramp, North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex North Greenwood Library, and Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex. Most commercial businesses and public uses have limited off-street parking available for their parcel use. Limited areas of on-street parking spaces (e.g., North Fort Harrison Avenue at Atrium Park, Phillies Drive, Eldridge Street) are available for commercial businesses in the CRA. On-street parking is permitted on most residential streets.
Stormwater Infrastructure
Stormwater infrastructure is present throughout most of the CRA, with gaps in some residential areas. Existing city stormwater drainage is all underground, whereas open ditch drains are Pinellas County facilities. The network of stormwater infrastructure is shown in Figure 39.
Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary sewer (wastewater) in the CRA flows into the Marshall Street Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) located in the CRA along Stevenson Creek. The only gaps in the wastewater network shown in Figure 40 are within the unincorporated enclaves.
The city continues to make improvements to the WRF, including the past replacement of the influent pump station and associated odor control. The city is currently preparing a Wastewater Resource Facility Master Plan for multiple facilities, including the Marshall Street WRF.
Potable Water
The CRA has full potable water coverage with no gaps in the network. The water mains within and surrounding the CRA are shown in Figure 41. The groundwater source for Clearwater is the Floridan Aquifer. This aquifer is a major source of groundwater in the southeastern United States and underlies all of Florida.
Reclaimed Water
The use of reclaimed water helps the city to preserve high-quality drinking water by providing an alternative source of irrigation water. This allows for the preservation of the supply of potable drinking water. Reclaimed water mains, shown on Figure 42, exist within the CRA along North Osceola Avenue, Seminole Street, North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, Fairmont Street, Overbrook Avenue, and Palmetto Street. Natural Gas
Natural gas service within the CRA is provided by Clearwater Gas System, which is owned and operated by the City of Clearwater. Natural gas mains are present below nearly all of the roadways within the CRA, shown on Figure 43, providing reliable energy for residential, commercial, and industrial uses.
Page 68 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnStorm Pipe
Underdrain
Ditch
Stormwater Pond
Swale
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 39 Stormwater Infrastructure
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 69
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnGravity Main
Force Main
Private Mains
Lift Stations
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 40 Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure
Page 70 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnCity Potable Water Main
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 41 Potable Water Infrastructure
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 71
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnReclaimed Water
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 42 Reclaimed Water Infrastructure
Page 72 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnGas Main
Unincorporated Areas
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 43 Natural Gas Infrastructure
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 73
Existing Conditions
Law, Fire/EMS, and Code Enforcement Activity
Law Enforcement
Types of Reported Criminal Activity
The City of Clearwater Police Department provided criminal activity data from 2015 to 2021. Figures 44 and 45 illustrate this data by crime type and severity. Crime and the perception of crime were identified as significant concerns in the community. In general, crime has decreased in most categories measured over this period as shown in Figure 46. This decrease corresponds with national trends and the Clearwater Police Department’s 2017-2022 Strategic Plan. While trends have been moving in the right direction, the North Greenwood CRA Plan aims to reduce crime and address its root causes. Figure 44 Non-Violent Crime by Type and Year Figure 45 Violent Crime by Type and Year
Location of Reported Criminal Activity
Based on the location data of reported incidents from 2015 to 2021, several areas stand out as having high concentrations of criminal activity. These high-incident areas are the intersections of North Betty Lane and Overlea Street, North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Palmetto Street, and Marshall Street and North Myrtle Avenue as displayed in Figure 47. This crime data is reported with approximated locations, so positions displayed on the map are generalized. The North Betty Lane concentration correlates with North Betty Lane Park. Activation of this and other under-utilized spaces would increase “eyes on the street,” helping to deter criminal activity.
0 200 400 600 800 1000
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2015
Burglary Disturbance Drug Call Drunk Driver
Shoplifting Theft Weapons Violation
0 20 40 60 80
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2015
Assault Carjacking Homicide Robbery
Sexual Battery
0 200 400 600 800 1000
2016
2017
2018
2019
20202021
2015
Burglary Disturbance Drug Call Drunk Driver
Shoplifting Theft Weapons Violation
0 20 40 60 80
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2015
Assault Carjacking Homicide Robbery
Sexual Battery
Page 74 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 46 Crime Incident Trends by Year
400
600
800
1000
40
60
80
100
Non-Violent
Non-ViolentLinear Trend
Violent
ViolentLinear Trend
Non-Violent Crime IncidentsViolent Crime IncidentsClearwater Police Vehicle
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 75
Existing Conditions
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnHigh Occurance
Low Occurance
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 47 Crime Hotspots
Page 76 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Fire / EMS
The Finding of Necessity Study included an evaluation of city fire and EMS calls provided for 2019. The data were normalized to report the number of calls for service per 1,000 population and the total number of calls within the study's subareas and citywide. Based on this data, the citywide call rate was 211.2 calls per 1,000 population. The city-approved North Greenwood CRA Plan limits include only the Downtown, North Fort Harrison/Osceola, and North Greenwood Core subareas. Table 9 shows that call rates in these subareas exceed the citywide rate of 211.2 calls per 1,000 population.
The data shows that while the subareas are a small percentage of the overall city population, their call rates are disproportionately high when compared to their population.
Subarea Call Rate per 1,000 Population
Downtown 467.4
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 876.4
North Greenwood Core 275.3Source: City of Clearwater Fire/EMS, Finding of Necessity Study
Table 9 Study Area Fire/EMS Call Rate
Subarea % of City-wide Calls % of Citywide Population
Downtown 4%1.7%
North Fort Harrison/Osceola 1%0.2%
North Greenwood Core 6%4.3%Source: City of Clearwater Fire/EMS, Finding of Necessity Study
Table 10 Study Area Fire/EMS Calls Proportional Allocation
Fire Station #51
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 77
Existing Conditions
Code Enforcement & Building Maintenance
The City of Clearwater Code Compliance and Building Divisions work together with citizens and the business community to make the city a safe, healthy, and economically viable place to live and work. The Divisions seek to attain compliance with various community standards within the Community Development Code, including the Clearwater Housing and Unsafe codes. The following figures display code violations within the North Greenwood CRA between 2015 and 2021.
Figure 48 depicts the top five categories of code violations, most of which pertain to the maintenance of vegetation and yards in general and are enforced by the Code Compliance Division. Figure 49 displays the top five violations related to structures on a property, enforced by the Building Division.
Generalized concentrations of recorded violations are displayed in Figure 50. These concentrations are visible north of Seminole Street between Vine and Pennsylvania Avenues, along North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue between Palm Bluff and Tangerine Streets, and east of North Betty Lane between Overlea and Springdale Streets. These concentrations correspond with primarily single-family residential areas.
Figure 48 Top Five Code Violation Categories
Figure 49 Top Five Structural Violation Categories
top 5 violation categories VegetationOvergrowthUnmaintainedRight-of-Way
Yards and Landscaping
Exterior Storage
InoperableVehicle
32%
20%18%
16%14%
Top 5 structure violation categories
Doors and Windows
Exterior Surfaces
Roof/RoofElements
Electrical Systems
Interior Floors,Walls, Ceilings
33%
26%
23%
9%9%
top 5 violation categories
VegetationOvergrowth
UnmaintainedRight-of-Way
Yards and Landscaping
Exterior Storage
InoperableVehicle
32%
20%18%
16%
14%
Top 5 structure violation categories
Doors and Windows
Exterior Surfaces
Roof/RoofElements
Electrical Systems
Interior Floors,Walls, Ceilings
33%
26%
23%
9%9%
Page 78 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveJones St
Eldridge St
NOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunsetPoint Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnDense
Sparse
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 50 Code Enforcement Hotspots
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 79
Existing Conditions
2.6 Public Engagement and Outreach
Public engagement was conducted throughout the planning process to gather input from residents, business owners, and community organizations through topic education and informal communications. Engagement and outreach build community consensus for project preferences that will provide a better understanding of community needs, the marketplace, and similar communities to guide the development of the CRA Plan and its recommendations.
Public Outreach Methods
Property Owner and Occupant Mailing
A direct property notification was conducted in January 2022 to announce the project and direct residents and tenants to the dedicated project website for background and meeting information. A total of 3,900 direct mailings were delivered.
Project Website
A project website was created at www.ngreenwoodcra.com and may continue as a city maintained CRA website in the future. Project background information, email contacts, polls, and announcements for upcoming workshops and surveys were hosted on the site.
Community Survey
An online survey was posted to the project website to collect public responses in June 2022. The survey sought participant responses on a similar exercise conducted during Workshop #3.
Faith Leadership Community Roundtable
A Faith Leadership Community Roundtable meeting was held on June 15, 2022, at the Curtis Museum with more than ten pastors or faith leaders, five members of the public, and five city staff and consultant team in attendance. Among the participants were representatives of several major North Greenwood churches and the CRA Plan Steering Committee. The purpose of this meeting was to engage the local faith community leaders in a brief education on the CRA Plan project and solicit their ideas on issues affecting the neighborhood, their perspectives as major landowners, and the potential for coordination and partnership in implementation strategies.
Image of a Postcard for the North Greenwood CRA
Page 80 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
The Roundtable engaged in an in-depth discussion that included issues affecting the faith community, both in rebounding from reduced attendance during the pandemic and how the faith community could assist in the implementation of the CRA Plan. The participants voiced commitment to assist in public-private partnerships, access to facilities, increased support of workforce training initiatives, and providing mentorship. Some of the major takeaways from the conversation include:
• Efforts of the Coalition should be built upon• The continued need to identify strategies that lower recidivism and increase affordable housing• Need for social venues/facilities– rotate jazz, then gospel, etc.• Need to address vacant and unmaintained properties• Need to enforce code enforcement fines• Need to go beyond the surface and address the root of the problems • Importance of youth development, job training, and trade school programs• Churches are a potential partner in Pre-K to adult education programs• Urgent need to address the poverty level• Churches own many vacant or underutilized properties that can be repurposed• Variety of housing units needed, both public and private• Gentrification is the greatest threat • Potential to have individual church visions and missions come together to further the community vision with one voice
Outreach Events
Direct project outreach occurred at scheduled community events during the CRA Plan process. Early opportunities were limited due to ongoing pandemic distancing requirements. However, members of the consultant team attended, provided handout information, directed persons to website, and registered attendees at the following events to broaden the community’s understanding of the project.
• Night at the Library - February 25, 2022• Juneteenth Celebration - June 18, 2022
Youth Engagement Event
On June 30, 2022, city staff hosted an engagement event to ensure the future generation has a voice in this planning process. Middle school-aged attendees of the North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex’s summer program were invited to share their perspectives on the community. The following questions were asked to generate an interactive discussion:
• Where do you like to go and why?• Where do you avoid / dislike?• Do you think you’ll stay in North Greenwood after high school?• What’s missing or what could be changed?• What would you like to see in the neighborhood / If you had a million dollars to spend here, what would you spend it on?
The discussion spurred from these questions focused on a few key topics. The North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex was discussed in detail. Attendees expressed that the recreation complex is a place they feel safe, welcomed, and have fun with their friends. They wished to see it expanded or have an additional center in the neighborhood. They expressed the desire for more capacity, allowing more kids to join programs, reducing the waitlist for summer programs, and allowing those who have been removed to receive a second chance. They also expressed the desire to have more sports facilities of varying types both at the recreation complex and throughout the neighborhood.
The attendees' most significant concerns with the neighborhood were safety and cleanliness. Many shared that they do not always feel safe in the neighborhood, mentioning criminal activities and violence. They also expressed that there was too much litter throughout the area, and it would benefit from more garbage cans.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 81
Existing Conditions
When asked if they would stay in the neighborhood after high school graduation, several varying answers were provided. In general, younger participants expressed a strong desire to stay to be near friends and family. Older participants who are closer to graduation tended to say that they plan on leaving to pursue their career and educational goals but hope to return to the neighborhood at some point. Several conveyed they would be more likely to stay in the neighborhood if there were employment opportunities in or nearby North Greenwood.
Other desires mentioned by attendees were:
• Helping and uplifting the homeless population• Increase road safety and reduce crashes• More parks and outdoor sports facilities• Environmental organizations or volunteer opportunities• Affordable housing• Opportunities to be exposed to new technologies
Community Workshops
A series of four community workshops were held throughout the planning process. The meetings were held at the North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex and attended by a mixture of neighborhood residents, business owners, and other stakeholders.
The events were advertised through multiple city social media accounts, a digital message board at the North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Palmetto Street intersection, sign boards along major rights-of-way, and posters at key community building entries. The property owner and physical address post-card mailing discussed in the previous section included an invitation to Workshop #1.
Community Workshop #1
Community Workshop #1 was held on February 24, 2022, and was a great success, with more than 93 members of the public in attendance. Among the attendees were representatives of the North Greenwood Steering Committee, multiple community non-profits, faith-based organizations, business owners, and homeowner associations. The purpose of the first workshop was to answer the question, “Where are we now?”.
Workshop Exercise – SWOT Analysis
Attendees worked in small groups to participate in a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis. Each table held engaging discussions and then reported on what was discussed to the larger gathering. The findings were wide-ranging and addressed many large- and small-scale issues. These issues were incorporated into this North Greenwood CRA Plan’s strategies and fueled the discussion in the following workshops. Participants at a Community Workshop
Page 82 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Workshop #1 Take-Aways
A range of responses was provided through the SWOT analysis. The following responses represent frequently mentioned topics.
Strengths
• North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex• Curtis Museum• Community residents• Greenwood Panthers Football• Stevenson Creek
Weaknesses
• Sidewalks• Housing costs• Drugs• Public amenities• Traffic speed
Opportunities
• Stevenson Creek• Jack Russell Stadium• Old Elk’s Lodge• Trade school• Pinellas Trail development
Threats
• Gentrification• Housing costs• Crime• Drugs• Displacement
Community Workshop #2
Community Workshop #2 was held on April 19, 2022, with more than 65 in attendance. The purpose of this workshop was to answer the question “Where are we going?”.
Workshop Exercise – Neighborhood Framework Mapping
Attendees worked in small groups focused on identifying neighborhood framework conditions. This exercise informed the creation of the Diagrammatic Plan detailed in Chapter 4 Plan Implementation. Participants were encouraged to consider the SWOT results to identify specific locations and potential future strategies to address the concerns they have with them. This exercise was used to synthesize a consensus diagrammatic plan.
