US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS FINAL REPORT April 2018 Prepared by: HDR With assistance from: SB Friedman Development Advisors
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis This page intentionally blank. b Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Contents 01 Executive Summary...1 Study Overview... 1 Key Findings... 3 Next Steps... 3 02 Land Use & Regulatory Context...5 Land Use & Development... 5 Development Characteristics... 7 Planning & Policy Context...13 Access & Mobility...26 Redevelopment Potential...28 03 Demographic and Economic Analysis...30 04 Market Conditions...35 Housing Market...35 Retail Market...40 Office Market...45 Hotel/Lodging Market...48 05 Market Potential Overview...50 Housing Market...50 Hotel/Lodging Market...50 Office Market...50 Retail Market...50 Population...30 Median Household Income...32 Employment...33 i
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis This page intentionally blank. ii Final Report
01 Executive Summary US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Study Overview Figure 1. Regional Context Map The US 19 Land Use and Economic Analysis Study for the Tarpon Springs area is a planning effort by the City of Tarpon Springs and Forward Pinellas to analyze land use and development conditions along specific stretches of the US 19 corridor. This study is being developed in cooperation with the Forward Pinellas US 19 SPOTlight initiative to develop a County-wide vision for the US 19 corridor. Tarpon Springs New Port Richey Aï As shown in Figure 1, the study area is located in Tarpon Springs, a city in Pinellas County. The study area (Figure 2) extends approximately threequarters of a mile around a 3.5-mile-long segment of US 19 between Anclote Boulevard and Klosterman Road. The community of Palm Harbor is at the southern end of the study area and Pasco County is located to the north. Though shown in the study area, an analysis of Pasco County s land use and development was not included in this report. This executive summary provides an overview of the study, key findings, and a summary of recommendations for the project. Included in this report is information on land use, development characteristics, and redevelopment potential in the study area; an overview of the existing planning context for the County; a review on access and mobility within the study area; and an analysis of demographic, economic, and market data, as well as market redevelopment potential. Gulf of Mexico Gulf of Mexico Tarpon Springs Dunedin AÊ Clearwater Holiday AÈ Palm Harbor AÈ )p )p AÂ East Lake Trinity PASCO Safety Harbor PINELLAS?ò Oldsmar Oldsmar 0 1.5 0 13 2 46 0 1.5 3 6 Miles Miles Tampa Bay 1
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 2. Study Area Map BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PA Study Area Map Project Limits 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs 2 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Key Findings Analyses completed for the study led to the following findings regarding the extent and form of change likely for properties along the corridor. US 19 Improvements Impact Opportunities Access and visibility along US 19 will continue to have significant and differing impacts on the competitive position of properties fronting the corridor. Overall, projects at major crossroad locations are expected to perform well for a range of neighborhood and community-serving uses while projects in less visible and disconnected locations are expected to work for a narrower range of destination uses. Retail and service uses dependent on high visibility and easy local and regional access will tend to perform best when clustered with similar uses at major intersections like Tarpon Avenue. Office and multi-family residential uses are likely to favor locations in close-proximity of crossroads but may also locate in areas with high visibility but less direct access. These dynamics are expected to influence land use and development patterns under the current roadway configuration, and continue or strengthen them should additional access management improvements (e.g. curb cut consolidation and closing of median left turns) be implemented. Modest Short-Term Potential for Transformative Change Market analysis indicates there is limited short-term potential for transformational change along the corridor. Area demographics suggest demand will be relatively stable, sites with US 19 frontage are largely built out, few larger vacant sites are available for development, and projects in highly accessible and visible locations are in sound physical condition and appear to be performing well, making them poor candidates for largescale redevelopment. Further tempering the potential for change is the relatively soft market for additional retail investment. Long-Term Potential at Tarpon Avenue Sites close to the Tarpon Avenue intersection, especially those with interparcel connections and access to the local streets, appear to have the greatest long term potential to attract investment. These places benefit from the following: easy access to Downtown Tarpon Springs and the Sponge Docks as well as regional housing and employment destinations; high visibility and multiple points of access from US 19; easy access from crossroads and side streets and cross-parcel vehicular and pedestrian connections, which may result in reduced total local vehicular trips and short distance travel on US 19; convenient locations for the placement of transit stops and points of transfers; and; moderate density residential and office uses in close proximity, which creates the potential for residents and office workers to access destinations on foot, thus reducing vehicle trips. Gateway to Downtown and the Sponge Docks US 19 s function as a gateway to Downtown Tarpon Springs and the Sponge Docks creates unique opportunities for planning along the corridor. In addition to carrying commute trips and serving as a suburban main street, the corridor provides access to two of the region s primary tourist and visitor destinations. Through coordinated aesthetic, landscape, wayfinding, and other enhancements, improved conditions along the corridor will help strengthen community identity and attractiveness. Next Steps As next steps in a longer-term planning process, Forward Pinellas and the City of Tarpon Springs should collaborate on preparation of a preliminary framework for land use and development along the corridor. The framework should build on the major crossroad locations identified 3
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis in Chapter 2 and be designed to promote more compact, intense, and connected destinations and help address challenges associated with conventional forms of auto-oriented, strip commercial development. Such a framework could include a preliminary vision statement, the definition of place types to guide future planning efforts, and planning strategies describing the preferred form, pattern, and character of development and redevelopment. The vision, place types, and planning strategies would provide a starting point for the following actions: completion of a Special Area Plan for the corridor designed to meet City and Forward Pinellas requirements; refinement of goals, objectives, and policies in the City of Tarpon Springs Comprehensive Plan; drafting of new form-based design and development standards to guide private investment; definition of context-sensitive design standards and approaches for transportation and mobility improvements; continued collaboration with FDOT to address access and safety concerns, improve bicycle, pedestrian, and transit accommodations; and enhance the corridor s function as a gateway to Downtown Tarpon Springs and the Sponge Docks; and establishment of corridor-specific economic development incentives focused on promoting appropriate forms of reinvestment and redevelopment. 4 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS 02 Land Use & Regulatory Context The following section documents existing land uses in the study area and provides a closer look at conditions with the potential to influence future land use and redevelopment. Land Use & Development The study area includes over 3,500 acres of land divided into over 4,000 individual parcels. As shown on Table 1 and Figure 3, residential uses account for 47 percent of land uses in the study area, and commercial and office uses account for 13 percent. In general, parcels fronting directly on US 19 are in some form of commercial, office, or multifamily residential use and parcels just off the corridor are primarily in single-family residential use. Twenty percent of the land in the study area is recreation/open space, which includes a portion of Innisbrook Golf and Spa Resort and Al Anderson Park to the south, and North Anclote River Nature Park to the north. Because of the Anclote River, the study area s northern region between East Tarpon Avenue and Anclote Boulevard is in a Special Flood Hazard Area. The Cycadia Cemetery and open greenspace occupy this land, which helps to abate flood risk in the area. Existing land uses were determined using parcel-based data available from the Pinellas County Property Appraiser s Office (PCPAO) and Forward Pinellas. Table 1. US 19 Study Area Existing Land Use Existing Land Use Parcels Acres Percent Residential 3,503 1,768 47% Single-Family 2,496 803.8 21% Duplex/Triplex/Fourplex 72 5.0 0% Multifamily 679 768.0 20% Mobile Home 256 191.3 5% Commercial 73 346.1 9% Office 39 155.6 4% Resort 6 25.4 1% Industrial 39 34.1 1% Agricultural 1 5.5 0% Institutional 57 326.1 9% Transportation/Utility 22 18.5 0% Water/Drainage 18 20.1 1% Recreation/Open Space 28 771.7 20% Vacant 498 295.6 8% TOTAL 4,284 3,766.5 100% Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser 5