Participants at a Community Workshop
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 83
Existing Conditions
Workshop #2 Take-Aways
Table reports provided key topics for each of the five basic elements (Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks), shown in the "Image of The City" by Kevin Lynch on page 102. The following are the most common of the responses provided at the workshop. Paths
• Pinellas Trail• North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue• North Fort Harrison Avenue
Edges
• Stevenson Creek• Clearwater Harbor• CSX Railroad
Districts
• North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue • Stevenson Creek• North Fort Harrison Avenue
Nodes
• North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Palmetto Street• Seminole Street and North Fort Harrison Avenue• North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue
Landmarks
• Curtis Museum• North Ward School• Bridge on Pinellas Trail over Stevenson Creek• Numerous community churches
Community Workshop #3
Community Workshop #3 was held on June 13, 2022, with more than 69 members of the public in attendance. The purpose of this workshop was to answer the question, “Where do we want to go?”.
Workshop Exercise – Community Survey
Attendees participated in a group activity by completing an electronic survey. Attendees were issued Turning Point digital keypads and led through a questionnaire that included demographic, strategy, and vision questions to help shape the CRA Plan. These questions were identical to those asked in the Community Survey. Workshop #3 Take-Aways
The following charts display responses to a selection of the survey questions.
Page 84 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 52 What type of housing units are most needed?
Figure 53 What recreational uses should be along Stevenson Creek?
Parks / Open Space
Streetlights
Sidewalks
Shade Trees
Community Policing
Traffic Calming
Public Parking
Other (Please Specify)
49
26
26
19
18
11
9
6
Workshop 3 Question 1 Workshop 3 Question 2
Any Type that is Affordable
Single-Family
Multifamily Apartments
Du-, Tri-, or Quadplex Units
Multifamily Condo
Accessory Dwelling Units
Micro-Units
Unsure/No Opinion
44
20
16
14
10
3
40
37
Boardwalk
Seating/Viewing
Fishing
Kayak/Canoe Launch
No Additional Access
41
26
3
34
31
Workshop 3 Question 3 Workshop 3 Question 4
Other Challenges
Aging in Place
Homelessness
Gentrification/Displacement
Crime/Drugs
Employment inNeighborhood
Housing Costs
5.9
3.3
2.93
2.88
2.12
4.26
3.92
Parks / Open SpaceStreetlightsSidewalksShade TreesCommunity PolicingTraffic CalmingPublic ParkingOther (Please Specify)49262619181196Workshop 3 Question 1 Workshop 3 Question 2Any Type that is AffordableSingle-FamilyMultifamily ApartmentsDu-, Tri-, or Quadplex UnitsMultifamily CondoAccessory Dwelling UnitsMicro-UnitsUnsure/No Opinion 442016141034037
Boardwalk
Seating/Viewing
Fishing
Kayak/Canoe Launch
No Additional Access
41
26
3
34
31
Workshop 3 Question 3 Workshop 3 Question 4
Other Challenges
Aging in Place
Homelessness
Gentrification/Displacement
Crime/Drugs
Employment inNeighborhood
Housing Costs
5.9
3.3
2.93
2.88
2.12
4.26
3.92
Figure 51 What amenities do you want most in the neighborhood?
Parks / Open Space
Streetlights
Sidewalks
Shade Trees
Community Policing
Traffic Calming
Public Parking
Other (Please Specify)
49
26
26
19
18
11
9
6
Workshop 3 Question 1 Workshop 3 Question 2
Any Type that is Affordable
Single-Family
Multifamily Apartments
Du-, Tri-, or Quadplex Units
Multifamily Condo
Accessory Dwelling Units
Micro-Units
Unsure/No Opinion
44
20
16
14
10
3
40
37
Boardwalk
Seating/Viewing
Fishing
Kayak/Canoe Launch
No Additional Access
41
26
3
34
31
Workshop 3 Question 3 Workshop 3 Question 4
Other Challenges
Aging in Place
Homelessness
Gentrification/Displacement
Crime/Drugs
Employment inNeighborhood
Housing Costs
5.9
3.3
2.93
2.88
2.12
4.26
3.92
Figure 54 What are the biggest challenges facing North Greenwood?
Parks / Open Space
Streetlights
Sidewalks
Shade Trees
Community Policing
Traffic Calming
Public Parking
Other (Please Specify)
49
26
26
19
18
11
9
6
Workshop 3 Question 1 Workshop 3 Question 2
Any Type that is Affordable
Single-Family
Multifamily Apartments
Du-, Tri-, or Quadplex Units
Multifamily Condo
Accessory Dwelling Units
Micro-Units
Unsure/No Opinion
44
20
16
14
10
3
40
37
Boardwalk
Seating/Viewing
Fishing
Kayak/Canoe Launch
No Additional Access
41
26
3
34
31
Workshop 3 Question 3 Workshop 3 Question 4
Other Challenges
Aging in Place
Homelessness
Gentrification/Displacement
Crime/Drugs
Employment inNeighborhood
Housing Costs
5.9
3.3
2.93
2.88
2.12
4.26
3.92
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 85
Existing Conditions
Community Workshop #4
Community Workshop #4 was held on Tuesday, August 2, 2022, with more than 68 members of the public in attendance. The purpose of this workshop was to answer the question, “How do we get there?”.
Workshop Exercise – Strategy Review
Twelve draft people-based strategies for this CRA Plan were presented to workshop participants. Participants were invited to comment, ask questions, or recommend new strategies. After the discussion, participants were given eight tickets to vote for their top strategies.
Workshop Exercise – Infill Development Mapping
Participants were asked to complete a tabletop exercise identifying locations they would like infill housing to occur and what intensity of development they would prefer. They were provided with a tabletop map with major community features and current vacant parcels.
Workshop #4 Take-Aways
The following list shows the workshop participants' top-five people-based strategies as presented or developed during the dialogue.
• Strategy A (73 Votes) - Increase home ownership through funding support of housing development grants, low-interest loans, financial literacy education, or other programs as appropriate to protect existing and expand home ownership.• Strategy L (56 Votes) - Work with partners to reduce crime through youth outreach, education, and youth-to-youth mentorship.• Strategy B (52 Votes) - Establish grant funding opportunities to assist current homeowners to make life / safety improvements to remain in their homes.
• Strategy F (43 Votes) - Work with partners, including the Pinellas County School District, to leverage the planned middle school “Innovation” program delivery and Pinellas Technical (P-Tech) adult education program expansion at the Clearwater Intermediate School campus for skilled workforce training, youth-to-youth mentorship, and increased year-round employment opportunities.• Strategy M (43 Votes) - Attendees recommended adding a new strategy focused on early childhood development and childcare.
The Infill Development exercise garnered a large variety of responses, but a general pattern emerged among the exercise groups. The trends in the expressed preferences included:
• Protect the single-family scale of the center of the residential neighborhood (roughly from North Myrtle Avenue to Clearwater Intermediate School)• Allow accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes in some or all of the single-family areas• Allow medium- or high-density development on larger lots and west of North Myrtle Avenue• Encourage commercial or mixed-use development along North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue• Encourage commercial development along Pinellas Trail
These areas and potential corresponding residential development types are shown in Figure 55 on the following page.
Page 86 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 55 Infill Residential Development
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 87
Existing Conditions
2.7 Existing Conditions Summary
The planning process for the CRA Plan included an extensive community outreach and engagement program with four public workshops, community events, steering and technical committee meetings, and a project website. Information was collected through interactive meeting exercises that questioned participants on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats affecting the community. Participants identified major emphasis areas where key community features exist, and completed online surveys and polls to gauge public opinion on relevant topics, the vision, goals, and strategies. The CRA Plan’s technical analysis included demographics, transportation, public facilities, and infrastructure systems. Based on this analysis, a review of issues and opportunities identified through the public outreach program, implementation strategies were identified with both people- and place-based investments.
The community has been clear in their desire to engage in equitable development that supports neighborhood change in a holistic manner addressing residents’ physical, health, housing, transportation, educational, and employment needs. They are especially concerned about preparing youth to enter the workforce, reducing recidivism rates for current residents, and providing more high wage jobs within the CRA. Affordable housing and preventing displacement as new development occurs is also a primary concern. The existing conditions assessment shows that direct investment in these areas is needed to reduce poverty and support better health outcomes.
Fortunately, the North Greenwood area has many physical and community assets that constitute a strong foundation on which to implement redevelopment strategies. It is situated between Downtown Clearwater and Dunedin and adjacent to Clearwater Harbor near major roadways and the Pinellas Trail. It has no major infrastructure gaps or poor environmental conditions. There are several well maintained city, school, and county recreational, educational, and cultural facilities. There are numerous non-profit organizations that deliver social service, cultural, and recreational programming within the community. The existing conditions analysis found a need to expand access to or make improvements to current public facilities, but there is not a need to build new public buildings or major infrastructure. There is an opportunity to strengthen the capacity of current non-profits to enable them to serve more residents and to encourage greater coordination among current organizations. However, there was not a identified need to establish new community-based organizations.
The primary commercial redevelopment opportunities that emerged were in the Old Bay District on North Fort Harrison Avenue and on the historic North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor. Development in these areas which contain numerous vacant parcels and buildings will add to the tax value without causing direct displacement. As a landowner in the area, the city has the opportunity to play a significant role in catalyzing the revitalization of the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor in a way that meets the community’s desire to bring back this corridor as a center for black-owned businesses. There are less existing opportunities for large residential developments, outside of mixed use projects in the Old Bay District. There is a need to repair and preserve the existing single-family housing stock which is over 50 years old. New housing will be obtained through infill on vacant lots and partnerships with small scale housing on publicly-owned sites, like the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center site. Infill design guidelines and historic preservation will be useful tools to preserve the community’s physical character and sense of place.
Page 88 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Attracting and retaining businesses and providing affordable housing will require changes to the urban form of the CRA. These changes could result in displacement. The existing conditions clearly showed that low- and moderate-income renters, particularly the 16% that are transit dependent, are vulnerable to displacement. The majority of residents in North Greenwood are cost burdened and are also vulnerable to displacement as property values and costs of living continue to rise. Ensuring equitable redevelopment requires that the plan is implemented in a way that minimizes or prevents negative impacts on vulnerable populations. One example of how equity is maintained is by keeping neighborhood-based recreation centers, library, schools, and businesses so that residents can utilize these services without access to a car.
North Greenwood is well positioned for revitalization and to turn around decades of persistent poverty. The city can build on its past investments in facilities and infrastructure by shifting to an expanded focus of investing in people and organizations to increase educational attainment, attract high wage jobs, and improve public health. Additional investments to reduce the cost burden of housing and strengthen local cultural and civic organizations will keep residents in their homes and maintain North Greenwood’s historic legacy as a vibrant black community. Strong partnerships between government entities, the private sector, and the community will be fundamental to success.
Former North Ward Elementary School
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 89
Existing Conditions
Page intentionally left blank
3. Vision, Goals, & Redevelopment Policies
3.1 Vision | 3.2 Goals & Objectives | 3.3 Redevelopment Policies
Page 92 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
3.1 Vision
The CRA Plan recognizes the need for a bold and committed approach to the future. Many of the underlying blighted area conditions are large in scale and have been created over many decades. It is expected that improving them will take time. Sustained public and private actions will be necessary over the 20-year planning horizon to increase affordable housing, improve economic development and employment, improve mobility, and eliminate the pervasive effects that poverty has had on North Greenwood. As such, the CRA Plan calls for actions that will significantly change the conditions of the neighborhood and will move the area toward greater economic independence.
The CRA Plan has been developed using a combination of good planning practice and public involvement with a strong emphasis on balancing the economic, environmental, and community quality of life needs of the CRA’s current and future residents. It identifies substantial investments in people- and place-based improvements. It is anticipated that the city will want the CRA to self-finance future implementation projects from the reinvestment of future collected TIF funds within the CRA. The reinvestment of TIF funds within the CRA will reduce the blighted area conditions identified in the Finding of Necessity Study and will create a higher rate of taxable value return to both the CRA and the city, particularly after the CRA sunsets.
The vision statement was prepared through the planning process in community engagement and outreach. It represents the consensus received and should be used as a guidance statement for future implementation actions.
North Greenwood will flourish as a vibrant community where social and economic equity is prioritized to eliminate poverty and enhance the quality of life for all. The success of North Greenwood will be achieved through people-based solutions, academic excellence, the improvement of existing infrastructure, and the creation of new spaces that will foster a thriving and sustainable future.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 93
Vision, Goals, & Redevelopment Policies
3.2 Goals & Objectives
The redevelopment will be guided by several overarching redevelopment goals. While many of the recommended redevelopment goals are large in scope, a great deal of thought has been put into their feasibility or ability to implement. All recommended goals are implementable. Objectives have been developed based on the data captured through the Finding of Necessity Study and Chapter 2 Existing Conditions. This plan has created SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Timebound) objectives based on available data. In cases where data was not available, CRA staff should create updated SMART objectives as part of the implementation process.
Goal 1: Public Safety
Strengthen relationships between residents, neighborhood organizations and public safety providers to improve public safety.
Objectives:
• Reduce crime committed by youth ages 16-25 by 50% from 2021 to 2043.• Reduce fire and EMS calls to at or below the citywide call rate per 1,000 population by 2031.• Reduce the top five code compliance violations to at or below the citywide level by 2043.• Reduce the top five building code violations to at or below the citywide level by 2043.
Goal 2: Mobility
Increase the safety of and access to active forms of transportation.
Objectives:
• Identify the primary causes of conflicts involving pedestrians and bicyclists in the CRA and develop a plan to reduce them.• Increase the number of residents using active transportation (walking, bicycling, transit) in the CRA.• Encourage increased ridership on the Pinellas Trail.
Goal 3: Poverty Reduction
Increase access to high paying jobs for the residents of the North Greenwood CRA both within and outside of the area through workforce development, business assistance programs, and support for entrepreneurs.
Objectives:
• Increase the employment density above the 2022 measure by 2043. • Decrease the unemployment rate below the 2022 measure by 2043.• Decrease the percent of households below the poverty level by 2043.• Increase the median household income to match or exceed the citywide median income by 2043.• Reduce the percent of area qualified for CDBG.• Increase job placement and job retention rate for ex-offenders returning to North Greenwood.• Reduce recidivism rates for ex-offenders living in North Greenwood.• Improve transit access to education and employment centers.
Page 94 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 6: Invest in Youth
Provide opportunities for youth in North Greenwood to live healthy and economically secure lives.