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 3. Existing Land Use & Wetlands BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PA Existing Land Use US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Wetlands Single-family Duplex/Triplex/Fourplex Multi-family Mobile Home Agricultural Commercial Office Mixed-use Industrial Institutional Marina Resort Rec./Open Space Transp./Utility Vacant Water/Drainage 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Forward Pinellas, Pinellas County Property Appraiser, FEMA 6 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Development Characteristics FORM & CHARACTER Although the character of areas along US 19 changes from place to place as discussed below, most areas were developed following conventional suburban models. Typical projects along the corridor include single-use, low-rise buildings set back behind simple landscape strips and one or more bays of parking. Architectural and landscape design treatments are typical of suburban locations throughout the region, streetscape and public space improvements to support pedestrian and transit travel are minimal or non-existent, and individual projects usually are not well connected to adjacent projects or nearby neighborhoods. As shown in Figures 4 through 6, building types include large-format retail buildings, in-line retail strips, and stand-alone retail and office buildings on out-parcels and individual sites. Although both multi-family residential and office uses are in close proximity to retail and restaurants, deep building setbacks, the lack of a local street grid, and limited streetscape and pedestrian amenities make walking from place to place an impractical alternative to driving. The corridor s neighborhood-serving shopping and dining destinations at Tarpon Avenue also function primarily as autooriented destinations. Buildings in these locations also follow conventional suburban forms and patterns of development with building frontages set back from streets behind multiple bays of parking and buildings on outparcels and pad sites. The suburban character of the corridor, the result of both market forces and development codes in effect in the 1970s and 1980s, may limit redevelopment potential, especially in areas with relatively small parcel sizes, fragmented ownership, and that lack an interconnected network of local streets. In these more challenged areas, the form and pattern of development may limit the potential of owners to adapt to changing market conditions and attract investment as access and circulation patterns change along US 19. The current character and quality of development also makes it difficult to distinguish between subdistricts and destinations within the study area. Due to the generic quality of many landscape and architectural designs, and the lack of investment in streetscapes and public spaces, the corridor s image is indistinguishable from other suburban corridors in the region. The lack of a unique or compelling brand for the Tarpon Springs section of US 19 may limit the County s ability to attract investment and promote the corridor as a regional destination and attractive market development. In the areas located between the local shopping destinations, the character of development is driven partially by parcel size. Over time, the subdivision of commercial sites along US 19 has resulted in a fragmented pattern of smaller sites with individual strip centers, retail buildings, and small offices interspersed among larger sites housing auto dealerships, mobile home parks, and low-rise apartment complexes. On average, sites in the in-between areas are smaller than those found at the cross streets, but suburban building forms and site configurations predominate. 7
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 4. Retail and Housing Types - US 19 at Klosterman Road Figure 5. Shopping Strip Center - US 19 at Tarpon Avenue US 19 US 19 Klosterman Road Tarpon Avenue Figure 6. Housing Types - US 19 at Live Oak Street US 19 Live Oak Street Source: 2017 Pictometry 8 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY The development intensity of parcels was calculated to indicate general levels of utilization within the study area. Usually, areas with low levels of utilization are considered to have higher potential to redevelop and those with higher levels of utilization are considered less likely to experience redevelopment pressure. Development intensities were determined by calculating the floor area ratio (FAR) for retail, office, or industrial parcels. As shown on Figure 7, the average development intensity within the study area is relatively low, falling under 0.4 FAR. Such intensities are generally lower than those permitted under the future land use categories but are consistent with intensities found along commercial arterials throughout the Tampa Bay region. Typical suburban forms of development like automotive dealerships, shopping centers, in-line strip centers, and stand-alone commercial buildings on pad sites tend to fall into the lowerintensity categories due in part to parking requirements and conventional development practices favoring single-story, single-use forms of development served by surface parking. Although utilization rates are generally low, the analysis does show pockets where intensities are higher than average. As shown on Figure 7, the highest development intensities are located at the northern end of the study area near Live Oak Street. Larger properties with the highest FAR along the corridor are located west of US 19 at Live Oak Street and include: the ABC Packaging Machine Corporation facility (0.50 FAR), the Beltram Foodservice Group restaurant supply store (0.60 FAR), and the Accent Neon & Sign Company (0.44 FAR). NOTE: Development intensities were evaluated based on data collected and reported by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser and may not reflect development intensity reported by other sources. AGE OF CONSTRUCTION Age of building construction is another factor influencing a property s competitive position and probability of redevelopment. As shown on Figure 8, buildings fronting the US 19 corridor were built at various times from pre-1960 to the present. A small majority of buildings were built between 1980 and 1999. However, a number of large newly-constructed (2000 to present) buildings are located at the intersection of US 19 and Tarpon Avenue. Businesses here include a Publix Super Market with surrounding fast food options and a CVS drug store. The Mt Vernon Shopping Center at US 19 and Spruce Street, Riverside Apartments at US 19 and Beckett Way, the Arthur Rutenberg single family homes at US 19 and Grand Cypress Boulevard, and the Tarpon Ridge townhomes at US 19 and Rita Way were also built between 2000 and the present. NOTE: The age of construction was identified using parcel data collected and reported by the Pinellas County Property Appraiser. MARKET VALUE To further assess patterns of investment and potential for redevelopment, improvement values for parcels were calculated as a percent of total property value. This analysis resulted in a map showing areas with higher and lower levels of investment represented by building values relative to land values. As shown in Figure 9, the majority of buildings in the study area have an improvement value of fifty to seventy-five percent. Areas with building values representing a high proportion of total parcel value include: Riverside Apartments, Promise Bookshoppe, Cycadia Cemetery, and St. Petersburg College - Tarpon Springs Campus. Parcels where the land value was a higher percentage of the total parcel value mainly include mobile home parks and open greenspace within the study area. 9
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 7. Development Intensity BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD DARLINGTON RD WEST US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY BECKETT WAY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST SPRUCE ST Tarpon Springs N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE US 19 S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD Unincorporated BELCHER RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Development Intensity US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Municipal Boundary Building Footprint No Info Vacant < 0.2 FAR 0.2 to 0.4 FAR 0.4 to 0.8 FAR > 0.8 FAR 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser, HDR 10 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 8. Age of Construction BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Age of Construction US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Building Footprint Vacant no data pre 1960 1960-1979 1980-1999 2000 to present 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser 11
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 9. Building Value as Percent of Total Value BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Building Value as % of Total Value US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Building Value/Total Value Water No data (condo) Vacant 0.1-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser, HDR 12 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Planning & Policy Context THE COUNTYWIDE PLAN The Countywide Plan (CWP) for Pinellas County guides land use planning for the County s 25 local governments, including the unincorporated portions of the County. The Countywide Plan is closely coordinated with the Pinellas County MPO s (now Forward Pinellas) Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The current plan, which took effect August 7, 2015, is the result of a nearly four-year collaborative process between Forward Pinellas and all 25 local governments, partner agencies, and the Board of County Commissioners in their role as the countywide planning authority. The CWP establishes a framework for higher-density redevelopment in activity centers and multi-modal corridors that can support a variety of transportation modes, while at the same time preserving and enhancing the suburban character of established neighborhoods. Another goal of the plan is to provide for and protect sufficient land to support employment and maintain high-wage jobs in Pinellas County. The plan consists of three major components to provide a countywide framework for development. The Countywide Plan Strategies provides the policy basis for the entire plan, the Countywide Rules set forth the regulations governing map implementation and amendment, and the Countywide Plan Map shows the locations of the plan categories. As shown in Figure 10, the majority of the parcels that front US 19 within the study limits are designated as Retail and Services. Parcels to the east and west of US 19 are primarily classified as Residential Low Medium, with isolated parcels categorized as Preservation, Employment, Residential Medium, or Public/Semipublic. Detailed descriptions of the plan categories are provided in Table 2. Transit-Oriented Land Use Vision Map As part of the Countywide Plan Strategies, the Transit-Oriented Land Use Vision Map (Figure 11), was established to guide decisions regarding future locations of transit-oriented densities and intensities in the County. The purpose of the Vision Map is to identify those areas of the County most able to accommodate higher densities and intensities in coordination with transit service and other multimodal transportation and to maximize the concentration of jobs and populations along these routes. The Vision Map identifies five types of Activity Centers throughout the County: Major Centers - are major urban centers and downtowns that are the employment, retail, residential and public focal points of their communities or the county as a whole, with significant existing and future development potential and capacity for increased density/ intensity Community Centers - are areas with notable concentrations of employment, retail, residential and public uses, which serve as focal points for their communities but are less intensive than Major Centers. Neighborhood Centers - are smaller areas with concentrations of retail, residential and public uses, which serve as focal points for their immediate communities but are less intensive than Community Centers. Transit Station Centers - are potential future light rail transit station locations identified in the Metropolitan Planning Organization s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and which are further subdivided into Typologies I through IV. Special Centers - are the areas with special area plans adopted prior to August 7, 2015. 13
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 10. Countywide Plan Map BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD DARLINGTON RD WEST US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY BECKETT WAY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST SPRUCE ST Tarpon Springs N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE US 19 S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD Unincorporated BELCHER RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Countywide Plan Map US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Municipal Boundary Residential Very Low Residential Low Medium Residential Medium Office Resort Retail & Services Employment Industrial Public/Semi-Public Preservation Activity Center Recreation/Open Space 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Forward Pinellas 14 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Table 2. Countywide Plan Map Summary Category Matrix Category/Symbol Description Max Dwelling Units Per Acre (UPA) Max Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Residential Very Low (RVL) Areas in a rural or large lot, very low density residential use. 1.30 Residential Low Medium (RLM) Areas in a suburban, low density or moderately dense residential use. 1.50 Residential Medium (RM) Areas in a medium-density residential use. 15.50 Residential High (RH) Areas in a high-density residential use. 30.60 Office (O) Resort (R) Retail & Services (R&S) Employment (E) Industrial (I) Public/Semi-Public (P/SP) Areas with office uses, low-impact employment uses, and residential uses (subject to an acreage threshold), in areas characterized by a transition between residential and commercial uses and in areas well-suited for community-scale residential/office mixed-use development. Areas in high-density residential and resort use. Allows for a combination of residential and temporary lodging use. Areas with a mix of businesses that provide for the shopping and personal service needs of the community or region, provide for employment opportunities and accommodate target employment uses, and may include residential uses as part of the mix of uses. Areas with a wide range of employment uses, including primary industries (i.e., those with a customer base that extends beyond Pinellas County), allowing for flex space, and for uses that have minimal external impacts. Areas in a general industrial manner; and so as to encourage the reservation and use of areas for industrial use. Institutional and transportation/utility uses that serve the community or region, especially larger facilities having acreage exceeding the thresholds established in other plan categories, and which are consistent with the need, character, and scale of such uses relative to the surrounding uses, transportation facilities, and natural resource features. 15.50 1.0 (specified uses in TEC) 30 1.2 24.55 1.1 (specified uses in TEC) N/A.65 1.3 (specified uses in TEC) N/A.75 1.5 (specified uses in TEC) 12.5.65 (institutional).70 (trans./utility) 1.0 (hospital) Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) Recreation/open space uses that serve the community or region. N/A.25 Preservation (P) Natural resource features worthy of preservation and those areas of the county that are now used, or are appropriate to be used, for the conservation, production, and management of the regional potable water supply and the supporting infrastructure, consistent with the natural resources of the area. N/A.10 (preservation).25 (water supply) Target Employment Center (TEC) Areas of the county that are now developed, or appropriate to be developed, in a concentrated and cohesive pattern to facilitate employment uses of countywide significance. 1 Includes only those corridors with associated density, intensity, and/or traffic generation rate standards. See Otherwise Applicable Category and Multiplier Factor Source: Countywide Plan Strategies, http://forwardpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/countywide-plan-strategies.pdf 15
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Additionally, the Vision Map identifies five types of Multimodal Corridors throughout the county (see Figure 11): Primary Corridors are those corridors identified by the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) and in the LRTP as Core bus routes as of August 7, 2015. Secondary Corridors are those corridors identified by PSTA as Frequent Local bus routes as of August 7, 2015. Supporting Corridor are those corridors identified by PSTA as Supporting Local corridors and trolley routes providing daily service as of August 7, 2015. Regional Corridors are those corridors identified by PSTA as Regional Express routes and the CSX railway line, as of August 7, 2015. Transit stops along regional corridors shall be as identified by PSTA. Special Corridors are areas in a linear configuration adopted as Special Area Plans prior to August 7, 2015. The Vision Map shows eligible locations for adoption of these Activity Centers and Multimodal Corridors using the rules outlined in Table 3. Activity Centers are most appropriately located at the intersections of two or more Multimodal Corridors or other arterial or collector roadways, with the highest density and intensity Activity Center subcategories located along corridors appropriate for the highest frequency transit service. Table 4 and Table 5 summarize the level of development allowed within the Activity Centers and along Multimodal Corridors based on areawide recommended target ranges and project-specific maximum permitted densities and intensities. According to the Plan s goals, these locations should reflect the desire to locate increased densities/intensities in close proximity to existing/future premium transit service. The potential locations on the Vision Map are generally based on plans for future transit improvements. US 19 has been identified as a Primary Corridor. This corridor designation would allow for the highest level of density and intensity. Additionally, several locations along US 19 are identified as Activity Centers; however, none of these locations are within the Tarpon Springs study area. Table 3. Multimodal Corridor Subcategory Intersections Providing Tier II Eligible Locations for Activity Center Subcategories Primary Corridor Secondary Corridor Regional Corridor (at transit stop) Supporting Corridor Other Arterials Other Collectors Primary Corridor Major Center Major Center Major Center Community Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Secondary Corridor Major Center Community Center Community Center Community Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Regional Corridor (at transit stop) Major Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Supporting Corridor Community Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Other Arterials Community Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Other Collectors Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Center Source: Countywide Plan Rules, Table 2a. http://forwardpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/countywide-plan-rules.pdf 16 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 11. Transit-Oriented Land Use Vision Map Table 4. Activity Centers Activity Center Subcategory Areawide Recommended Target Ranges for Center Density/Intensity 1 Dwelling Units/Acre or FAR (or Proportionate Share of Each) Project-Specific Maximum Permitted Center Density/Intensity 2 Dwelling Units/Acre or FAR (or Proportionate Share of Each) - I 90-150 3.0-5.0 200 7.0 Transit Station -II 60-90 2.0-3.0 150 5.0 Center (TOD) -III 45-60 1.5-2.0 90 3.0 -IV 30-45 1.0-1.5 60 2.0 Major Center 40-50 1.25-1.75 75 2.5 Community Center 15-30 0.5-1.0 50 1.5 Neighborhood Center 7.5-10 0.4-0.5 15 0.75 Special Center Per Approved Special Area Plans 1 Target ranges are for each plan map area as classified by plan category and subcategory. 2 Permitted max. are for any individual project within the plan map area as classified by plan category/subcategory. Source: Countywide Plan Strategies, http://forwardpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/countywide-plan-strategies.pdf Table 5. Multimodal Corridors 1 Multimodal Corridor Type Areawide Recommended Target Ranges for Density/Intensity 2 Dwelling Units/Acre or FAR (or Proportionate Share of Each) Project-Specific Maximum Permitted Density/Intensity 3 Dwelling Units/Acre or FAR (or Proportionate Share of Each) Primary Corridor 15-30 0.5-1.0 40 1.5 Secondary Corridor 10-20 0.5-0.75 30 1.0 Special Corridor Per Approved Special Area Plans 1 Includes only those subcategories of the Multimodal Corridor category with density/intensity standards. 2 Target ranges are for each plan map area as classified by plan category and subcategory. 3 Permitted max. are for any individual project within the plan map area as classified by plan category/subcategory. Source: Countywide Plan Strategies, Figure 1. http://forwardpinellas.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/countywide-plan-strategies.pdf Source: Countywide Plan Strategies, http://forwardpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/countywide-plan-strategies.pdf 17