Objective:
• Increase the supply of early childhood education providers who can deliver quality education programs for ages 0 – 5. • Achieve a senior graduation rate of 90% for all high school seniors in the CRA.• Provide opportunities for afterschool and year-round employment for youth.• Develop apprenticeship programs that prepare youth for careers in Pinellas County’s targeted industries.• Identify partnerships and programs where the faith community can lead youth initiatives.
3.3 Redevelopment Policies
Community revitalization is a long-term process that requires responsiveness and adaptability to changing conditions. While the vision and goals will remain stable throughout the 20-year plan period, the objectives and strategies are likely to change based on new information. The redevelopment policies are designed to apply to strategy implementation as well as land redevelopment. They should be used to prioritize the timing of redevelopment projects, financial investments, and the kinds of partnerships the CRA will undertake to implement plan goals.
Goal 4: Housing Affordability
Provide safe and affordable housing options for residents at all stages of life allowing them to age in place.
Objective:
• Reduce the percent of households that are housing cost burdened to below the 2022 percentage by 2043.• Reduce the number of vacant lots through construction of new residential development that is compatible with the character of the community.• Increase the amount and types of affordable housing.• Increase existing home ownership rates.• Reduce the amount of people experiencing homelessness.
Goal 5: Quality of Life
Sustain a high quality of life through community engagement, access to recreational opportunities, celebrating the unique culture of North Greenwood, improving public health, and protecting the environment.
Objective:
• Preserve and expand the community’s historic and cultural resources.• Provide increased access to the city and county’s cultural, recreational, and educational facilities.• Reduce the percentage of residents living with preventable, chronic health conditions.• Coordinate community engagement efforts to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of plan implementation.• Build public infrastructure that protects the environment and improves health outcomes for residents.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 95
Vision, Goals, & Redevelopment Policies
Racial Equity & Co-Creation
We recognize that people of color have been disproportionally impacted by poverty, CRA investments will be intentionally designed to improve outcomes for people of color. The faith community, Clearwater Urban Leadership Coalition, the school system, and many other organizations have worked for a long time in North Greenwood for the betterment of the neighborhood. Staff commits to collaborating with the community to create new programs, redevelop vacant properties, and determine investment levels in each goal area.
Implementing at the Intersection
We recognize that complex problems require collaborative solutions and that achieving the recommended objectives for one goal area, ex. Public Safety, may be found through solutions in another goal area, ex. Quality of Life. Staff will identify and sustain partnerships and programs that fulfill multiple goals within the organization and with external partners.
Aging in Place
The community expressed a strong desire to “age in place”. Staff will implement strategies that provide housing and transportation choices that serve all phases of life.
Building Community Capacity
Investment strategies will directly benefit the residents, non-profit organizations, and businesses that currently exist in the CRA. Staff should identify a neighborhood provider first, before seeking partners outside the district to implement programs.
We recognize that the government cannot do this work alone. The private sector will be an important partner to help bring the North Greenwood vision to life.
Evaluate & Adapt
Every implementation strategy should answer the questions, “Who are we targeting for this strategy and what outcomes do we want for them?” Staff should collect data on the efficiency and effectiveness of plan expenditures as part of the CRA annual reporting process and adapt as needed to meet plan goals and objectives.
Vacant Land Redevelopment
The CRA will prioritize the use of publicly owned vacant lots in residential areas for affordable housing. The CRA will prioritize the use of publicly owned vacant lots in commercial and industrial areas for employers in target industries. Infill construction should be compatible with the current community character. The portion of the CRA known as the Old Bay District is governed by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The character and standards of the Downtown District take precedent.
Housing
Grant programs will prioritize keeping existing residents in their homes through funding for addressing property maintenance and building code issues and reducing visual blight. Programs should provide a balance of rental and home ownership opportunities.
Public Safety
The plan recognizes that sending more people to jail does not increase long term public safety. Public safety officials will prioritize their efforts to building relationships with young adults ages 16-25 and returning citizens to deter criminal behavior. Program funding should be directed to identified “hot spots” for crime and code enforcement.
Annexation
The city should work to annex properties in the unincorporated areas to provide standardized service delivery, especially sanitary sewer service, throughout the CRA area.
4. Plan Implementation
4.1 Overview | 4.2 TIF Projections | 4.3 Funding Recommendations4.4 Diagrammatic Plan & Area Descriptions | 4.5 Plan Implementation
Page 98 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
4.1 Overview
This chapter provides an overview of the sources of funding, redevelopment opportunities, and implementation partners for this plan. It also recommends strategies to meet the goals and objectives in Chapter 3. The Community Redevelopment Agency staff will take the lead role in coordinating the efforts of the city departments and community organizations working on plan implementation. They also prepare funding and program recommendations for consideration by the Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees. Many of the recommendations in this plan are outside of the typical services offered by the City of Clearwater and require forming new partnerships and approaches to service delivery.
4.2 TIF Projections
The creation of a new community redevelopment area requires the establishment of a companion redevelopment trust fund used to collect, hold, and disburse the tax increment that grows (if redevelopment is occurring) from the established base year through the life of the CRA Plan. It is the intent to use 2022 as the base year of this plan with a 20-year planning period ending in 2043. Any increase in taxable value over the base year, referred to as “tax increment funds” or “TIF” is collected from the city and county and distributed to the redevelopment trust fund on an annual basis. State law requires that monies in the trust fund are used to implement the strategies and projects identified in the CRA Plan and within the community redevelopment area.
The purpose of estimating future tax increment is to identify financial gaps between the anticipated increase in tax revenues generated by new development and the costs of implementing the plan’s redevelopment strategies. Plan implementation occurs as soon as the CRA Plan is adopted. The generation of a significant amount of increased tax revenues can take several years. A mixed-use redevelopment project may take anywhere from 2-4 years to move from concept, to zoning entitlement, to permitting, to construction, and then added to the tax roll. Another consideration is that there are plan recommendations that may increase an individual’s income improving their economic condition that does not increase the taxable value of a property. Those types of successes are not reflected in the TIF projection table. Table 11 includes a 20-year projection, using 2021 as a base year, of total taxable values, total tax increment values, and total TIF revenues collected. These projections are built on the assumptions that the city and the county will maintain their current millage rates (5.8850 and 4.7398 respectively). The projections do not include special tax exemptions.
The city and county will contribute 95% of the tax increment. The county can choose to contribute less than 95% through a process which is described in detail later in this section.
Redevelopment of vacant infill lots and small commercial properties in the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor will occur slowly and at a small scale requiring public subsidy. The city estimates a yearly increase of 3% in taxable value to reflect smaller scale new construction and renovations.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 99
Plan Implementation
The real estate market is at a peak and double-digit growth in the value of single-family homes in this area is not anticipated. There has been a significant amount of land assembly by the private sector in the Old Bay District and it is not anticipated additional land assembly on that scale in other areas of the North Greenwood CRA. The city anticipates $100 million in new taxable value to be added between years 6 and 12 predominately in the Old Bay District. This is shown as a 4-6.5% increase in taxable value in years 6-12 in addition to the base increase of 3%.Based on the plan recommendations, large parcels of land and buildings that are currently owned by public entities and non-profits will be improved, but will remain tax exempt to provide affordable housing, youth development, and other cultural programs. The North Greenwood CRA is intended to begin with a year one base year of 2022; however, Pinellas County certified data for 2022 was not available at the time of writing, therefore 2021 taxable value has been used. The taxable value of the CRA in year one (2021) is $193,652,086. Using the estimates of yearly increase, the taxable value of the CRA in year 2042 is estimated to be $496,250,244. This will result in an estimated total tax increment payment (funds available to spend on plan implementation) of $28,650,846 with $12,781,349 from the county and $15,869,497 from the city. The estimated TIF payments begin to exceed $300,000 in year five which would allow the CRA to begin to invest in larger projects. This is an estimate for planning purposes and actual annual taxable growth will be different and based upon actual market conditions.
Tax increment is one source of revenue and subject to several state and local restrictions. This plan identifies additional sources of revenue to support plan implementation. State of Florida redevelopment statues (Ch. 163) restrict the use of TIF funds to activities that directly support the redevelopment of property to preserve or increase the supply of affordable housing, community policing, and blight reduction. The county adopted Ordinance 21-48 in 2021, regulating the creation of new community redevelopment areas and the use of tax increment funds. The ordinance establishes county priorities and requires tax increment payments to be used towards affordable housing, economic development and employment, and mobility initiatives. In order to maintain the
Housing on Marshall Street
full (95%) contribution of county TIF, a minimum of 50% of the total TIF revenue, just over $14 million, must be used in the county priority areas. The CRA is required to develop revenue projections as part of the budgeting process and to report on all TIF expenditures by project category on an annual basis to the county and state governments.
Page 100 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Base Year Plus 1 Year 5 Year 10 Year 15 Year 20
City Millage Rate 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850
County Millage Rate 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 EstimatedTotalProjection BaseYear TaxableValue
Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year
2021 2022 2026 2031 2036 2041
District FY22 FY23 FY27 FY32 FY37 FY42 FY23 to FY42
North Greenwood - Tax Year 2021 193,652,086
Total Value Change: %3.00%3.00%9.00%3.00%3.00%
Total Taxable Value 193,652,086 199,461,648.58 224,495,842.73 308,734,685.58 428,069,819.78 496,250,244.06
Tax Increment Value 5,809,562.58 30,843,756.73 115,082,599.58 234,417,733.78 302,598,158.06
Total Value Change: $ 5,809,562.58 6,538,713.87 25,491,854.77 12,468,053.00 14,453,890.60
County Tax Increment Payment 95% 26,159.36 138,883.58 518,195.08 1,055,538.52 1,362,542.01 12,781,349.42
City Tax Increment Payment 95% 32,479.81 172,439.73 643,398.04 1,310,570.95 1,691,750.65 15,869,496.88
Grand Total 58,639.17 311,323.31 1,161,593.12 2,366,109.46 3,054,292.66 28,650,846.30
Table 11 TIF Projections
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 101
Plan Implementation
4.3 Funding Recommendations
There are two primary sources of funding identified for plan implementation - TIF revenue and federal ARPA funds. Tables 12 and 13 show how the plan recommends allocating funding by goals for ARPA and by the county's priority categories for TIF revenue. The city has allocated $5 million of ARPA funding that must be allocated by the end of 2024 and spent by the end of 2026. ARPA funds are prioritized for direct poverty reduction activities.
As an area with an Urban Revitalization designation, the North Greenwood CRA will receive a base contribution of 70% of the county TIF revenues. To receive the remaining 25%, the city must commit to spending 50% of all (city and county) TIF revenues in three priority areas as described in Section 2.4. This is just over $14 million. Because there are greater restrictions on how TIF funds can be used, it has been primarily reserved for programs that would address housing affordability and creation of employment opportunities, consistent with the county’s priorities.
The city has general funds allocated to city operations and capital improvements in this area. CRA staff should work with local non-profits to obtain additional funds through private and public grants.
TIF Expenditure Priorities
In 2021, Pinellas County adopted new policies governing the use of TIF funds in CRAs to align expenditures of county TIF with its comprehensive plan. The North Greenwood CRA will receive a base contribution of 70% of the County TIF revenues, and can receive the remaining 25% if it commits to spending 50% of all (city and county) TIF revenues in the three priority areas. This is just over $14 million. There are three county priority areas which are briefly described below.
Recommended TIF Expenditures 2023-2043
Category Amount
Affordable Housing $13 million
Economic Development & Employment $9.5 million
Mobility $2 million
CRA Administration $4 million
Total:$28.5 million
Recommended ARPA Funds by Goal and Redevelopment Sites
Goal 1: Public Safety $500,000
Goal 2: Mobility $100,000
Goal 3: Poverty Reduction $2,300,000
Goal 4: Housing Affordability $450,000
Goal 5: Quality of Life $400,000
Goal 6: Invest in Youth $950,000
Redevelopment Sites $300,000
Total:$5,000,000
Table 12 Recommended TIF Expenditures
Table 13 Recommended ARPA Expenditures
Affordable Housing: Rehabilitation, Preservation, and Creation of Housing
Affordable housing funds must address income-restricted affordable housing units and prevent displacement for households making less than 120% Area Median Income (AMI). This includes rehabilitation of income-restricted affordable housing units, development of small-scale infill units compatible with existing residential areas, site preparation work, and loan assistance programs for low-income homeowners. This funding could also be used toward mixed-income developments. The focus is not on creating larger scale housing development, but on providing new housing that is in character with the existing neighborhood fabric.
Page 102 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Economic Development and Employment: Increase in Quality Employment
Increase quality employment opportunities, particularly in the county target industries. This includes site preparation, infrastructure improvements to support redevelopment of a site to attract target industries, and relocation of site residents and businesses to facilitate a capital improvement project. Mobility
Improve transit, walking, and biking options and access to transit. This includes capital investments for intermodal facilities, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking connected to public transportation.
4.4 Diagrammatic Plan & Area Descriptions
Diagrammatic Plan
Florida Statutes require a diagrammatic plan to be included in the CRA Plan. Workshop #2 participants were provided a background introduction to Kevin Lynch’s – “Image of The City” five basic elements of wayfinding (e.g., Path, Edge, Landmark, District, and Node). These elements provided an organizational technique for participants to map and describe major emphasis areas in North Greenwood. This interactive process was a transparent method to collect broad community comment that was then synthesized into a consensus diagrammatic plan.
The workshop participants’ identification of key locations for the five basic elements provided a pattern of development. Several reoccurring comments included the importance of North Greenwood’s history, its people, and the importance of having access to local businesses on North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. The success of neighborhood schools, library, museums, and the number of local churches that helped to create a cultural framework was seen as being critically important, as well as the physical routes through the neighborhood.
“Image of The City” Elements by Kevin Lynch
Emphasis Areas
The diagrammatic plan shown in Figure 56 includes specific place-based emphasis areas where the highest concentration of responses from Workshop #2 participants occurred. The diagrammatic plan used main community elements to organize emphasis areas.
Major and minor roadway corridors, the Pinellas Trail, land uses, and specific comments heard during the process were used to identify generalized emphasis areas that captured the highest concentration of wayfinding responses by participants. These response concentrations reinforced the emphasis area’s importance to the community and included potential opportunities where redevelopment strategies may be calibrated to the specific location and the identified needs. Table 14 at the end of this chapter summarizes recommended land use changes and specific redevelopment projects by emphasis area.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 103
Plan Implementation
Figure 56 Diagrammatic Plan
Page 104 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area A: North Ward Elementary School / Seminole Boat Ramp Area
General Characteristics
This area is centered around the high visibility intersection of North Fort Harrison Avenue and Seminole Street. The North Ward Elementary School was a former Pinellas County school property that was purchased by the city in 2019 and historically landmarked by the State of Florida due to its importance to Black/African American culture and architectural features. The school was in operation from 1915 to 2009. The city will be seeking a development partner for an adaptive reuse project.
The city’s Seminole Boat Ramp is a highly used public trailered boat launch that was improved in 2018 following recommendations contained within the North Marina Area Master Plan. Also in the area are the Francis Wilson Playhouse, a performing arts center, and the Clearwater Garden Club building. The recent completion of the Marina Bay 880 private mid-rise condominium project represents increasing private development interest in this area.
The area is regulated by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Development Standards. The high amount of vacant properties adjacent to the area represents the potential for larger catalytic redevelopment projects that could provide increased benefit to the CRA for housing options, community supportive retail, and increased future tax increment funds generation.
Community input received during the planning process included support for protecting the historic building through adaptive reuse, the inclusion of higher-density residential product types in the surrounding area, and improved mobility connections throughout the area.
Francis Wilson Playhouse
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 105
Plan Implementation
10
Nicholson St
Seminole St
Eldridge St N Fort Harrison AveNOsceolaAveEmphasis Area
Francis Wilson Playhouse
North Ward School
10 Seminole Boat Ramp
Zoning Districts
Downtown
Low Medium Density Residential
Preservation
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 57 Emphasis Area A Zoning
Page 106 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area B: North Fort Harrison Avenue / North Myrtle Avenue Corridors
General Characteristics
These two major parallel roadway corridors have the highest average annual daily trip (13k to 18.5k) counts through North Greenwood, linking Downtown Clearwater and Dunedin. The two corridors merge into a single roadway at the Fairmont Street intersection and Atrium Park at the north end of the corridors. The Pinellas Trail crosses North Myrtle Avenue at a pedestrian-activated signal at La Salle Street and runs between the two corridors through the southern half of the area.
Most of the retail and commercial businesses located within the CRA Plan limits are located along North Fort Harrison Avenue and North Myrtle Avenue/Alt US 19. However, both storefront and parcel vacancy contribute to a lack of active foot traffic. The vehicular traffic movements are at higher speeds than posted and do not support a comfortable pedestrian environment.
The Clearwater segment of the Pinellas Trail bisects North Greenwood and has one of the lowest amounts of use in the countywide trail network. It is not routinely used by residents, and current users are provided with limited knowledge or connection with the neighborhood. Increasing bicycle and pedestrian use on the trail could add to local business attraction. While the trail corridor occurs at the rear of many properties, other county locales (e.g., Dunedin, Tarpon Springs, etc.) have demonstrated the community benefit that adjacent businesses can capture with higher numbers of trail users and orientation of businesses to the trail corridor. The ability to easily connect to businesses off of the trail is limited by the existing vehicular guard rail barriers.
The city’s planned reconstruction of North Fort Harrison Avenue will include design changes that will slow traffic and increase pedestrian safety. Forward Pinellas has completed a preliminary Alt US 19 Cultural Corridor report for the corridor that also seeks to increase community identity and connection to arts and cultural opportunities. Both of these proposed projects can help add to the North Greenwood community identity.
Community input received during the planning process included support for increased use along the Pinellas Trail in the commercial business areas, the inclusion of higher-density residential product types in the surrounding area that is scaled to transition to stable single-family neighborhoods, and improved mobility connections throughout the area.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 107
Plan Implementation
3
1
Sunburst Ct
Marshall St
Eldridge St
Jones StN Garden AveNMyrtleAveN Fort Harrison AveEmphasis Area
1 Atrium Park
3 Garden Avenue Park
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Downtown
High Density Residential
Industrial Research and Technology
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
Preservation
Figure 58 Emphasis Area B Zoning Painted Crosswalk at Eldrige Street and North Fort Harrison Avenue
Page 108 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area C: CSX Industrial Area / Armory Area
General Characteristics
The industrial area contains numerous businesses and potential for support and expansion for increased local employment. Existing businesses utilize the public street right-of-way for employee parking, truck delivery, and other services that pose a potential conflict for other users. The potential for an additional pedestrian trail along the CSX railroad line is possible to expand bicycle and pedestrian mobility through this portion of Clearwater. The state-owned Armory property is used by the city’s Parks and Recreation Department for offices and open storage. There is potential for future reuse if city needs for the property change.N MLK Jr AveEldridge St
Emphasis Area
Armory Building
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Downtown
Industrial Research and Technology
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Open Space/ Recreation
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 59 Emphasis Area C Zoning
Community input received during the planning process included support for industrial uses and the desire for increased employment in the area. Lack of public parking for surrounding recreation events and local business employees was identified as an issue. Improvement of on-street parking, co-use of portions of the Armory property, or eventually adaptive re-use of the Armory building if not needed by the city in the future were identified as options.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 109
Plan Implementation
JR
W
Pennsylvania AveN MLK Jr AvePalmetto St
Seminole St
Emphasis Area
North Greenwood Library
J Jack Russell Stadium
W Walter C Campbell Park
R North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Industrial Research and Technology
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
Area D: North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex / North Greenwood Library Area
General Characteristics
The combination of these facilities creates a center point for the neighborhood. Both are tremendous community assets and experience a high level of use. There is a desire for enhanced access to parks and recreational activities throughout North Greenwood and expanded opportunities for young adult (18+) programs. The need for additional event parking was identified during public workshops. This includes regular use at the recreation complex as well as larger team events occurring at the adjacent Jack Russell Stadium and Walter C Campbell Park facilities.
Community input received during the planning process included support for the community uses but sought additional access to fields and facilities through reduced requirements. Lack of public parking for surrounding recreation events was identified as an issue.
Figure 60 Emphasis Area D Zoning
Page 110 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Eldridge Street Right-of-Way North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 111
Plan Implementation
Area E: North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue Corridor
General Characteristics
This is the neighborhood’s traditional local commercial business corridor and generally stretches from Palmetto Street to Carlton Street. There is a high level of vacant parcels and underutilized city ownership properties. The city-owned parcels include community uses that need to remain, including the co-located Suncoast Health Center, Police Substation building, and the Willa Carson Health Center. Portions of the former Elks Lodge property and vacant properties also provide additional corridor surface parking for businesses. The city-owned former Elks Lodge property is scheduled for demolition in the fall of 2022 due to building structural conditions, safety issues, and the presence of asbestos materials that drastically increase the rehabilitation costs. Redevelopment of this parcel and increased pedestrian activity along the corridor are needed. The city-owned parcels represent potential opportunities to activate business and possibly to include additional infill residential use.
Community input received during the planning process included support for the re-emergence of the commercial business as a community feature. The former Elks Lodge was recognized as being neglected and requiring demolition. As one of the larger parcels in the corridor, redevelopment with a mixture of commercial, residential, and community use was supported. Reduced parking requirements or shared common improvements for surrounding businesses were supported to improve business viability.
Tangerine St
Grant St
N MLK Jr AveEmphasis Area
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Institutional
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
North Greenwood CRA
Grant St
Metto St
Figure 61 Emphasis Area E Zoning
Page 112 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area F: Curtis Museum / Cherry Harris Park Area
General Characteristics
The Curtis Museum anchors the north end of the North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue corridor. It occupies the first floor of the former Pinellas County School District’s Curtis Elementary School. The building is a great example of early 1920’s architecture. The museum is a critically important community cultural feature that needs to be supported and highlighted. The second floor is underutilized due to accessibility limitations. There is the potential for increased adaptive reuse of the upper floor and redevelopment of adjacent vacant parcels with residential or other supportive community uses. Outbuildings on the property house the First Rung program, a 501(C)3 workforce skills training program that has maximized its space.
C
N MLK Jr AveBeckett St
Grant St
N Madison AveEmphasis Area
C Cherry Harris Park
Curtis Museum
Zoning Districts
Commercial
High Density Residential
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 62 Emphasis Area F Zoning
To the north of the museum is Cherry Harris Park. This neighborhood park includes pavilions and a children’s playground. The pavilion is routinely used as a gathering place for residents. The remainder of the emphasis area is zoned for residential use, and existing vacant parcels should be promoted to redevelop with infill residential housing options.
Community input received during the planning process included support for the Curtis Museum and its visibility as an important attraction in the county. The potential for increased activation of the building’s second floor with more museum programming or other uses, such as residential units, was discussed as an option.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 113
Plan Implementation
Area G: Clearwater Intermediate School / Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center / Cemetery Area
General Characteristics
The combination of these properties creates a large public ownership area in the eastern portion of the CRA, north of Palmetto Street, that contains community assets. Pinellas County School District recently announced the newly identified program and campus improvements that will occur at Clearwater Intermediate School in fall 2022. It will be renamed Clearwater Innovation School with a concentration on career academy programs. School District representatives identified that they intend to expand education programs with evening P-Tech (Pinellas Technical College) workforce training programs to increase campus activity in early evenings and expand skills training opportunities for residents. School District representatives mentioned new campus capital improvements and the re-institution of historic Pinellas High School colors (maroon and gold) as a link to the past community. Other cultural and recreational uses in this area include the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center and Phillip Jones Park.
The 2021 rediscovery of the North Greenwood Cemetery along Holt Avenue is being addressed by city and family representatives. The next steps to memorialize and honor the cemetery have not yet been finalized, though it is anticipated that an historical marker will be placed to memorialize the cemetery. Enhancements could include a memorial park or plaza with documentation of the cemetery’s history and linkage to those interned and local families.
Community input received during the planning process included identification that the city’s Marshall Street Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) located along Stevenson Creek emits facility odors that need to be addressed. There is support for the community uses but sought additional access to fields and facilities through reduced requirements. Lack of public parking for surrounding recreation events was identified as an issue.
P
M
Grant St
Beckett St
N Madison AveEmphasis Area
M MLK Jr Community Center
P Phillip Jones Park
Clearwater Intermediate School
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
Preservation
Russell St
Holt AveDouglas AveFigure 63 Emphasis Area G Zoning
Page 114 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area H: Stevenson Creek / Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex Area
General Characteristics
Stevenson Creek is a significant natural amenity that helps create a transition zone between Clearwater and Dunedin. The city has completed the previous dredging of silt, removal of nuisance species, and the installation of shoreline wetland mangrove plantings to improve water quality in the creek. Portions of the unincorporated county residential neighborhoods located north of the creek remain on septic fields and are within the creek watershed. Wastewater nutrients will continue to leach into groundwater that connects to Clearwater Harbor. Future voluntary annexation should be promoted to bring properties into the city jurisdiction and to remove the septic systems through connection to city services.
The Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex is a city-controlled park that is located along the southern shoreline of the creek. Most of its programmed use occurs within the onsite buildings with no orientation to the creek. Protection of these natural resources and expanded recreational uses for residents and visitors could occur with the installation of boardwalks through the mangroves and sidewalks through the upland treed areas with passive park shelters.
Community input received during the planning process included support for the increased recreational access to passive and non-motorized watercraft and opportunities for fishing.
North Betty Lane Park
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 115
Plan Implementation
L
O
B Overlea St
N MLK Jr AveNOsceolaAveN Myrtle AveKings HwySunset Point Rd
Palmetto St N Betty LnEmphasis Area
Fire Station 51
B North Betty Lane Park
O Overbrook Park
L Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex
Zoning Districts
Commercial
Downtown
High Density Residential
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
Office
Open Space/ Recreation
Preservation
North Greenwood CRA
Figure 64 Emphasis Area H Zoning
Page 116 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area I: Calvin A. Hunsinger / Sandy Lane Schools Area
General Characteristics
Located in the northeast corner of the CRA Plan area, the Pinellas County Schools property includes two public schools: Calvin A. Hunsinger, a 109-student K-12 school, and Sandy Lane Elementary, a 340-student PK-5 school. Sandy Lane contains the Conservatory for the Arts and focuses on the arts and arts integration programs.
The school campuses occupy a small portion of the property. Significant oak trees and a potential FEMA floodplain may limit the ability to intensify the property with any new development. However, underutilized portions of the property could be utilized for additional uses if agreeable with Pinellas County Schools. Community input received during the planning process included a high level of support for the schools and recognition that a large number of students walk along Kings Highway and North Betty Lane sidewalks to surrounding residential neighborhoods and that continued importance of good and safe routes were needed. The community identified that additional co-location and access to recreational courts would be great additions to this area. The lack of surrounding public recreational courts was identified as an issue, and the Pinellas County Schools properties were identified as an option.
Calvin A. Hunsinger School
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 117
Plan Implementation
Figure 65 Emphasis Area I Zoning
1
2
Sunset Point Rd
N Betty LnKings HwyEmphasis Area
1 Calvin A Hunsinger School
2 Sandy Lane Elementary School
Zoning Districts
Institutional
Low Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Unincorporated Areas
Sandy Lane Elementary School
Page 118 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Figure 56 Diagrammatic Plan and the subsequent emphasis area descriptions outlined the place-based opportunities in North Greenwood for physical improvement through renovation of current buildings, new construction on vacant or underutilized sites, and land use policies.