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE/ZONING Zoning As shown in Figure 12, study area parcels with direct frontage on US 19 are within the City s Highway Business (HB) and Land Conservation (LC) zoning districts. These districts allow for Multifamily and some Preservation Areas and Conservation Easements; as well as Golf Courses, Public or Private; and Community Assembly. Other City zoning districts within the study area include Agricultural (A), Single Family Residential (R-100, R-100A, R-70A), One and Two Family Residential (R-70, R-60), Residential Multifamily (RM), Mobile Home Park (MHP), Residential Office (RO), General Business (GB), Intensive Business (IB), Industrial Restricted (IR), Residential Planned Development (RPD), and Commercial Planned Development (CPD). Table 6. City of Tarpon Springs Zoning Summary Table Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height A Agricultural (See Section 25.01, LDC) Residential Districts R-100 Single Family Residential (See Section 25.02, LDC) R-100A Single Family Residential (See Section 25.02, LDC) Maximum Building Height 30,000 200 No min. 30 50 20 25 35 1.4 dwelling units per acre.30 FAR.60 max. ISR 10,000 75 100 25 30 A minimum of 10 with a total of 25 for both side yards 15 35 4 Dwelling units per acre 7,000 60 100 25 25 10 10 35 5 Dwelling units per acre Minimum Net Floor Area No min. 1,200 1,200 18 Final Report
Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height R-70A Single Family Residential (See Section 25.02, LDC) R-70 One and Two Family Residential (See Section 25.03, LDC) R-60 One and Two Family Residential (See Section 25.03, LDC) US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Maximum Building Height 6,500 60 80 25 20 7.5 15 35 6 Dwelling units per acre Minimum Net Floor Area Single Family 7,000 60 80 25 20 7.5 15 35 6 Dwelling 1,000 units per acre Two Family 10,000 600 Non Residential Uses Single Family 6,000 40 No min. 25 to garage; 15 to unenclosed porch; 20 to living area Two Family 9,000 60 No min. 25 to garage; 15 to unenclosed porch; 20 to living area 20 to house; 10 to detached garage 25 to house; 10 to detached garage 7.5 10 All other uses 12,000 88 No min. 35 25 15 15.40 FAR.65 Max ISR 1,000 30 See FLUM No Min. 19
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height CRM Conditional Residential Mix (See Section 25.04, LDC) *For minimum distances between multifamily buildings see Section 25.04(D)(6)(d) (5), LDC Single Family Detached Single Family Attached Single Family Semi- Detached Maximum Building Height Minimum Net Floor Area 7,000 60 80 25 20 7.5 15 35 See FLUM 1.000 2,000 20 100 20 facing a public right of way; 15 facing a common drive, courtyard or private parking area 2,000 20 100 20 facing a public right of way; 15 facing a common drive, courtyard or private parking area 15 7.5 7.5 See FLUM 900 15 7.5 7.5 See FLUM 1,000 Two Family 10,000 80 90 25 20 7.5 15 See FLUM 600 Multifamily* 10,000 80 90 25 20 20 20 45 See FLUM 600 RM Residential Multifamily (See Section 25.05, LDC) MHP Mobile Home Park (See Section 25.06, LDC) As provided for by the CRM District 4,000 50 80 15 7.5 5 10 35 7 dwelling units per acre (min. 15 acres) 600 20 Final Report
Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height RO Residential Office (See Section 25.08, LDC) Commercial Districts NB Neighborhood Business (See Section 25.10, LDC) GB General Business (See Section 25.11, LDC) HB Highway Business (See Section 25.12, LDC) Residential Uses Non Residential Uses Single Family Detached Non Residential Uses As provided for by the CRM District US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Maximum Building Height 5,000 50 80 20 20 7.5 15 35.25 FAR 20% min. open space.75 max. ISR 5,000 50 80 10 15 ; 20 when adjoining a residential district Minimum Net Floor Area No min. As provided for by the R-70 District See FLUM 1,000 Zero; 10 when adjoining a residential district Single Family Attached All Other Residential Uses All Other Uses No min. No min. No min. Zero 10 Zero; 10 when adjoining a residential district 10 25.20 FAR 20% min. open space.80 max. ISR No min. As provided for by the R-60 district See FLUM No min. As provided for by the CRM District See FLUM No min. Zero, but outside visibility triangle 45 See Comp. Plan 10% min. open space.90 max. ISR Multifamily As provided for by the CRM District 15 dwelling units per acre 15 dwelling units per acre 10,000 80 100 30 25 10 15 35.40 FAR 15% min. open space.85 max. ISR No min. No min. No min. 21
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height IB Intensive Business (See Section 25.13, LDC) WDI Waterfront Development (See Section 25.14, LDC) Industrial Districts IR Industrial Restricted (See Section 25.17, LDC) IH Industrial Heavy (See Section 25.18, LDC) Special Purpose Districts Maximum Building Height 5,000 50 80 10 10 10 10 35.40 FAR 15% min. open space.85 max. ISR Single Family As provided for by the R-60 District 15 dwelling units per acre All Other Uses No min. No min. No min. Zero feet minimum, 10 maximum Zero; 25 when adjoining a residential district 10,000 100 100 25 20 ; 75 if adjoining a residential district Zero; 10 when adjoining a residential district 20 ; 75 if adjoining a residential district Zero feet minimum, 10 maximum See Section 25.14(E)(2)(a) FAR per FLUM 15% min. open space.85 max. ISR 25 45.60 FAR 15% min. open space.80 max. ISR Minimum Net Floor Area No min. No min. No min. No min. LC Land Conservation (See Section 25.19, LDC) P/PS Public/Semi-Public (See Section 25.20, LDC) Refer to Section 25.19 of the LDC for Permitted and Conditional Uses Refer to Section 25.20 of the LDC for district regulations 22 Final Report
Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height Planned Development Districts RPD Residential Planned Development (See Section 78.01, LDC) Single Family Detached Single Family Detached Cluster Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line Single Family SemiDetached Single Family Attached Multifamily (see also min. distances between bldgs.) Non Residential Uses CPD Commercial Planned Development (See Section 78.02, LDC) US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Maximum Building Height Minimum Net Floor Area 10,000 75 No min. 25 20 10 15 35 See FLUM 1200 6,500 (average) 60 (corner lots only) No min. 20 10 12 between buildings, 5 to lot line 4,000 40 No min. 20 No min. Zero one side, 10 other side 10 See FLUM 1000 10 See FLUM 1000 2,000 20 No min. 15 10 10, one wall attached 15 See FLUM 1000 2,000 20 No min. 15 10 10 (end 15 See FLUM 900 lots only) 10,000 100 No min. 25 15 15 15 45 See FLUM 600 10,000 100 No min. 20 10 10 35 to external perimeter streets 35 See FLUM No min. 10,000 No min. No min. No min. 45 40 FAR 600 20% min. open space.85 max. ISR 23
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Zoning District Use Minimum Lot Size Minimum Yard Setbacks Maximum Area Width Depth Front Rear Side Side Building Street Height IPD Industrial Planned Development (See Section 78.03, LDC) 15,000 150 No min. 35 to abutting collector or arterial roads; 20 to remaining perimeter boundaries; 75 to adjoining residential uses or districts; Parking lots shall be separated from adjoining residential uses by a 15 buffer Maximum Building Height 60 50 FAR 20% min. open space.80 max. ISR Minimum Net Floor Area LDC = Comprehensive Zoning and Land Development Code; FLUM = Future Land Use Map; FAR = Floor Area Ratio; ISR = Impervious Surface Ratio IMPORTANT NOTICE: This document is published by the Development Services Department as a public service and does not contain the complete requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning and Land Development Code. It is intended as a quick reference and for general information only. Always use the official laws or ordinances if absolute legal accuracy is required. Source: http://www.ctsfl.us/index_htm_files/summaryofzoningdistricts.pdf No min. 24 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 12. City of Tarpon Springs Zoning Map BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR COLOR LEGEND FOR ZONING MAP PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD Source: City of Tarpon Springs C:\Andyfiles\Citymap_NEW\citymap_base.dwg, Zoning Section Cover 18x24, 7/2/2014 2:21:22 PM RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PA Zoning (City of Tarpon Springs) US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Wetlands 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: City of Tarpon Springs. Clipped by HDR 25
US 19 US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Access & Mobility US 19 is the only continuous north-south highway that serves the heavily populated coastal areas of Pinellas and Pasco counties. This major regional facility is the only road in the study area that is classified as a Principal Arterial. US Alt 19, East Tarpon Avenue/Keystone Road, and Belcher Road are classified as Minor Arterials. As shown on Figure 14, Dixie Highway, Beckett Way, Spruce Street, Dr. MLK Jr. Drive, and Klosterman Road are classified as Collectors. The only road classified as a Local Major Street is Cypress Pond Road. The remainder of roads are considered Local Streets. The corridor has fairly continuous sidewalks that are generally set back from the roadway behind an open drainage swale. Over the last two decades, US 19 in Pinellas County has begun to transform from a commercial roadway with multiple driveways and access roads into a limited access six-lane roadway with interchanges and two-lane frontage roads. Construction on several segments to the south of the study area have already been completed and design is underway on the US 19 corridor within the study area. The LRTP was amended in February to remove the US 19 grade separated improvements at Tarpon Ave, Lake St to the county line. That was the result of a Tarpon Springs resolution opposing the improvements. The 2045 LRTP is currently being developed. Future improvements to this section of the corridor, including interchanges and overpasses as well as at-grade modifications, will be evaluated as the Plan is being developed. The LRTP is scheduled for adoption in November, 2019. Figure 13. Existing Conditions at US 19 and Tarpon Avenue Tarpon Avenue 26 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 14. Roadway Functional Classification & Planned US 19 Interchanges BRYAN LN PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR FLORA AVE KEYSTONE RD US 19 DARLINGTON RD WEST PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY BECKETT WAY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE ) LIVE OAK ST SPRUCE ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE Dr. MLK Jr Drive S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE P US 19 PARKVIEW BLVD S PINELLAS AVE P KLOSTERMAN RD BELCHER RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Roadway Functional Classification US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Water Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Minor Collector Local Major Street Local Street Trail P Planned Interchange ) Planned Overpass Only Planned Frontage Road 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Forward Pinellas, FDOT 27