Table 14 summarizes those recommendations with a project description, assigned project lead, estimated total cost, funding source, and timeline. The recommended land use, zoning and design standards are intended to prevent displacement and provide opportunities for a variety of housing options that are compatible with existing neighborhood character. The plan has identified two catalytic redevelopment projects – the North Ward School site and the North Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue corridor. It also recommends supporting renovations for the Curtis Museum and Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center with ARPA funding. The plan acknowledges the need for infill development on vacant sites throughout the neighborhood. Community Redevelopment Agency staff will meet with property owners of vacant sites and coordinate development efforts. Since there will not be a significant amount of TIF revenue until after year 10, financial support for infill development is slated to occur in years 2028 and later.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 119
Plan Implementation
Page intentionally left blank
Page 120 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area Wide Recommended Land Use Change and Redevelopment Opportunities
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Continue to prohibit short term rentals P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Limit lot assembly in single-family areas P&D Staff Time General Fund X
Update 1995 Residential Infill Study and establish design guidelines or new zoning district that addresses existing "small" lots and allows additional density to support missing middle housing
P&D Staff Time General Fund X X
Work with owners of small apartment complexes to avoid demolition and encourage preservation of affordable housing units
P&D Staff Time General Fund X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Meet with the owners of vacant properties to develop a strategy for redevelopment CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X
Partner with an organization(s) to redevelop lots in single-family neighborhoods as affordable units CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X
Table 14 Emphasis Area Recommendations
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 121
Plan Implementation
Area Wide Recommended Land Use Change and Redevelopment Opportunities
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to prohibit short term rentals P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Limit lot assembly in single-family areas P&D Staff Time General Fund
Update 1995 Residential Infill Study and establish design guidelines or new zoning district that addresses existing "small" lots and allows additional density to support missing middle housing
P&D Staff Time General Fund
Work with owners of small apartment complexes to avoid demolition and encourage preservation of affordable housing units
P&D Staff Time General Fund
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Meet with the owners of vacant properties to develop a strategy for redevelopment CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration
Partner with an organization(s) to redevelop lots in single-family neighborhoods as affordable units CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 122 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area A: North Ward School/Seminole Boat Ramp Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards
P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q for the private redevelopment of the North Ward School property with adaptive reuse of the structure and expanded mixed-use housing and public activity on the property
P&D; CRA Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration X
Provide grant funds to support historic preservation of the building and construction of community spaces on the North Ward School property
CRA; ED&H; P&D $2,000,000 General Fund X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 123
Plan Implementation
Area A: North Ward School/Seminole Boat Ramp Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards
P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q for the private redevelopment of the North Ward School property with adaptive reuse of the structure and expanded mixed-use housing and public activity on the property
P&D; CRA Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration
Provide grant funds to support historic preservation of the building and construction of community spaces on the North Ward School property
CRA; ED&H; P&D $2,000,000 General Fund
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 124 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area B: North Fort Harrison Avenue/North Myrtle Avenue Corridors
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards
P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $3,000,000
TIF for Affordable Housing ($1m) and Economic Development ($2m)
Area C: CSX Industrial Area/Armory Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Update zoning, site development, and fire code standards if needed to support shared commercial kitchens, multi-tenant flexible spaces, and shared driveway entries
P&D; Fire; Public Works Staff Time General Fund X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Provide grants for renovations and build out to support new businesses CRA; ED&H $1,000,000 TIF for Economic Development
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 125
Plan Implementation
Area B: North Fort Harrison Avenue/North Myrtle Avenue Corridors
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards
P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $3,000,000
TIF for Affordable Housing ($1m) and Economic Development ($2m)
X X X X X
Area C: CSX Industrial Area/Armory Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Update zoning, site development, and fire code standards if needed to support shared commercial kitchens, multi-tenant flexible spaces, and shared driveway entries
P&D; Fire; Public Works Staff Time General Fund
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Provide grants for renovations and build out to support new businesses CRA; ED&H $1,000,000 TIF for Economic Development X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 126 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area D: North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex/North Greenwood Library
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified
Area E: North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue Corridor
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Complete the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor design charette and accompanying recommendations
P&D $60,000
General Fund ($25k);Forward Pinellas Grant
X
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q to redevelop the former Elks Lodge property to add commercial, community use, and possibly compatible infill mixed residential development
CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration X X
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $6,000,000
TIF for Affordable Housing ($2m) and Economic Development ($4m)
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 127
Plan Implementation
Area D: North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex/North Greenwood Library
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Area E: North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue Corridor
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Complete the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor design charette and accompanying recommendations
P&D $60,000
General Fund ($25k);Forward Pinellas GrantRedevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q to redevelop the former Elks Lodge property to add commercial, community use, and possibly compatible infill mixed residential development
CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $6,000,000
TIF for Affordable Housing ($2m) and Economic Development ($4m)
X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 128 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area F: Curtis Museum/Cherry Harris Park Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Work with the Pinellas County School District to investigate and expand the adaptive reuse of the Curtis Museum building’s second floor and site
CRA $75,000 ARPA X X
Provide matching funds to repair Curtis Museum facilities Cultural Affairs; CRA $150,000 ARPA X
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing
Area G: Clearwater Intermediate/Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center/Cemetery AreaLand Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Work with the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center to investigate and support the renovation and potential expansion of the building and site to support plan goals
CRA $75,000 ARPA X
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 129
Plan Implementation
Area F: Curtis Museum/Cherry Harris Park Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Work with the Pinellas County School District to investigate and expand the adaptive reuse of the Curtis Museum building’s second floor and site
CRA $75,000 ARPA
Provide matching funds to repair Curtis Museum facilities Cultural Affairs; CRA $150,000 ARPA
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Area G: Clearwater Intermediate/Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center/Cemetery AreaLand Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Work with the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center to investigate and support the renovation and potential expansion of the building and site to support plan goals
CRA $75,000 ARPA
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 130 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area H: Stevenson Creek/Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing
Area I: Calvin A. Hunsinger/Sandy Lane Schools Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 131
Plan Implementation
Area H: Stevenson Creek/Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Area I: Calvin A. Hunsinger/Sandy Lane Schools Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties CRA $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 132 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Capital Improvement ProjectsProject Title Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Provide a 4 foot wide sidewalk on at least one side of every street in the North Greenwood area Public Works $320,000 Streets & Sidewalks X X
Redesign and construction of North Fort Harrison Avenue to encourage active transportation Public Works TBD City CIP X X X X X
Pinellas Trail safety & placemaking improvements Public Works; Pinellas County $500,000 TIF for Mobility X X
Provide new bicycle/pedestrian connections to Pinellas Trail from the Seminole Boat Ramp and the North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Public Works; Parks & Recreation $4,150,000 TIF for Mobility;City CIP X
Design & construct improvements to the Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex to provide access to Stevenson Creek and additional recreational amenities
Parks & Recreation $5,000,000 General Fund X X
Provide improvements to Overbrook Park Parks & Recreation $200,000 General Fund X X
Provide improvements to North Betty Lane Park Parks & Recreation $200,000 General Fund X X
Design improvements to reduce the odor from the Marshall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant Public Utilities TBD City CIP X
Convert private septic to the city's sewer system in the unincorporated enclave Public Utilities TBD City CIP X X
Table 15 CRA Implementation Table
4.5 Plan Implementation
Table 15 includes the recommended strategies, implementation lead, estimated cost, funding source, and timeline for each project in the CRA by goal. It also identifies existing capital improvement projects in the city's 5-year Capital Improvement Plan.
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development Department
The City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 133
Plan Implementation
Capital Improvement Projects
Project Title Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Provide a 4 foot wide sidewalk on at least one side of every street in the North Greenwood area Public Works $320,000 Streets & Sidewalks
Redesign and construction of North Fort Harrison Avenue to encourage active transportation Public Works TBD City CIP
Pinellas Trail safety & placemaking improvements Public Works; Pinellas County $500,000 TIF for Mobility X X X X X
Provide new bicycle/pedestrian connections to Pinellas Trail from the Seminole Boat Ramp and the North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Public Works; Parks & Recreation $4,150,000 TIF for Mobility;City CIP X X X X X
Design & construct improvements to the Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex to provide access to Stevenson Creek and additional recreational amenities
Parks & Recreation $5,000,000 General Fund
Provide improvements to Overbrook Park Parks & Recreation $200,000 General Fund
Provide improvements to North Betty Lane Park Parks & Recreation $200,000 General Fund
Design improvements to reduce the odor from the Marshall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant Public Utilities TBD City CIP
Convert private septic to the city's sewer system in the unincorporated enclave Public Utilities TBD City CIP X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 134 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Partner with housing providers to monitor the rate of opioid use to increase intervention and treatment rates
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to host a quarterly information panel for the community to ask Clearwater Police questions and review crime data
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to require annual anti-bias training for the police as provided in the department’s strategic plan Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Fund one on one mentoring programs, like Refuse to Lose, that break the cycle of poverty driven criminal behavior by providing access to better educational and employment opportunities
Police $50,000 annually General Fund X X X X
Pilot new approaches like community paramedicine to reduce the number of medical calls that do not qualify as emergencies (e.g. https://emsa.ca.gov/community_paramedicine)
Fire TBD General Fund X X X
Determine the feasibility of increasing the number of Advanced Life Support (ALS) units at Station #51
Fire TBD General Fund;County ALS Funds X
Advertise smoke alarm and CPR training programs at Fire Station #51 to North Greenwood area residents Fire $15,000 General Fund X X X X X
Develop grant programs to pay for interior and exterior improvements to blighted properties CRA; P&D; ED&H $1,000,000 over 20 years ARPA ($200k); TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 135
Plan Implementation
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Partner with housing providers to monitor the rate of opioid use to increase intervention and treatment rates
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to host a quarterly information panel for the community to ask Clearwater Police questions and review crime data
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to require annual anti-bias training for the police as provided in the department’s strategic plan Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Fund one on one mentoring programs, like Refuse to Lose, that break the cycle of poverty driven criminal behavior by providing access to better educational and employment opportunities
Police $50,000 annually General Fund
Pilot new approaches like community paramedicine to reduce the number of medical calls that do not qualify as emergencies (e.g. https://emsa.ca.gov/community_paramedicine)
Fire TBD General Fund
Determine the feasibility of increasing the number of Advanced Life Support (ALS) units at Station #51
Fire TBD General Fund;County ALS Funds
Advertise smoke alarm and CPR training programs at Fire Station #51 to North Greenwood area residents Fire $15,000 General Fund X X X X X
Develop grant programs to pay for interior and exterior improvements to blighted properties CRA; P&D; ED&H $1,000,000 over 20 years ARPA ($200k); TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 136 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Organize clean up days and trash amnesty days prior to code enforcement sweeps
CRA; P&D; Solid Waste TBD General Fund X X X X
Maintain a list of landlords and meet regularly with them to share resources about home improvement CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Develop programs to encourage neighborhood pride in yard and home appearance CRA TBD TIF for Administration X X X X X
Install additional lighting along sidewalks and trails CRA; Public Works $300,000 ARPA X X
Goal 2 Policy Implementation: Mobility
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Explore creating a Safe Routes to Schools program with Pinellas County Schools CRA Staff Time CRA X X
Conduct feasibility study of additional on-street parking throughout North Greenwood as a traffic calming measure
Public Works Staff Time General Fund X
Develop and install solutions to provide additional shade and amenities on sidewalks and trails Public Works $200,000 ARPA ($100k); TIF for Mobility X X
Determine the causes of bicycle/pedestrian crashes from the 2021 Forward Pinellas study and implement solutions to improve safety (e.g. pedestrian crosswalk signals, traffic pattern evaluation)
CRA; Public Works Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration X X X X
Identify opportunities to increase use of existing transit services and expand transit services
CRA; Public Works; PSTA Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 137
Plan Implementation
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Organize clean up days and trash amnesty days prior to code enforcement sweeps
CRA; P&D; Solid Waste TBD General Fund X X X X X
Maintain a list of landlords and meet regularly with them to share resources about home improvement CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Develop programs to encourage neighborhood pride in yard and home appearance CRA TBD TIF for Administration X X X X X
Install additional lighting along sidewalks and trails CRA; Public Works $300,000 ARPA
Goal 2 Policy Implementation: Mobility
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Explore creating a Safe Routes to Schools program with Pinellas County Schools CRA Staff Time CRA
Conduct feasibility study of additional on-street parking throughout North Greenwood as a traffic calming measure
Public Works Staff Time General Fund
Develop and install solutions to provide additional shade and amenities on sidewalks and trails Public Works $200,000 ARPA ($100k); TIF for Mobility
Determine the causes of bicycle/pedestrian crashes from the 2021 Forward Pinellas study and implement solutions to improve safety (e.g. pedestrian crosswalk signals, traffic pattern evaluation)
CRA; Public Works Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration X X X X X
Identify opportunities to increase use of existing transit services and expand transit services
CRA; Public Works; PSTA Staff Time General Fund; TIF for Administration
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 138 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement neighborhood scale business development assistance and marketing program(s) like the Main Street model or other comprehensive programs
ED&H; CRA $300,000 ARPA X X X
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement a neighborhood scale workforce development program(s)
ED&H; CRA $500,000 ARPA X X X
Convene Pinellas County Schools, Pinellas County Economic Development, and local colleges to develop a workforce program focused on bringing the county's target industries to the North Greenwood area and employing North Greenwood residents in these target industries
ED&H; CRA $25,000 General Fund X
Develop city apprenticeship and employment programs for North Greenwood residents that train them to resolve community problems (e.g. weatherize homes)
CRA TBD General Fund; TIF for Administration X X
Develop a grant program to fund improvements to commercial buildings, to establish new businesses, and reduce blight in the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor
CRA $1,000,000 ARPA X X X X
Create an emergency fund to assist low-income residents with one-time costs to mitigate issues that would prevent them from going to work
ED&H; CRA $500,000 ARPA X X X X
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to support workforce development programming Library TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development Department
The City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 139
Plan Implementation
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement neighborhood scale business development assistance and marketing program(s) like the Main Street model or other comprehensive programs
ED&H; CRA $300,000 ARPA
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement a neighborhood scale workforce development program(s)
ED&H; CRA $500,000 ARPA
Convene Pinellas County Schools, Pinellas County Economic Development, and local colleges to develop a workforce program focused on bringing the county's target industries to the North Greenwood area and employing North Greenwood residents in these target industries
ED&H; CRA $25,000 General Fund
Develop city apprenticeship and employment programs for North Greenwood residents that train them to resolve community problems (e.g. weatherize homes)
CRA TBD General Fund; TIF for Administration
Develop a grant program to fund improvements to commercial buildings, to establish new businesses, and reduce blight in the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor
CRA $1,000,000 ARPA
Create an emergency fund to assist low-income residents with one-time costs to mitigate issues that would prevent them from going to work
ED&H; CRA $500,000 ARPA
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to support workforce development programming Library TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development Department
The City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 140 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Pair North Greenwood businesses and residents with mentor companies in Clearwater and Pinellas County
ED&H; CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Quarterly research and report on opportunities for the community to leverage city events to promote local businesses (e.g. local vendors at games at Jack Russell Stadium)
Library; Parks & Recreation Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Survey residents and business owners on an annual basis to determine if their workforce needs are being met
CRA $2,000 TIF for Administration X X X X X
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Determine the feasibility of establishing a land trust to maintain long term affordability of residential properties
CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration X X
Provide direct rent subsidy to cost burdened households to prevent displacement ED&H $250,000 ARPA X X X X
Provide an emergency assistance fund for low-income residents for life safety home repairs and renovations to accommodate physical disabilities
ED&H $300,000 ARPA ($150k); TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Create a "role-model" resident program to encourage community role models to live in North Greenwood
CRA; ED&H $150,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X
Hire an organization(s) to implement homeownership education programs ED&H $50,000 ARPA X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 141
Plan Implementation
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Pair North Greenwood businesses and residents with mentor companies in Clearwater and Pinellas County
ED&H; CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Quarterly research and report on opportunities for the community to leverage city events to promote local businesses (e.g. local vendors at games at Jack Russell Stadium)
Library; Parks & Recreation Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Survey residents and business owners on an annual basis to determine if their workforce needs are being met
CRA $2,000 TIF for Administration X X X X X
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Determine the feasibility of establishing a land trust to maintain long term affordability of residential properties
CRA; ED&H Staff Time TIF for Administration
Provide direct rent subsidy to cost burdened households to prevent displacement ED&H $250,000 ARPA
Provide an emergency assistance fund for low-income residents for life safety home repairs and renovations to accommodate physical disabilities
ED&H $300,000 ARPA ($150k); TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Create a "role-model" resident program to encourage community role models to live in North Greenwood
CRA; ED&H $150,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Hire an organization(s) to implement homeownership education programs ED&H $50,000 ARPA
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 142 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Create a grant program to reduce blight through the repair and preservation of historic homes CRA; ED&H $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X
Create a grant program to incentivize the construction of affordable housing on vacant, infill lots
CRA $2,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X
Continue current Economic Development & Housing programs and CDBG activities that support homeownership
ED&H Staff Time SHIP; CDBG; General Fund X X X X X
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Fund projects and programs that honor North Greenwood's history through memorials, interpretive messaging, and public art installations
Cultural Affairs $150,000 ARPA X X X
Expand and increase programming of the Christine Wigfall Morris African American Collection at the North Greenwood Library
Library TBD General Fund X X X
Help support the operations and expansion of the Pinellas County African American Museum at Curtis Elementary School
Cultural Affairs; CRA $50,000 ARPA X X X
Explore the feasibility of attracting existing cultural institutions in Pinellas County to relocate or establish additional locations in the North Greenwood area to bring new funding and programs to underutilized spaces
Cultural Affairs; CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 143
Plan Implementation
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Create a grant program to reduce blight through the repair and preservation of historic homes CRA; ED&H $1,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Create a grant program to incentivize the construction of affordable housing on vacant, infill lots
CRA $2,000,000 TIF for Affordable Housing X X X X X
Continue current Economic Development & Housing programs and CDBG activities that support homeownership
ED&H Staff Time SHIP; CDBG; General Fund X X X X X
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Fund projects and programs that honor North Greenwood's history through memorials, interpretive messaging, and public art installations
Cultural Affairs $150,000 ARPA
Expand and increase programming of the Christine Wigfall Morris African American Collection at the North Greenwood Library
Library TBD General Fund X X X X X
Help support the operations and expansion of the Pinellas County African American Museum at Curtis Elementary School
Cultural Affairs; CRA $50,000 ARPA
Explore the feasibility of attracting existing cultural institutions in Pinellas County to relocate or establish additional locations in the North Greenwood area to bring new funding and programs to underutilized spaces
Cultural Affairs; CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 144 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Examine all recreational facilities and determine how to increase community access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Parks & Recreation Staff Time General Fund X X
Work with Pinellas County Schools to examine school properties to determine how to increase communty access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Parks & Recreation; Pinellas County Schools Staff Time General Fund X X
Promote historic preservation through public education and assistance with local designation P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to fund existing recreation programs that serve youth and seniors (scholarships, Silver Sneakers etc.)