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Redevelopment Potential To assess development and redevelopment potential within the study area, the study team evaluated Pinellas County Property Appraiser and Forward Pinellas data regarding land use and building year of construction dates for the 4,284 parcels within the study area. Since the majority of the study area east and west of US 19 is stable, single-family residential neighborhoods, this evaluation focused on the parcels with direct US 19 frontage or located near the major east-west crossroad (Tarpon Avenue). This area includes 289 parcels on 753 acres. The first part of the evaluation looked at the availability of vacant parcels. Using the vacant land use classifications in the property appraiser and Forward Pinellas consolidated land use categories, 53 parcels are vacant (176 acres). As shown in Table 7, the majority of the vacant parcels are small in size, averaging about 4.0 acres along the corridor and 0.5 acre within the parcels at the major crossroad. Figure 15 shows vacant parcels are spread evenly within the study area. The largest vacant parcel is located just north of Live Oak Street, to the east of US 19. This land is categorized as Retail & Services, Office, Preservation, and Residential Low Medium in the Countywide Plan. However, development has likely been avoided since this land is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. Age of construction is another factor influencing a property s competitive position and probability of redevelopment. As shown in Table 7, there are 23 parcels (177 acres) adjacent to the US 19 corridor that have buildings constructed prior to 1980. The majority of these parcels are smaller in size, averaging about 7.7 acres along the corridor and 2.1 acres within the major crossroads parcels. Figure 15 shows these pre-1980 parcels are mainly clustered near the southern half of the study area. Many older parcels are located to the east and west of US 19, south of Tarpon Avenue. The majority of these parcels are mobile home/rv Park communities. Without significant reinvestment or major changes in these older properties, attracting quality tenants and remaining locally- and regionally-competitive may prove difficult. These older properties may become candidates for redevelopment, thus creating opportunities to improve the corridor s attractiveness, address connectivity and circulation challenges and strengthen the competitive position of destinations. Table 7. Redevelopment Potential Summary Total Vacant Pre-1980 Construction Location Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Avg. Size Parcels Acres Avg. Size Corridor Adjacent Parcel 239 672.5 43 170.9 4.0 23 176.6 7.7 Major Crossroad Parcel 50 81.2 10 4.7 0.5 7 14.6 2.1 Tarpon Avenue 50 81.2 10 4.7 0.5 7 14.6 2.1 TOTAL 289 753.7 53 175.6 4.4 30 191.2 9.8 Source: Pinellas County Property Appraiser, HDR 28 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 15. Redevelopment Potential Map BRYAN LN HIGHPOINT DR LAKE FRONT DR PERRINE RA NCH RD HIGHPOINT DR LANSBROOK LAKE FRONT DR PKWY LANSBROOK PKWY GRAND BLVD SUNRAY DR Lake Tarpon DARLINGTON RD WEST MILE STRETCH DR KEYSTONE RD US 19 PASCO COUNTY US ALT 19 BECKETT WAY SPRUCE ST US 19 BELCHER RD DARLINGTON RD WEST ANCLOTE BLVD DIXIE HWY DIXIE HWY N PINELLAS AVE LIVE OAK ST N SPRING BLVD E TARPON AVE S PINELLAS AVE MERES BLVD VIRGINIA AVE S PINELLAS AVE KLOSTERMAN RD RIVERSIDE DR WHITCO MB BLVD MERES BLVD KLOSTERMAN RD PALM HARBOR BLVD ANCLOTE RD TARPON DR CARLTON PL PALM HARBOR BLVD Corridor Redevelopment Potential US 19 Economic & Land Use Analysis - Tarpon Springs Project Limits Special Flood Hazard Areas (Zones A, AE, AO) Water Coastal Flood Zone with Velocity Hazard Wetlands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 500 Year Flood Zone US19_Tarpon_Centers Corridor Parcel pre-1980 Construction Vacant Parcel Mobile Home/RV Park 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Source: Pinellas County, Pinellas County Property Appraiser, HDR 29
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis 03 Demographic and Economic Analysis SB Friedman has conducted a market/economic and land use study for the US 19 corridor in Tarpon Springs in order to better define market potentials for major land uses and help outline planning and economic development strategies along the corridor. The following section includes an analysis of select demographic and economic characteristics of both the study area and Pinellas County. These key metrics help explain fundamental market demand for residential and commercial land uses that are likely to drive future development and redevelopment initiatives within the study area. Population Growth The Pinellas County population is estimated at 960,000 residents as of 2017. The County added approximately 38,000 people since 2000, growing at a 0.24% compound annual growth rate (CAGR). Population is expected to increase slightly in the next few decades. Woods and Poole data projects a 0.44% CAGR between 2017 to 2040, resulting in an estimated county population of nearly 1.06 million people by 2040. Population in the study area is nearly 17,000 people as of 2017. According to ESRI Business Analyst (a market/business geospatial tool), population and households are projected to increase at a CAGR of 1.3% and 1.2%, respectively, from 2017 to 2022 slightly slower than the rates experienced from 2010 to 2017. As shown in Figures 16 and 17, the Pinellas County population is projected to increase. As compared to the 25-year period from 1990 to 2015, when the County added nearly 93,000 residents, nearly 79,000 additional residents are projected during the 2015 to 2040 period. As shown on Figure 19, in the future, population growth will be greatest Figure 16. Pinellas County Population Projection, 2000-2040 1,100,000 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 922,150 916,440 Source: Woods and Poole 949,827 959,882 975,947 1,063,066 1,026,988 1,002,267 2000 2017 CAGR: 0.24% 2017 2040 CAGR: 0.44% 2000 2010 2015 2017 2020 2025 2030 2040 Figure 17. Study Area Population Projection, 2010-2022 2010 2017 2022 Source: ESRI Business Analyst 2011-2015 ACS estimate 2010-2017 CAGR 2017-2022 CAGR Population 15,117 16,936 18,049 1.6% 1.3% Households 7,016 7,762 8,235 1.5% 1.2% 30 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 19. Pinellas County Population Projection, 1990-2040 Figure 18. Pinellas County Population Projection by Cohort, 2015-2040 AGE C O H O R T YOUNG PROFESSIONALS (20-34) FAMILY YEARS; TRADE-UP HOMEBUYERS (35-54) EMPTY NESTERS & YOUNG SENIORS (55-74) SENIORS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS (75+) POPULATION CHANGE, 1990-2015: +92,975 400,000 300,000 20-34 35-54 55-74 75+ -10,920 +43,486 +63,018-3,209 40,000 36,879 38,090 200,000 30,000 20,000 17,604 21,684 100,000 10,000 0-10,000 7,469 9,395 4,019 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 -1,769 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+ -4,571-4,225-4,309-10,368-9,228-8,295 0 Source: Woods and Poole 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040-20,000 PROJECTED POPULATION CHANGE, 2015-2040: +79,306 40,000 +5,534 +26,327-18,546 +65,951 32,361 28,576 30,000 20,000 15,780 11,520 11,870 8,434 10,000 5,764 5,014 802 0 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+ -1,032-10,000-5,457-6,213 in the Seniors with Special Needs cohort (age 75+). This may translate to a greater need for assisted living facilities, single-story or ADA-accessible housing, or increased demand for medical care facilities. Population growth is also expected in the Family Years; Trade-Up Homebuyers cohort (age 35-54). This may translate to increased demand for multiple housing types, including more walkable, mixed-use housing options, such as single-family homes, and housing with high levels of access to regional employment centers. -20,000 Source: Woods Source: Woods and Poole and Poole -14,275-13,838 31
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Median Household Income Figure 20. Median Household Income by Census Tract, 2016 Another key demographic metric is median household income. As presented in Figure 20, the study area is a largely middle-income area, with a 2016 annual median household income of $38,610. This figure is less than the County average of $45,362 (Table 8). Within the study area, nearly 32% of households earn less than $25,000 annually. Approximately 14% of study area households earn more than $100,000 annually. Study Area $38,610 Tarpon Springs $41,684 PASCO COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY Table 8. Comparison of Median Household Income, 2016 Geography Median HH Income Study Area $38,610 Tarpon Springs $41,684 Pinellas County $45,362 Tampa $44,997 St. Petersburg $44,476 State of Florida $42,500 St. Petersburg $44,476 Tampa $44,997 Source: American Community Survey, ESRI Business Analyst, Pinellas County GIS Department 32 Final Report
Employment SB Friedman analyzed employment data to better understand future development potential within the study area. TAMPA MSA EMPLOYMENT GROWTH SB Friedman examined employment trends in the Tampa-St. Petersburg- Clearwater Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), as prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, for the period between 2006 and 2016. As shown in Figure 21, the number of jobs in the Tampa MSA increased by nearly 64,600 jobs from 2006 to 2016. This translates to a CAGR of 0.51%, or an average addition of nearly 6,500 jobs annually from 2006 to 2016. Since 2010, the MSA has recovered from its post-recession low of 1,105,900 jobs. Total Tampa MSA employment is approximately at a 10-year high, at 1,296,800 jobs as of 2016. PINELLAS COUNTY EMPLOYMENT SB Friedman also reviewed projected employment in Pinellas County from 2017 to 2040, as provided by Moody s Analytics. As shown in Figure 22, Pinellas County employment is at a historic high at nearly 448,000 jobs as of 2017. Pinellas County experienced employment losses following the Great Recession. In 2017, employment levels recovered from the 2007 prerecession peak of nearly 440,000 jobs. County employment is projected to increase by nearly 55,000 jobs between 2017 and 2040 at a CAGR of 0.51% a faster rate than the 0.06% CAGR for the 2000 to 2017 period. Figure 21. Tampa MSA Employment, 2006-2016 1,400,000 1,300,000 1,200,000 1,100,000 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 1,232,200 RECESSION 1,105,900 US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS 1,296,800 2006 2016 CAGR: 0.51% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, SB Friedman Figure 22. Pinellas County Projected Employment, 2000-2040 igure XX. Pinellas County Projected Employment, 2000-2040 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 443,905 RECESSION 448,116 503,260 200,000 100,000 0 2000 2017 CAGR: 0.06% 2017 2040 CAGR: 0.51% Source: Moody s Analytics, SB Friedman 33
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis STUDY AREA EMPLOYMENT Figure 23. Study Area Business Mix by Establishment, 2016 According to Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) data, there are 5,606 jobs within the study area as of 2015. This total represents just over 1% of total Pinellas County employment. Of this total, nearly 32% of study area employees are employed in the Retail Trade NAICS Industry Sector. Accommodation and Food Services and Health Care and Social Assistance Industry Sectors represent 14% and 11.4% of study area employment, respectively. 74 11% 50 8% Services 258 39% Retail Trade As shown in Figure 23, there are nearly 658 business establishments in the study area. Services (e.g., healthcare, professional services, etc.) represent the largest share of business establishments at 39%. The Retail Trade category, which is comprised of businesses that offer goods and services to consumers, represents 22% of study area business establishments. Industrial, which is comprised of the construction, manufacturing, transportation, and wholesale trade sectors, represents 20% of study area business establishments. Traditional office employment, including Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (known as FIRE ) establishments represent only 11% of businesses within the study area. The All Other category, which includes sectors such as Public Administration and Agriculture, among others, represents the remaining 8% of study area businesses. 130 20% 146 22% Source: ESRI Business Analyst, SB Friedman Industrial FIRE (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate) All Other 34 Final Report
04 Market Conditions US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Housing Market SB Friedman conducted high-level market research in order to estimate development potential for housing that may be appropriate for the study area. STUDY AREA HOUSING PROFILE Commercial land uses represent many of the parcels fronting the US 19 corridor in the study area. However, there were approximately 8,600 housing units within the study area as of 2017, as shown in Figure 24. Residential neighborhoods within or adjacent to the US 19 corridor are located within the municipalities of Tarpon Springs, Holiday, and Palm Harbor. Single-family detached product represents nearly half of the study area housing units. The other half of housing in the study area characterized by older rental apartment stock, mobile home parks, and some affordable rental housing product. Many of the more typical rental apartment buildings in the study area are two-story, garden-style product delivered before the 1990s. Multi-family product, such as rental apartments, represent approximately 30% of study area housing units. Mobile homes represent nearly 20% of the study area s housing mix. There is nearly 170 gross acres of mobile home land use in the study area, with a median mobile home park acreage of approximately 15 gross acres. Some mobile home parks within the study area are reaching the end of their useful lives due to infrastructure issues. Nearly 70% of owner-occupied housing is valued at less than $200,000, with a median value of $134,097 as of 2017 (Figure 25). The owner-occupancy rate (52%) of study area housing units mirrors the Pinellas County rate. The study area has a higher renter-occupied rate Figure 24. Study Area Housing Mix, 2017 2,295 27% 1,642 19% SF Detached 505 6% 4,161 48% SF Attached Multi Family Mobile Home or Other Figure 25. Study Area Owner-Occupied Home Value, 2017 15% 9% 6% 31% 39% Figure 26. Housing Tenure, 2017 Less than $99,999 $100,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 to $399,999 $400,000+ Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Unoccupied TARPON SPRINGS STUDY AREA PINELLAS COUNTY Source: ESRI Business Analyst, US Census 52% 52% 34% 31% 15% 17% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 35
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis (34%) as compared to the County (31%). The study area s high housing unit vacancy rate of 15%, as shown in Figure 26, may be attributable to seasonal housing use. Snowbirds or other vacationers that own second homes or seasonally occupy homes (as defined by occupation of less than six months per year) may skew the number of truly unoccupied units within the study area. Therefore, SB Friedman estimated a true vacancy rate of 7.7% by totaling the number of unoccupied housing units classified by US Census as For Rent or Other Vacant. MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT COMPS Figure 27. Typical Residential Comps PASCO COUNTY ANCLOTE BLVD TARPON AVE KLOSTERMAN RD 3 1 4 2 Typical Mobile Home Comp Typical Rental Apartment Comp Newer Rental Apartment Comp in Region Study Area T A R P O N S P R I N G S SB Friedman profiled comparable rental properties in Tarpon Springs and adjacent communities, including 1,647 units in seven properties (Table 9 and Figure 27 show examples of existing product). ALDERMAN RD CURLEW RD PINELLAS COUNTY These residential housing product comps were selected based on various factors, including their location within the study area or broader submarket. This report focuses on newer market-rate product, as defined by a delivery within the last 10 years, as well as product that is more suburban than urban in nature (e.g. two to four story product with on-site parking as compared to a high-rise in a downtown core). FL-580 C L E A R W A T E R As profiled in Figure 28 and 29, select comparable rental apartment product in the study area exhibited rental rates ranging from $1.21 to $1.35 per square foot ( SF ). There have been no new market-rate rental apartment developments in the study area in recent years. Table 9. Typical Residential Comps Summary Comp Unit Count 1 Cypress Place 96 2 Stillwater Palms 457 3 Tarpon Glen 128 4 Hillside Mobile Home Park 46 5 Epic at Gateway Centre 320 6 Gateway North 342 7 Charleston of 66th 258 36 Final Report GULF TO BAY RD BELLAIR RD ULMERTON RD PARK BLVD N Source: Costar, ESRI 6 7 5
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 28. Typical Residential Product by Type Figure 29. Residential Land Use APARTMENTS 1 MOBILE HOME PARKS 3 ANCLOTE BLVD Typical Rental Apartment Comp Typical Mobile Home Comp Cypress Place, 825 Cypress St, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689 Year Built 1985 Avg. SF 738 Units 96 Avg. Rent $896 Floors 2 Avg. Rent/SF $1.21 Acres 4 DU/Acre 24 Tarpon Glen, 42085 Us Highway 19 N, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689 Year Built 1985 Avg. SF N/A Units 128 Avg. Rent N/A Floors 1 Avg. Rent/SF N/A Acres 23 DU/Acre 6 TARPON AVE 2 4 Stillwater Palms, 2350 Cypress Pond Rd, Palm Harbor, FL 34683 Year Built 1985 Avg. SF 802 Units 457 Avg. Rent $1,079 Avg. 2 Floors Rent/SF $1.35 Acres 20 DU/Acre 23 Source: CoStar Hillside Mobile Home Park, 40110 US Highway 19 N, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689 Year Built 1956 Avg. SF N/A Units 46 Avg. Rent N/A Floors 1 Avg. Rent/SF N/A Acres 3 DU/Acre 15 KLOSTERMAN RD Source: CoStar, ESRI, HDR 37
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis NEWER MULTI-FAMILY PRODUCT IN STUDY AREA Figure 30. Newer Rental Apartment Deliveries SB Friedman researched suburban luxury rental options developed between 2014 and 2017 in nearby communities to better understand competitive alternatives, determine market rates, and identify amenities that are generally included in a higher-end rental product. A summary of key metrics for these products is included in Figure 30. NEWER RENTAL APARTMENT DELIVERIES 5 6 Based on metrics of products, newer apartment products are typically 250 to 350 units in three- to four- story buildings, with an average unit count of 307. The average site size for newer rental apartment products in the county measures at nearly 14 gross acres. Newer product has an average density of 23, as measured by dwelling units (DU) per gross acre. Based on interviews, typical newer product generally has relatively low vacancy rates upon stabilization. Newer apartment products have an average rent per SF of $1.33. This is similar to the average rent per SF of select, older rental apartment products in the study area, as previously featured in Figure 28. However, the monthly per unit costs of the newer rental apartment deliveries are nearly $500 more than the typical study area rental apartment products due to the larger size of units. In the next 20 years, new market-rate rental apartment product will most likely locate near employment centers, in areas with high accessibility to regional nodes (retail, destinations), and/or along arterials with easy access points. Epic at Gateway Centre - 3115 Grand Ave, Pinellas Park, FL 33782 Year Built 2014 Avg. SF 1,110 Units 320 Avg. Rent $1,541 Floors 4 Avg. Rent/SF $1.39 Acres 13 DU/Acre 25 Charleston on 66th - 12700 66th St N, Largo, FL 33773 Year Built 2017 Avg. SF 1,164 Units 258 Avg. Rent $1,568 Floors 4 Avg. Rent/SF $1.35 Acres 13 DU/Acre 20 7 Gateway North - 2681 Roosevelt Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33760 Year Built 2014 Avg. SF 1,027 Units 342 Avg. Rent $1,277 Floors 3 Avg. Rent/SF $1.24 Acres 15 DU/Acre 23 Note: Averages based on newer, comparable rental apartment product as featured in this Study. Source: CoStar 38 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS HOUSING STARTS SB Friedman utilized US Census housing permit data to better understand historic housing starts activity at the County level. Starts are measured by the number of detached buildings for single-family product and by units for multi-family product. As shown in Table 10 and Figure 31, according to US Census permit data, since 2010 Pinellas County has seen an annual average addition of 700 single-family detached buildings and 2,758 units of multi-family product. This results in a housing start ratio of 20/80 single-family detached buildings to multi-family units. The pace of single-family product housing starts has slowed since 2010, compared to the pre-recession pace of nearly 1,500 buildings annually during the 2000 to 2009 period. Table 10. Pinellas County Housing Permits by type, 2000-2015 PRE- RECESSION 2000-2009 Total Starts Annual Average Ratio POST- RECESSION 2010-2015 Total Starts Annual Average Ratio Single-Family Detached (buildings) 15,219 1,522 31% 4,201 700 20% Multi-family (units) 33,146 3,315 69% 16,546 2,758 80% Source: US Census There have been no new market-rate multi-family product deliveries in the study area in over five years, according to CoStar, a commercial real estate database. Figure 31. Pinellas County Housing Permits, 2000-2015 8,000 Single Family (Buildings) Muti-Family (Units) 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000-6,729 5,417 5,353 4,884 4,961 4,376 2,954 2,775 2,574 2,632 2,724 2,252 2,006 2,183 1,794 1,639 1,669 1,786 1,578 1,663 982 1,093 884 620 714 695 418 260 299 341 368 489 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: US Census 39