Parks & Recreation $100,000 General Fund X X X X X
Support the installation and management of community gardens Parks & Recreation; Sustainability TBD General Fund X X X X X
Support organizations implementing community engagement programs CRA $100,000 ARPA X X X X
Coordinate the efforts of neighborhood associations, non-profit service providers, churches and other organizations through quarterly meetings in the North Greenwood area
CRA $50,000 TIF for Administration X X X X X
Convene local health care providers to develop funding strategies to improve public health outcomes (e.g. community health workers, access to fresh food etc.)
CRA $50,000 TIF for Administration X X X X
Support organizations that provide adult mental health and wellness programs CRA $100,000 ARPA X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development Department
The City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 145
Plan Implementation
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Examine all recreational facilities and determine how to increase community access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Parks & Recreation Staff Time General Fund
Work with Pinellas County Schools to examine school properties to determine how to increase communty access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Parks & Recreation; Pinellas County Schools Staff Time General Fund
Promote historic preservation through public education and assistance with local designation P&D Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Continue to fund existing recreation programs that serve youth and seniors (scholarships, Silver Sneakers etc.)
Parks & Recreation $100,000 General Fund X X X X X
Support the installation and management of community gardens Parks & Recreation; Sustainability TBD General Fund X X X X X
Support organizations implementing community engagement programs CRA $100,000 ARPA
Coordinate the efforts of neighborhood associations, non-profit service providers, churches and other organizations through quarterly meetings in the North Greenwood area
CRA $50,000 TIF for Administration X X X X X
Convene local health care providers to develop funding strategies to improve public health outcomes (e.g. community health workers, access to fresh food etc.)
CRA $50,000 TIF for Administration
Support organizations that provide adult mental health and wellness programs CRA $100,000 ARPA
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development Department
The City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 146 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Continue to utilize community liaison teams and invest in Operation Graduate, arts and sports programs, and other youth focused activities that build relationships between police officers and residents
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Increase afterschool and summer programs at North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex Parks & Recreation TBD General Fund X X X X X
Address child poverty through direct payments for children in low-income households to ensure adequate access to food, technology, and transportation
CRA $350,000 ARPA X X X X
Work with partners to implement and enhance workforce development and youth job readiness programs, including year-round afterschool employment
CRA $50,000 ARPA X X X X
Support increased access to high-quality childcare and early childhood education ED&H $250,000 ARPA X X X X
Work with partners including the Pinellas County School District to leverage the planned middle school “Innovation” program delivery
CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Hire an organization(s) to provide mentoring services to assist children with receiving social service benefits and participating in educational programs
CRA $150,000 ARPA X X X X
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to serve youth afterschool and on the weekends Library TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 147
Plan Implementation
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to utilize community liaison teams and invest in Operation Graduate, arts and sports programs, and other youth focused activities that build relationships between police officers and residents
Police Staff Time General Fund X X X X X
Increase afterschool and summer programs at North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex Parks & Recreation TBD General Fund X X X X X
Address child poverty through direct payments for children in low-income households to ensure adequate access to food, technology, and transportation
CRA $350,000 ARPA
Work with partners to implement and enhance workforce development and youth job readiness programs, including year-round afterschool employment
CRA $50,000 ARPA
Support increased access to high-quality childcare and early childhood education ED&H $250,000 ARPA
Work with partners including the Pinellas County School District to leverage the planned middle school “Innovation” program delivery
CRA Staff Time TIF for Administration X X X X X
Hire an organization(s) to provide mentoring services to assist children with receiving social service benefits and participating in educational programs
CRA $150,000 ARPA
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to serve youth afterschool and on the weekends Library TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Page 148 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Support organizations that provide youth mental health and wellness programs CRA $150,000 ARPA X X X X
Increase availability to and awareness of private afterschool and summer programs in the North Greenwood area
CRA TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 149
Plan Implementation
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth (con't)
Action Project Lead Estimated Total Cost Funding Source 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support organizations that provide youth mental health and wellness programs CRA $150,000 ARPA
Increase availability to and awareness of private afterschool and summer programs in the North Greenwood area
CRA TBD General Fund X X X X X
CRA - Community Redevelopment AgencyED&H - Economic Development and Housing DepartmentP&D - Planning and Development DepartmentThe City & CRA will abide by the requirements of Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b) which prohibits tax increment revenue from being spent on projects that are in the current City CIP, or have been in the CIP within the last three years.
5. Governance
5.1 Overview | 5.2 State Requirements | 5.3 Pinellas County Requirements5.4 City CRA Administration | 5.5 Citizens Advisory Committee
Page 152 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
5.1 Overview
Once established, community redevelopment areas are governed by state and local regulations pertaining to special districts. These regulations include annual reporting requirements, restrictions on how TIF funds are spent, and training requirements for Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees. Staff should check these requirements on a regular basis to ensure they are operating in compliance with adopted regulations.
5.2 State Requirements
Chapter 163 of Florida Statues governs community redevelopment areas. Community Redevelopment Agencies are required by state law to prepare five annual reports:
1. Annual Audit (can be independent of the creating entity or included in the creating entity’s audit) (www.myflorida.com/audgen)2. Annual Fees and Updates to the Office of Special District Accountability at the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (http://floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/special-districts/special-district-accountability-program)3. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (https://myfloridacfo.com/division/aa/local-governments)4. Annual March 31 Report to the public (posted online)5. Annual Budget (proposed and adopted) and Board, contact information updated and posted each September online on CRA pages
The state has numerous restrictions on TIF fund expenditures. TIF funds should be kept in a segregated fund and annual reports should clearly explain how funds were spent.
5.3 Pinellas County Requirements
Pinellas County recently adopted Ordinance 21-48 which outlines the county’s funding priorities and the process for establishing a new CRA and determining the amount of county TIF revenue it will receive. The full scoring methodology for this plan is contained in Appendix B. The CRA must allocate 50% of all TIF revenue towards the three county priority areas in order to receive 95% of county TIF revenue. If the city chooses to spend the funds in non-priority areas then the county contribution will be reduced to 70%. The funds should be kept in separate project accounts to clearly track how they are being allocated. The unincorporated enclave within the CRA is not included in the current legal description of the CRA and will not contribute any tax increment as long as it remains unincorporated. If there is interest in annexing the unincorporated area into the city in the future, both city and county staff highly recommends that the entire area come in at one time to minimize the administrative burden of plan changes and to consolidate delivery of services. The modification of the CRA boundaries will require approval of the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners and Clearwater City Council.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 153
Governance
5.4 City CRA Administration
The City of Clearwater has already established a Community Redevelopment Agency which administers the Downtown CRA. The five City Council members serve as the five Trustees that govern the Community Redevelopment Agency. City staff serves as staff for the agency via an intergovernmental agreement. The current Trustees and staff will administer the implementation of the North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan.
To ensure the CRA Plan is implemented in continuous collaboration with the community, the city will establish a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) comprised of residents, business owners, property owners, and non-profit organizations located in the plan area. The CAC will make recommendations to the Trustees on plan implementation.
After plan adoption, Community Redevelopment Agency staff should prepare an annual operating budget that includes staffing recommendations, funds for training of staff and CAC members, and general marketing costs.
Over the 20-year life of this plan, it will be amended. The City Council, upon recommendation by the Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees, has the authority to amend the redevelopment plan. The Trustees have the authority to establish grant programs, set budget expenditures, buy and sell property, and invest in redevelopment projects. The Community Redevelopment Agency may amend its boundaries with the approval of the county.
5.5 Citizens Advisory Committee
The Citizens Advisory Committee will be a five-member body, with three members appointed by the City of Clearwater City Council and the remaining two members appointed by the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. Members will serve staggered terms that will be decided upon at a later date. It will have the authority to make recommendations to the Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees on the annual budget, amendments to the CRA plan, and the adoption of programs. It will have the authority to initiate research to develop new program ideas, evaluate existing programs, and convene meetings to solicit neighborhood input on CRA activities.
Appendices
Appendix A - Legal Description | Appendix B - CRA Local AssessmentAppendix C - Tax Increment Projection | Appendix D - Statement of Neighborhood ImpactAppendix E - TIF Expenditures
Page 156 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Appendix A
North Greenwood CRA Legal Description
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
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.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 157
Appendices
Appendix B
Pinellas County CRA Local Assessment
Total Score
The local designation assessment utilizes 12 factors across four categories to assess each CRA. These factors provide a baseline understanding of the needs of the CRA, as well as the location’s alignment with county priorities on issues like mobility and economic development. The local designation assessment determines the level of need in the CRA, placing all CRAs into one of three categories depending on the scoring threshold reached.
The North Greenwood CRA is designated as Urban Revitalization and has a total score of 79, indicating that the CRA is considered one of the most distressed areas. There is a prevalence of low- and moderate-income persons, endemic poverty, and where other programs can provide targeted funding.
Demonstrated Need
This set of factors assesses whether the potential CRA is home to a high need population or if the physical environment requires new investment. These needs align with need as defined in CRA statute, as well as with county priorities to promote affordable housing and economic development in disadvantaged areas.
Percent of Households Below Poverty – 10 points
25% of the households in the North Greenwood CRA is below the poverty level, which is 2.16 times the county’s poverty rate. North Greenwood CRA scored 10 points for this metric.
Median Household Income – 15 points
The median household income in the Greenwood CRA is $32,022, 62% of the county’s median household income. North Greenwood CRA scored 11 points for this metric.
Percent of area Qualified for CDBG funds – 5 points
87% of the of the Census Block Groups within the North Greenwood CRA qualify for CDBG funding. The North Greenwood CRA scored 5 points for this metric. Demonstrated Blight Factors – 10 points
North Greenwood CRA’s Finding of Necessity Study indicated 9 blight factors were present within the CRA boundary. The North Greenwood CRA scored 10 points for this metric.
Area Affected by Coastal High Hazard Area – 5 points
The Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) covers 22% of the North Greenwood CRA. The North Greenwood CRA scored 5 points for this metric.
Economic Development and Employment
The county has identified job retention and attraction as a near term priority. These factors indicate the level of economic activity in a CRA and the economic status of its residents.
Employment Density – 5 points
According to LEHD data the employment density in the North Greenwood CRA boundary is 1.24 jobs per acre. The North Greenwood CRA scored 5 points for this metric.
Unemployment (Civilian) – 10 points
The unemployment rate (civilian) within the North Greenwood CRA is 8.4%, which is 1.49 times the rate of Pinellas County. The North Greenwood CRA scored 7 points for this metric.
Tax Value Trend – 5 points
The CRA area’s taxable value grew at a higher rate than the county, outperforming the county’s growth rate by an average of 3% for the years 2017 through 2021. 0 points were scored for this metric.
Page 158 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Activity Centers and Target Employment Areas – 5 points
There are no target employment areas or activity centers within the boundary of the North Greenwood CRA. 0 points were scored for this metric.
Housing Affordability
The county has identified creation and preservation of quality, affordable housing as a near term priority. This factor assesses the extent to which households experience a housing cost burden.
Percent of Households that are Housing Cost Burdened – 10 points
52% of households within the North Greenwood CRA are considered housing cost burdened, this is 1.5 times higher than Pinellas County. The North Greenwood CRA scored 10 points for this metric.
Median Residential Values – 15 points
The median residential value for properties within the North Greenwood CRA is $141,579, 23% lower than the county median residential value. The North Greenwood CRA scored 11 points for this metric.
Mobility
The county places a priority on improving biking, walking, and transit options, particularly in designated corridors.
Mobility – 5 points
66% of the area within the North Greenwood CRA is within ¼ mile of a Premium, Primary, or Secondary Transit Corridor. The North Greenwood CRA scored 5 points for this metric.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 159
Appendices
Page intentionally left blank
Page 160 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Appendix C
Tax Increment Projection
Base Year Plus 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20
City Millage Rate 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850
County Millage Rate 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 EstimatedTotalProjection BaseYear TaxableValue
Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041
District FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 FY31 FY32 FY33 FY34 FY35 FY36 FY37 FY38 FY39 FY40 FY41 FY42 FY23 to FY42
North Greenwood - Tax Year 2021
193,652,08
Total Value Change: %3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%6.00%7.00%8.00%3.00%9.00%9.00%9.50%9.50%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%
Total Taxable Value 193,652,086 199,461,648.58 205,445,498.04 211,608,862.98 217,957,128.87 224,495,842.73 237,965,593.30 254,623,184.83 274,993,039.62 283,242,830.80 308,734,685.58 336,520,807.28 368,490,283.97 403,496,860.95 415,601,766.77 428,069,819.78 440,911,914.37 454,139,271.80 467,763,449.96 481,796,353.46 496,250,244.06
Tax Increment Value 5,809,562.58 11,793,412.04 17,956,776.98 24,305,042.87 30,843,756.73 44,313,507.30 60,971,098.83 81,340,953.62 89,590,744.80 115,082,599.58 142,868,721.28 174,838,197.97 209,844,774.95 221,949,680.77 234,417,733.78 247,259,828.37 260,487,185.80 274,111,363.96 288,144,267.46 302,598,158.06
Total Value Change: $5,809,562.58 5,983,849.46 6,163,364.94 6,348,265.89 6,538,713.87 13,469,750.56 16,657,591.53 20,369,854.79 8,249,791.19 25,491,854.77 27,786,121.70 31,969,476.69 35,006,576.98 12,104,905.83 12,468,053.00 12,842,094.59 13,227,357.43 13,624,178.15 14,032,903.50 14,453,890.60
County Tax Increment Payment 95% 26,159.36 53,103.49 80,855.95 109,440.99 138,883.58 199,535.30 274,541.27 366,262.86 403,410.10 518,195.08 643,310.71 787,263.19 944,891.15 999,397.24 1,055,538.52 1,113,364.03 1,172,924.31 1,234,271.39 1,297,458.89 1,362,542.01 12,781,349.42
City Tax Increment Payment 95%32,479.81 65,934.02 100,391.85 135,883.42 172,439.73 247,745.74 340,874.17 454,756.94 500,879.46 643,398.04 798,743.30 977,476.66 1,173,189.68 1,240,865.18 1,310,570.95 1,382,367.89 1,456,318.73 1,532,488.11 1,610,942.56 1,691,750.65 15,869,496.88
Grand Total 58,639.17 119,037.51 181,247.81 245,324.41 311,323.31 447,281.04 615,415.44 821,019.80 904,289.56 1,161,593.12 1,442,054.01 1,764,739.84 2,118,080.83 2,240,262.42 2,366,109.46 2,495,731.91 2,629,243.04 2,766,759.50 2,908,401.45 3,054,292.66 28,650,846.30
Notes:1. Pinellas County Property Appraiser 2021 Estimated Taxes w/o Cap or Exemptions.2. Assumes 3% annual property value increase.3. Assumes a 20-year Trust Fund length.4. Assumes $100 million of new taxable value will come online in years 6-12.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 161
Appendices
Base YearPlus 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5Year 6Year 7Year 8Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20
City Millage Rate5.88505.88505.88505.88505.88505.88505.88505.88505.88505.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850 5.8850
County Millage Rate4.73984.73984.73984.73984.73984.73984.73984.73984.73984.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 4.7398 EstimatedTotalProjection BaseYear TaxableValue
Tax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax YearTax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year Tax Year
2021202220232024202520262027202820292030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041
DistrictFY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27FY28FY29FY30FY31 FY32 FY33 FY34 FY35 FY36 FY37 FY38 FY39 FY40 FY41 FY42 FY23 to FY42
North Greenwood - Tax Year 2021
193,652,08
Total Value Change: %3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%6.00%7.00%8.00%3.00%9.00%9.00%9.50%9.50%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00%
Total Taxable Value193,652,086199,461,648.58 205,445,498.04 211,608,862.98217,957,128.87 224,495,842.73237,965,593.30254,623,184.83274,993,039.62 283,242,830.80 308,734,685.58 336,520,807.28 368,490,283.97 403,496,860.95 415,601,766.77 428,069,819.78 440,911,914.37 454,139,271.80 467,763,449.96 481,796,353.46 496,250,244.06
Tax Increment Value5,809,562.5811,793,412.04 17,956,776.9824,305,042.8730,843,756.7344,313,507.3060,971,098.8381,340,953.62 89,590,744.80 115,082,599.58 142,868,721.28 174,838,197.97 209,844,774.95 221,949,680.77 234,417,733.78 247,259,828.37 260,487,185.80 274,111,363.96 288,144,267.46 302,598,158.06
Total Value Change: $5,809,562.585,983,849.46 6,163,364.946,348,265.896,538,713.87 13,469,750.5616,657,591.53 20,369,854.79 8,249,791.19 25,491,854.77 27,786,121.70 31,969,476.69 35,006,576.98 12,104,905.83 12,468,053.00 12,842,094.59 13,227,357.43 13,624,178.15 14,032,903.50 14,453,890.60
County Tax Increment Payment 95% 26,159.36 53,103.49 80,855.95 109,440.99 138,883.58 199,535.30 274,541.27 366,262.86 403,410.10 518,195.08 643,310.71 787,263.19 944,891.15 999,397.24 1,055,538.52 1,113,364.03 1,172,924.31 1,234,271.39 1,297,458.89 1,362,542.01 12,781,349.42
City Tax Increment Payment95%32,479.8165,934.02100,391.85135,883.42172,439.73247,745.74340,874.17 454,756.94 500,879.46 643,398.04 798,743.30 977,476.66 1,173,189.68 1,240,865.18 1,310,570.95 1,382,367.89 1,456,318.73 1,532,488.11 1,610,942.56 1,691,750.65 15,869,496.88
Grand Total 58,639.17 119,037.51 181,247.81 245,324.41 311,323.31 447,281.04 615,415.44 821,019.80 904,289.56 1,161,593.12 1,442,054.01 1,764,739.84 2,118,080.83 2,240,262.42 2,366,109.46 2,495,731.91 2,629,243.04 2,766,759.50 2,908,401.45 3,054,292.66 28,650,846.30
Page 162 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Appendix D
Statement of Neighborhood Impact
Florida Statutes include a requirement addressing community redevelopment areas that contain low- or moderate-income housing, as the North Greenwood CRA Plan does. It is the intent to retain, improve, and increase the housing stock within North Greenwood. The CRA Plan does not propose any specific project which would result in the acquisition or demolition of existing residential structures nor the relocation of current residents in the area. Any future project supported by the CRA Plan and its financing mechanisms that requires the involuntary displacement of any resident shall be accompanied by a project relocation plan in accordance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The project relocation plan must be approved by the City Council/Community Redevelopment Agency Trustees in a publicly noticed Trustees' meeting prior to receiving final approvals.
The following information is provided to address the anticipated impact of the CRA Plan’s redevelopment upon the residents of the neighborhood.
Relocation
The CRA Plan does not include any preemptive public residential land ownership demolition that would require the relocation of any residents. The city does own the former Elks Lodge commercial property that is vacant and scheduled for demolition due to the building’s deteriorated structural condition. The city owns other vacant residential properties within the CRA limits and anticipates working with its partners to make the properties available for infill residential redevelopment through a publicly approved process.
Traffic Circulation
The CRA Plan limits are served by city, county, and state roadways and county bus transit services. The existing transportation facility’s levels of service, roadway functional classifications, and bus transit routes and frequencies are included in the plan. All facilities are operating at acceptable levels of service and are not anticipated to fail with the projected redevelopment of existing vacant or underutilized properties. The redevelopment is anticipated to be consistent with the city’s adopted Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and its Community Development Code zoning designations. This will require a future amendment to the Community Development Code. The area is also served by the Pinellas Trail, a recreational multi-use facility that connects all of Pinellas County through its 75-mile length. The CRA Plan includes strategies to increase bicycle and pedestrian mobility in the neighborhood. The city has also planned vehicular improvements to the North Fort Harrison Avenue roadway that includes improvements for pedestrians and cyclists resulting in decreased traffic speed and increased bicycle and pedestrian safety in the neighborhood.
Environmental Quality
The North Greenwood CRA limits include Stevenson Creek, a major tributary that outfalls Clearwater Harbor and the Gulf of Mexico. The city has completed past environmental improvements, including the removal of 115,000 cubic yards of sand and organic muck, and increased the tidal volume west of Fairmont Street bridge towards the Pinellas Trail bridge. Exotic vegetation was removed, and native plants were installed. A 3.2-acre mangrove shelf was installed to provide habitat and water quality benefits. The city is evaluating additional recreational improvements at the Stevenson Creek Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex that may include additional environmental improvements. CRA Plan strategies include the promotion of voluntary annexation and replacement of private septic systems with city sewer connections, increased public realm landscaping, and park amenities that will add to creek resource protection and increased community shading and access.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 163
Appendices
Availability of Community Facilities and Services
The North Greenwood CRA area benefits from numerous existing community facilities. There are 46.76-acres of city-owned park lands, the North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex, the North Greenwood Library, the Pinellas Trail, and the Pinellas County African American History Museum.
Effect Upon School Population
While redevelopment of vacant residential lands within the North Greenwood CRA limits will increase population, it is assumed that the increased student-aged population will be minor and not have a large effect on public schools. Analysis shows a total of 22.96-acres of vacant residential land exists. An estimate of potential residential units using a minimum 5,000 gross square foot lot may produce 200 new residential units. The current household size is estimated at 2.42 people per household and would yield 485 new persons. If existing household population age percentages are equaled, then it is estimated that 145 additional students may be anticipated if all vacant residential acreage is redeveloped. The Pinellas County School system is a choice-based selection process. Students are able to attend locally zoned schools but are eligible to attend any countywide school. Capacity is available in the public school system to absorb these potential new students.
Other Items Affecting the Physical and Social Quality of the Neighborhood
The North Greenwood area has a long history of dealing with the pervasive effects of a high concentration of poverty. The CRA Plan includes people-based strategies to help address these underlying issues and support housing, education, and employment initiatives with assistance from the city and partner organizations. Estimated TIF generation is not going to be an adequate source in the short term to make substantive progress. The city is dedicating $5 million of its American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to advance implementation actions.
The CRA Plan identifies that approximately 238 acres (28.31%) within the total 840.77-acre limits are tax-exempt properties. Tax-exempt properties include city, county, school district, church, and other institutional ownership. These properties will not contribute to the trust fund but are important partners that will assist with plan implementation. The plan calls for CRA staff to coordinate the service delivery of these partners to achieve redevelopment goals
Page 164 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Appendix E
TIF Expenditures
The Finding of Necessity Study (Study) identified blight factors within the North Greenwood area to be addressed by the goals, objectives, and strategies of this CRA Plan. The goals and objectives provide overarching guidance for what the strategies should work toward achieving. There were six goals developed based on input from the community. A list of those goals and how the strategies within each goal addresses the blight factors from the Study is provided below.
• Public Safety addresses the reduction of crime and code violations as well as fire and EMS calls through programs that expand and continue relationships and education with the City of Clearwater Police and Fire Departments and grant opportunities and community clean-up days to assist with blight properties.• Mobility addresses an increase in transportation opportunities to allow residents better access to employment through expanded transit and sidewalk and trail connections.• Poverty Reduction addresses low median income, poverty, and recidivism through employment opportunities, workforce development, and business assistance programs.• Housing Affordability addresses the substandard housing, low median house value, and households being cost-burdened through programs providing rent subsidies to cost burdened households, emergency assistance to low-income residents for life safety home repairs, and a grant program to incentive the construction of affordable housing.• Quality of Life addresses access to recreational opportunities and improving public health outcomes through coordination of existing organizations providing service to the community, convene health care providers to develop strategies to improve health outcomes, and examine recreational facilities to increase community access outside standard hours.
• Invest in Youth addresses opportunities for youth education, mentoring, and job readiness through implementation of a job readiness program, increased access to childcare, and providing a mentoring service for youth.