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis MARKET-RATE HOUSING POTENTIAL Over the next 20 years, there may be multi-family development potential for up to two to four rental apartment projects in the study area. Future development is dependent in large part on various factors, including site availability and/or land assembly opportunities, as well as new competition from locations outside the study area. According to interviews with local stakeholders, market research, and analysis of CoStar data regarding density and other site considerations, future rental apartment product will most likely be characterized by the following attributes: an 8 to 15 gross acre site; a three- to four-story building with 250 to 300 units; and/or a density of 20 to 28 DU per gross acre. Potential Impact of Proposed US 19 Road Improvements SB Friedman sought to define market potentials for major land uses with and without proposed road improvements to the US 19 corridor in the Tarpon Springs study area. In regards to access and visibility, proposed improvements to the US 19 corridor may have neutral impact on development potential in the next few decades. Interchanges and other road improvements may increase speed and access to regional employment, shopping, and entertainment destinations. However, it is possible that US 19 frontage, elevated interchanges, and/or sound walls may create barriers at grade level. In this case, proposed improvements may have an adverse affect on access and may limit potential development sites along the corridor in the study area. On a broader scale, proposed improvements to US 19 in the Palm Harbor area, and completed improvements to US 19 in the Clearwater/Largo area may likely have a more material impact on development potential by improving regional access overall. Retail Market A high-level market assessment of the potential for retail development within the study area was also conducted. Figure 32 provides an overview of various retail typologies and associated characteristics. Retail is changing at the national level. Understanding these trends provides a better context for the study area s retail market potential. E-commerce, or the transaction of buying or selling online, is expected to grow. E-commerce as a percentage of total annual national sales has more than doubled in recent years, from 3% in 2006 to 7% in 2015, as presented in Figure 33. While e-commerce as a share of total revenue varies by retailer category, brand and/or price point, stores with a traditional physical presence will continue to capture a large share of that growth. Just-in-time delivery (the process of ordering and receiving product inventory only as needed) is now possible through advancements in supply chain and logistics practices, often allowing for faster shipping directly to customers homes. Traditional brick and mortar retail stores will continue to restructure their physical presence. The growth of e-commerce, among other economic trends (spending preferences towards services over goods), means that existing stores may continue to close. Downsizing, especially in urban markets, may become increasingly common as less inventory will be required in-store. For instance, a traditional Best Buy may require a 30,000 to 50,000 SF building, as featured in Figure 34. But, the more-urban downsized format Best Buy Mobile has a narrower focus (smartphones, customer service) and may only require less than 3,000 SF. Alternately, some non-store retailers with a traditional online presence, such as Amazon, are embracing a Clicks-to-Bricks concept with the opening of physical stores (Amazon Books) with limited inventory. Omnichannel practices will likely continue to enhance customer experience by more seamlessly integrating online and offline commerce. 40 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 32. Retail Typologies Neighborhood Center Mall & Lifestyle Center REGIONAL OR SUPER-REGIONAL MALL LIFESTYLE CENTER - Typically enclosed - Anchored by 2+ full-line department stores 400,000-1,000,000+ sf - Upscale national-chain specialty stores - Dining and entertainment - Outdoor setting 250,000-500,000 sf Hybrid HYBRID OF LIFESTYLE CENTER AND POWER/COMMUNITY CENTER Regional Retail Clusters POWER CENTER COMMUNITY CENTER - 3+ category-dominant freestanding anchors of at least 20,000 sf 250,000-600,000 sf - General merchandise and convenience-oriented - Apparel/soft goods 125,000-400,000 sf Freestanding Retail Strip Retail Downtown 30,000-125,000 SF - Standalone stores - Often owner-occupied 5,000-150,000 sf - Small convenience center with goods and services - Limited trade area <30,000 sf - First-floor or standalone < 20,000 SF Source: Based on International Council of Shopping Centers retail classifications 41
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 33. E-Commerce as a Percent of Total Annual National Sales 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: US BLS; Estimated Annual US Retail Trade Sales Figure 34. Retail Store Restructuring While traditional retail is changing, new e-commerce business models are emerging altogether. The sharing economy (rental and secondary markets) places less emphasis on ownership and more on convenience. The services economy has created a market for do-it-for-me services, such as deliveries and home cleaning. The personalization economy and on-demand economy mean that customers (or smart technology) can automatically replenish curated subscriptions. As these new business models continue to emerge, it is likely that future retail development patterns will be affected by these trends. Future retail development patterns will be impacted by a divergence in retail typologies. Convenience- and/or value-focused retail, often developed in power, community, and convenience retail centers, may continue to sell basic goods and services like groceries without much concern for ambiance and experience. Conversely, experience-focused retail consisting of high-end and lifestyle retail centers may offer customers a mix of uses, including dining and entertainment options. This typology will likely be found in new lifestyle shopping centers or walkable downtown districts. Finally, value-focused retail, including fast fashion and off-price retail such as TJ Maxx, may continue to grow with the rise of customers seeking value options. Overall, omni-channel concepts will continue to play an important role in the retail landscape as consumers desire a seamless shopping experience both online and in-store. However, physical stores will not disappear. In addition to retail space, future stores may function as showrooms, service centers, or focus on offering a unique customer experience. Retail nodes are located in clusters of various typologies in and around the study area. Within select clusters of Pinellas and Pasco Counties, as profiled in Figure 35, there is nearly four million SF of retail space in six community centers, one power center, one regional mall, and two downtown clusters. Typical Size: 30,000 50,000 SF Typical Size: Under 3,000 SF Source: SB Friedman, World Economic Forum, Shaping the Future of Retail for Consumer Industries 42 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 35. Retail Structure Map STUDY AREA RETAIL Holiday Cluster Anchors: Home Depot, Save A Lot, Winn- Dixie Total SF: 330,000 Historic Sponge Docks Cluster Anchors: General retail, tourist-oriented retail Total SF: 240,000 Downtown Cluster Anchors: Tarpon Plaza, Manatee Village Mall Total SF: 530,000 ANCLOTE BLVD TARPON AVE KLOSTERMAN RD ALDERMAN RD Nebraska Cluster Anchors: Publix, Office Depot, Michaels, Ross Total SF: 380,000 CURLEW RD Curlew Crossing Cluster Anchors: Home Depot, Publix, Petco, Staples Total SF: 430,000 Source: CoStar, ESRI FL-580 Mitchell Ranch Plaza Cluster Anchors: Target, Walmart, Publix, Marshalls Total SF: 570,000 P A S C O C O U N T Y P I N E L L A S C O U N T Y Tarpon Cluster Anchors: Walmart, Publix, Staples, TJ Maxx, Big Lots Total SF: 490,000 Alderman Cluster Anchors: Walmart, Publix, Walgreens Total SF: 350,000 Oldsmar Cluster Anchors: Walmart Supercenter, Aldi, Ross Dress for Less Total SF: 460,000 Westfield Countryside Mall Cluster Anchors: Macy's, Sears, Lowe's, Kohl's, Kmart, Fresh Market Total SF: 1.3M Study Area Study Area Retail Cluster Type Retail Cluster Type Downtown Downtown Community Center Center Regional Mall Regional Mall Power Center Power Center The study area includes the Tarpon Cluster, a community center which contains nearly 500,000 SF of retail uses anchored by a Walmart, Publix, and Staples. This cluster directly competes with nearby community centers such as the Alderman Cluster to the south and Holiday Cluster to the north. Overall, the study area contains nearly 1.8 million SF of retail uses, according to CoStar data. Figure 36. ANCLOTE BLVD TARPON AVE KLOSTERMAN RD Study Area Retail Walmart Publix P A S C O C O U N T Y P I N E L L A S C O U N T Y POTENTIAL IMPACT OF US 19 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Potential interchange improvements to the US 19 corridor may impact select cluster typologies. For instance, community center-type retail clusters located at major crossroads may experience a neutral to improved outcome due to increased regional access. Convenience-driven retail, which is typically more dependent on ease of access at the site level, may experience a neutral to negative outcome. However, this outcome may be largely dependent on factors such as the level of visibility of businesses and/or signage, and/ or level of access (e.g. a business located near an interchange compared to interstitial areas). Elevated highways could adversely impact study area retail by decreasing visibility for at-grade businesses and/or decreasing signage visibility. However, elevated highways could also increase the number of vehicles 43