The strategies in the CRA Plan have an estimated cost and funding source identified in Table 15 CRA Implementation Table. The City of Clearwater does not intend to incur debt as a result of the costs identified in Table 15 this CRA Plan.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 165
Appendices
Area Wide Recommended Land Use Change and Redevelopment OpportunitiesLand Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to prohibit short term rentals
Limit lot assembly in single-family areas
Update 1995 Residential Infill Study and establish design guidelines or new zoning district that addresses existing "small" lots and allows additional density to support missing middle housing
Work with owners of small apartment complexes to avoid demolition and encourage preservation of affordable housing units
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Meet with the owners of vacant properties to develop a strategy for redevelopment CRA Staff
Partner with an organization(s) to redevelop lots in single-family neighborhoods as affordable units CRA Staff
CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency
Table 16 CRA Emphasis Area TIF Expenditures by Year
Page 166 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area A: North Ward School/Seminole Boat Ramp Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q for the private redevelopment of the North Ward School property with adaptive reuse of the structure and expanded mixed-use housing and public activity on the property
CRA Staff
Provide grant funds to support historic preservation of the building and construction of community spaces on the North Ward School property
Area B: North Fort Harrison Avenue/North Myrtle Avenue Corridors
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to implement the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Downtown District and Design Standards
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 167
Appendices
Area C: CSX Industrial Area/Armory Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Update zoning, site development, and fire code standards if needed to support shared commercial kitchens, multi-tenant flexible spaces, and shared driveway entries
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Provide grants for renovations and build out to support new businesses $50,000 $50,000
Area D: North Greenwood Recreation & Aquatic Complex/North Greenwood LibraryLand Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency
Page 168 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Area E: North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue Corridor
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Complete the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue corridor design charette and accompanying recommendations
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Request Letters of Interest or issue RFP/Q to redevelop the former Elks Lodge property to add commercial, community use, and possibly compatible infill mixed residential development
CRA Staff
Support private infill residential and commercial redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 $200,000 $300,000
Area F: Curtis Museum/Cherry Harris Park Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Work with the Pinellas County School District to investigate and expand the adaptive reuse of the Curtis Museum building’s second floor and site
Provide matching funds to repair Curtis Museum facilities
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 169
Appendices
Area G: Clearwater Intermediate/Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center/Cemetery Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Work with the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center to investigate and support the renovation and potential expansion of the building and site to support plan goals
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $50,000 $50,000
Area H: Stevenson Creek/Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex AreaLand Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $50,000
Area I: Calvin A. Hunsinger/Sandy Lane Schools Area
Land Use, Zoning, and Design Standards
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
None Identified
Redevelopment Opportunities
Project Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Support private infill of affordable residential redevelopment on vacant and underutilized properties $50,000
CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency
Page 170 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Provide a 4 foot wide sidewalk on at least one side of every street in the North Greenwood area
Redesign and construction of North Fort Harrison Avenue to encourage active transportation
Pinellas Trail safety & placemaking improvements $50,000 $50,000
Provide new bicycle/pedestrian connections to Pinellas Trail from the Seminole Boat Ramp and the North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Design & construct improvements to the Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex to provide access to Stevenson Creek and additional recreational amenities
Provide improvements to Overbrook Park
Provide improvements to North Betty Lane Park
Design improvements to reduce the odor from the Marshall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant
Convert private septic to the city's sewer system in the unincorporated enclave
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Table 17 First Five Years of TIF Expenditures, Capital Improvements and Goals
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 171
Appendices
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Partner with housing providers to monitor the rate of opioid use to increase intervention and treatment rates
Continue to host a quarterly information panel for the community to ask Clearwater Police questions and review crime data
Continue to require annual anti-bias training for the police as provided in the department’s strategic plan
Fund one on one mentoring programs, like Refuse to Lose, that break the cycle of poverty driven criminal behavior by providing access to better educational and employment opportunities
Pilot new approaches like community paramedicine to reduce the number of medical calls that do not qualify as emergencies (e.g. https://emsa.ca.gov/community_paramedicine)
Determine the feasibility of increasing the number of Advanced Life Support (ALS) units at Station #51
Advertise smoke alarm and CPR training programs at Fire Station #51 to North Greenwood area residents
Develop grant programs to pay for interior and exterior improvements to blighted properties $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
Organize clean up days and trash amnesty days prior to code enforcement sweeps
Maintain a list of landlords and meet regularly with them to share resources about home improvement CRA Staff
Develop programs to encourage neighborhood pride in yard and home appearance CRA Staff
Install additional lighting along sidewalks and trails
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Page 172 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 2 Policy Implementation: Mobility
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Explore creating a Safe Routes to Schools program with Pinellas County Schools
Conduct feasibility study of additional on-street parking throughout North Greenwood as a traffic calming measure
Develop and install solutions to provide additional shade and amenities on sidewalks and trails $50,000 $50,000
Determine the causes of bicycle/pedestrian crashes from the 2021 Forward Pinellas study and implement solutions to improve safety (e.g. pedestrian crosswalk signals, traffic pattern evaluation)CRA Staff
Identify opportunities to increase use of existing transit services and expand transit services CRA Staff
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 173
Appendices
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement neighborhood scale business development assistance and marketing program(s) like the Main Street model or other comprehensive programs
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement a neighborhood scale workforce development program(s)
Convene Pinellas County Schools, Pinellas County Economic Development, and local colleges to develop a workforce program focused on bringing the county's target industries to the North Greenwood area and employing North Greenwood residents in these target industries
Develop city apprenticeship and employment programs for North Greenwood residents that train them to resolve community problems (e.g. weatherize homes)CRA Staff
Develop a grant program to fund improvements to commercial buildings, to establish new businesses, and reduce blight in the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor
Create an emergency fund to assist low-income residents with one-time costs to mitigate issues that would prevent them from going to work
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to support workforce development programming
Pair North Greenwood businesses and residents with mentor companies in Clearwater and Pinellas County CRA Staff
Quarterly research and report on opportunities for the community to leverage city events to promote local businesses (e.g. local vendors at games at Jack Russell Stadium)
Survey residents and business owners on an annual basis to determine if their workforce needs are being met CRA Staff
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Page 174 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Determine the feasibility of establishing a land trust to maintain long term affordability of residential properties CRA Staff
Provide direct rent subsidy to cost burdened households to prevent displacement
Provide an emergency assistance fund for low-income residents for life safety home repairs and renovations to accommodate physical disabilities $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500
Create a "role-model" resident program to encourage community role models to live in North Greenwood $15,000 $15,000 $15,000
Hire an organization(s) to implement homeownership education programs
Create a grant program to reduce blight through the repair and preservation of historic homes $100,000 $100,000
Create a grant program to incentivize the construction of affordable housing on vacant, infill lots $100,000 $100,000
Continue current Economic Development & Housing programs and CDBG activities that support homeownership
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $7,500 $7,500 $22,500 $222,500 $222,500
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 175
Appendices
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Fund projects and programs that honor North Greenwood's history through memorials, interpretive messaging, and public art installations
Expand and increase programming of the Christine Wigfall Morris African American Collection at the North Greenwood Library
Help support the operations and expansion of the Pinellas County African American Museum at Curtis Elementary School
Explore the feasibility of attracting existing cultural institutions in Pinellas County to relocate or establish additional locations in the North Greenwood area to bring new funding and programs to underutilized spaces CRA Staff
Examine all recreational facilities and determine how to increase community access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Work with Pinellas County Schools to examine school properties to determine how to increase communty access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Promote historic preservation through public education and assistance with local designation
Continue to fund existing recreation programs that serve youth and seniors (scholarships, Silver Sneakers etc.)
Support the installation and management of community gardens
Support organizations implementing community engagement programs
Coordinate the efforts of neighborhood associations, non-profit service providers, churches and other organizations through quarterly meetings in the North Greenwood area CRA Staff
Convene local health care providers to develop funding strategies to improve public health outcomes (e.g. community health workers, access to fresh food etc.)CRA Staff
Support organizations that provide adult mental health and wellness programs
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Page 176 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth
Project/Strategy 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Continue to utilize community liaison teams and invest in Operation Graduate, arts and sports programs, and other youth focused activities that build relationships between police officers and residents
Increase afterschool and summer programs at North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Address child poverty through direct payments for children in low-income households to ensure adequate access to food, technology, and transportation
Work with partners to implement and enhance workforce development and youth job readiness programs, including year-round afterschool employment
Support increased access to high-quality childcare and early childhood education
Work with partners including the Pinellas County School District to leverage the planned middle school “Innovation” program delivery CRA Staff
Hire an organization(s) to provide mentoring services to assist children with receiving social service benefits and participating in educational programs
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to serve youth afterschool and on the weekends
Support organizations that provide youth mental health and wellness programs
Increase availability to and awareness of private afterschool and summer programs in the North Greenwood area
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Grand Total TIF Dollars Allocated First 5 Years $47,500 $97,500 $112,500 $312,500 $312,500
Total TIF Projection Each Year $58,639 $119,038 $181,248 $245,324 $311,323
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 177
Appendices
Capital Improvement ProjectsProject/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Provide a 4 foot wide sidewalk on at least one side of every street in the North Greenwood area
Redesign and construction of North Fort Harrison Avenue to encourage active transportation
Pinellas Trail safety & placemaking improvements $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
Provide new bicycle/pedestrian connections to Pinellas Trail from the Seminole Boat Ramp and the North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000
Design & construct improvements to the Shuffleboard & Lawn Bowling Complex to provide access to Stevenson Creek and additional recreational amenities
Provide improvements to Overbrook Park
Provide improvements to North Betty Lane Park
Design improvements to reduce the odor from the Marshall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant
Convert private septic to the city's sewer system in the unincorporated enclave
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Table 18 Years 6-10 of TIF Expenditures, Capital Improvements and Goals
Page 178 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 1 Policy Implementation: Public Safety
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Partner with housing providers to monitor the rate of opioid use to increase intervention and treatment rates
Continue to host a quarterly information panel for the community to ask Clearwater Police questions and review crime data
Continue to require annual anti-bias training for the police as provided in the department’s strategic plan
Fund one on one mentoring programs, like Refuse to Lose, that break the cycle of poverty driven criminal behavior by providing access to better educational and employment opportunities
Pilot new approaches like community paramedicine to reduce the number of medical calls that do not qualify as emergencies (e.g. https://emsa.ca.gov/community_paramedicine)
Determine the feasibility of increasing the number of Advanced Life Support (ALS) units at Station #51
Advertise smoke alarm and CPR training programs at Fire Station #51 to North Greenwood area residents
Develop grant programs to pay for interior and exterior improvements to blighted properties $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
Organize clean up days and trash amnesty days prior to code enforcement sweeps
Maintain a list of landlords and meet regularly with them to share resources about home improvement CRA Staff
Develop programs to encourage neighborhood pride in yard and home appearance CRA Staff
Install additional lighting along sidewalks and trails
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 179
Appendices
Goal 2 Policy Implementation: Mobility
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Explore creating a Safe Routes to Schools program with Pinellas County Schools
Conduct feasibility study of additional on-street parking throughout North Greenwood as a traffic calming measure
Develop and install solutions to provide additional shade and amenities on sidewalks and trails
Determine the causes of bicycle/pedestrian crashes from the 2021 Forward Pinellas study and implement solutions to improve safety (e.g. pedestrian crosswalk signals, traffic pattern evaluation)CRA Staff
Identify opportunities to increase use of existing transit services and expand transit services CRA Staff
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Page 180 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 3 Policy Implementation: Poverty Reduction
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement neighborhood scale business development assistance and marketing program(s) like the Main Street model or other comprehensive programs
Hire an organization(s) to develop and implement a neighborhood scale workforce development program(s)
Convene Pinellas County Schools, Pinellas County Economic Development, and local colleges to develop a workforce program focused on bringing the county's target industries to the North Greenwood area and employing North Greenwood residents in these target industries
Develop city apprenticeship and employment programs for North Greenwood residents that train them to resolve community problems (e.g. weatherize homes)CRA Staff
Develop a grant program to fund improvements to commercial buildings, to establish new businesses, and reduce blight in the North Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue commercial corridor
Create an emergency fund to assist low-income residents with one-time costs to mitigate issues that would prevent them from going to work
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to support workforce development programming
Pair North Greenwood businesses and residents with mentor companies in Clearwater and Pinellas County CRA Staff
Quarterly research and report on opportunities for the community to leverage city events to promote local businesses (e.g. local vendors at games at Jack Russell Stadium)
Survey residents and business owners on an annual basis to determine if their workforce needs are being met CRA Staff
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 181
Appendices
Goal 4 Policy Implementation: Housing Affordability
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Determine the feasibility of establishing a land trust to maintain long term affordability of residential properties CRA Staff
Provide direct rent subsidy to cost burdened households to prevent displacement
Provide an emergency assistance fund for low-income residents for life safety home repairs and renovations to accommodate physical disabilities $7,500 $7,500 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
Create a "role-model" resident program to encourage community role models to live in North Greenwood $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000
Hire an organization(s) to implement homeownership education programs
Create a grant program to reduce blight through the repair and preservation of historic homes $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000
Create a grant program to incentivize the construction of affordable housing on vacant, infill lots $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $600,000
Continue current Economic Development & Housing programs and CDBG activities that support homeownership
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $222,500 $322,500 $525,000 $625,000 $825,000
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Page 182 | Adopted 01.12.2023
North Greenwood Community Redevelopment Area Plan
Goal 5 Policy Implementation: Quality of Life
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Fund projects and programs that honor North Greenwood's history through memorials, interpretive messaging, and public art installations
Expand and increase programming of the Christine Wigfall Morris African American Collection at the North Greenwood Library
Help support the operations and expansion of the Pinellas County African American Museum at Curtis Elementary School
Explore the feasibility of attracting existing cultural institutions in Pinellas County to relocate or establish additional locations in the North Greenwood area to bring new funding and programs to underutilized spaces CRA Staff
Examine all recreational facilities and determine how to increase community access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Work with Pinellas County Schools to examine school properties to determine how to increase communty access for recreational use outside of standard operating hours
Promote historic preservation through public education and assistance with local designation
Continue to fund existing recreation programs that serve youth and seniors (scholarships, Silver Sneakers etc.)
Support the installation and management of community gardens
Support organizations implementing community engagement programs
Coordinate the efforts of neighborhood associations, non-profit service providers, churches and other organizations through quarterly meetings in the North Greenwood area CRA Staff
Convene local health care providers to develop funding strategies to improve public health outcomes (e.g. community health workers, access to fresh food etc.)CRA Staff
Support organizations that provide adult mental health and wellness programs
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.
Adopted 01.12.2023 | Page 183
Appendices
Goal 6 Policy Implementation: Invest in Youth
Project/Strategy 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032
Continue to utilize community liaison teams and invest in Operation Graduate, arts and sports programs, and other youth focused activities that build relationships between police officers and residents
Increase afterschool and summer programs at North Greenwood Recreation and Aquatic Complex
Address child poverty through direct payments for children in low-income households to ensure adequate access to food, technology, and transportation
Work with partners to implement and enhance workforce development and youth job readiness programs, including year-round afterschool employment
Support increased access to high-quality childcare and early childhood education
Work with partners including the Pinellas County School District to leverage the planned middle school “Innovation” program delivery CRA Staff
Hire an organization(s) to provide mentoring services to assist children with receiving social service benefits and participating in educational programs
Expand North Greenwood Library hours to serve youth afterschool and on the weekends
Support organizations that provide youth mental health and wellness programs
Increase availability to and awareness of private afterschool and summer programs in the North Greenwood area
Total TIF Dollars Allocated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Grand Total TIF Dollars Allocated Years 6-10 $512,500 $612,500 $815,000 $915,000 $1,115,000
Total TIF Projection Each Year $447,281 $615,415 $821,020 $904,290 $1,161,593
Notes:1. Any unused TIF dollars will roll over to future years.2. The City of Clearwater will abide by Florida Statutes Ch. 163.370(3)(b), which prohibits tax increment revenue from being expended on projects that are in the current CIP or have been in the CIP within the last three years.3. CRA = Community Redevelopment Agency4. Light Blue text are projects or strategies where County TIF dollars can be spent.