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 37. Retail Trade Area Holiday Cluster ANCLOTE BLVD TARPON AVE Mitchell Ranch Plaza Cluster Tarpon Cluster P A S C O C O U N T Y P I N E L L A S C O U N T Y Study Area Refined Trade Area Refined Trade Area Competitive Thiessen Polygon Competitive 5 Minute Drive Thiessen Time: Trade Polygon Area 5 Minute 5 Drive Time: Competition Trade Area 5 Minute Community Drive Center Time: Competition Regional Power Center Community Regional Mall Center Regional Power Center Regional Mall per day that pass the retail establishment, potentially drawing more exposure and/or customers. A Retail Trade Area (as shown in Figure 37) is a geographic area from which a shopping cluster gets the majority of its customer patronage. The area was estimated based on several variables, including competitive supply and the key existing power/community center clusters 1. The transportation network and typical five-minute drive times for power/ community centers and lines of equidistance between the centroid of clusters ( thiessen polygons ) 2 were also considered. This approach accounts for the typical travel-time along the existing road network for larger-scale suburban retail centers and the spatial distribution of competitive retail supply available to consumers. KLOSTERMAN RD ALDERMAN RD Nebraska Cluster Alderman Cluster As shown in Figure 37, the eastern edge of the Trade Area was adjusted to better reflect estimated consumer preferences and behavior regarding equidistant drive times between Mitchell Ranch Plaza and Oldsmar clusters. The western Trade Area edge was also adjusted to capture the northwestern land peninsula and account for natural barriers such as water. MARKET POTENTIAL CURLEW RD Curlew Crossing Cluster Oldsmar Cluster Retail leakage analysis helps identify retail and/or service categories that are over- or under-represented within a particular geography. Understanding the potential undersupply or oversupply within a market allows for a better estimation of future market potential for retail uses. FL-580 Westfield Countryside Mall Cluster Source: CoStar, ESRI Business Analyst Note: [1] Example of non-mall retailers include big-box stores and in-line retail selling grocery general merchandise, furniture, or building materials. [2] A consumer on a dark blue line between two retail clusters is equidistant from both nodes. Retail leakage is based on the difference between consumer spending potential by retail demand and retail sales occurring within trade area. When supply is greater than demand, the trade area is considered to be oversupplied. Likewise, when demand is greater than supply, the trade area is considered to be undersupplied or experiencing leakage in which consumers are spending more dollars outside of the trade area. The residential neighborhoods located behind commercial uses lining much 44 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS of the US 19 frontage and the surrounding area provide a built-in market demand for retail, food and beverage, and consumer services. Figure 38. Office Typologies According to an analysis of ESRI Business Analyst data, the study area has some market potential for additional retail space. There is an approximate retail/consumer services leakage of $21.5 million 3. Converted to SF basis, assuming $275 sales per SF, this leakage translates to nearly 80,000 SF of potential retail uses that could be recaptured within the trade area 4. Potential retail development on US 19 would most likely be characterized by a traditional suburban format. This may translate to development patterns in the form of a neighborhood or strip center with surface parking. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF US 19 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS As previously discussed, potential grade separated US 19 road improvements could have a beneficial impact on larger Community Center-type retail clusters located at major crossroads due to increased access and speed. Convenience-based retail in less visible or disconnected areas could be negatively affected by proposed elevated roadways or sound walls due to decreased visibility from auto traffic. Retail in areas with street networks and parallel local roadways may fare better than retail in more isolated interstitial areas between crossroads locations. Office A high-level market assessment of the potential for office development within the study area was also conducted using Costar data. This included profiling significant regional office clusters in order to understand the study area s relative competitive position in the region s office market. Figure 38 includes a profile of various office typologies. Type/Class Tenants Free-Standing Node Smaller tenants including professional forms and medical uses Class-A Node/ Park Single or multitenant Corporate Campus Class-A and Class-B space Several Single-tenant headquarters buildings Size 1-2 stories 1-4 stories Low/mid rise Typical Location Other Characteristics Source: SB Friedman Broadly located, near retail centers and downtown Limited need for direct highway visibility or regional access Located within office parks, typically in the suburbs Lower rent, land costs and barrier to entry Concentrated along major interstates and interchanges with locations accessible to corporate executives High visibility from the interstate Note: [3] Based on Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink, NAICS 44-45, 722, excluding Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers, Gasoline Stations, and Non-store Retailers industries. [4] Retail gap converted to SF basis, assuming $275 sales per SF. Source: Esri Business Analyst 45
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Figure 39. Competitive Class-A Office Supply TARPON SPRINGS P A S C O C O U N T Y P I N E L L A S C O U N T Y North Pinellas Northwest Tampa Corporate office typically consist of single-tenant headquarter buildings or a larger multi-tenant Class-A space. Class-A office product is distributed throughout the region. As shown in Figure 39, Class-A office development in the greater Tampa St. Petersburg Clearwater region is generally concentrated in four submarkets: Westshore, Downtown Tampa, Gateway, and Downtown St. Petersburg. Westshore is the largest office submarket in the region, with 8.2 million SF of Class-A office, based on CoStar data (Figure 39). Minor office submarkets include Bayside, Northwest Tampa, and North Pinellas. CLEARWATER Westshore There is no Class-A office located within or adjacent to the study area. The study area is located outside major Class-A regional office clustering patterns. Bayside Gateway Downtown Tampa TAMPA Figure 40. Submarket Office SF By Class Downtown St. Petersburg ST. PETERSBURG Millions 20 18 16 Rest of Office Class A Office 14 8.2 12 10 Study Area Study Area 8 6 4 2 0 5.3 3.4 9.7 4.5 5.7 1.7 1.1 2.4 2.5 Westshore Downtown Tampa Gateway Downtown St. Petersburg Bayside 46 Final Report
US 19 CORRIDOR Land Use & Economic Analysis-TARPON SPRINGS Figure 41. Study Area Office FL-54 Morton Plant North Bay Hospital Area Medical Center of Trinity Area Non-corporate office development tends to be of a smaller scale and more broadly distributed. Non-corporate office serves a wide variety of smaller tenants with limited need for direct highway visibility or regional access, including professional firms and medical uses. While the study area is located outside major regional office clustering patterns, it is situated between several minor professional and medical office clusters in the surrounding area. These clusters include the Downtown Tarpon Springs area, the Morton Plant North Bay Hospital area, the Medical Center of Trinity area, and the Palm Harbor area along the US 19 corridor to the south. ANCLOTE BLVD Downtown Tarpon Springs Area TARPON AVE KLOSTERMAN RD PASCO COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY Future office development is likely to follow existing clustering patterns. Currently, the study area is located outside major regional office clustering patterns. Therefore, it is unlikely that Class-A professional office users will locate within the study area. Speculative office space without an identified anchor tenant and/or targeted outreach would be relatively risky. However, a wild card buildto-suit tenant may find this location conducive to their needs. In the near term, the intersection located at Tarpon Ave and US 19 may be the most likely location for potential office development. However, this area is currently characterized by mostly retail uses and may continue to be a more appropriate site for retail development. The study area can help position itself for future development by targeting business recruitment or relocation efforts for key development sites to catalyze additional growth. Potential Impact of Potential US 19 Road Improvements Source: CoStar, ESRI ALDERMAN RD Palm Harbor Area Grade separated US 19 road improvements in the study area would likely result in a neutral outcome for potential office development. Office uses typically consider factors such as proximity to workforce in locational decisions. Speed of travel is typically not as important for professional offices, which prefer to locate near residential populations. 47
US 19 North Economic & Land Use Analysis Hotel/Lodging Market Figure 43. Hotel Competitive Supply SB Friedman analyzed market performance and metrics of the competitive hotel and lodging supply located within or near the study area to understand the potential to accommodate additional lodging and drive commercial economic activity. This analysis considers only the potential for traditional hotels and does not analyze non-traditional house rentals such as AirBnB or Vacation Homes By Owner ( VBRO ). Data on hotel market performance was provided by STR Global, which is the hotel industry s leader in tracking market conditions and annual performance metrics for participating properties across the world. HOTEL MARKET SUPPLY ANCLOTE BLVD HOLIDAY PASCO COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY Midscale Class Upper Midscale Upscale Study Area There are 1,090 hotel rooms in seven properties located within or near the study area. To better capture a competitive set of hotels within or near the study area, economy motels were excluded from this analysis. Economy motels were considered uncompetitive due to factors such as building age and/or level of service. The majority of hotels in or near study area are Midscale or Upper Midscale. The largest property, Innisbrook Resort & Golf TARPON AVE KLOSTERMAN RD TARPON SPRINGS PASCO COUNTY PINELLAS COUNTY PALM HARBOR CLEARWATER TAMPA LARGO Club, contains 485 rooms and is classified as an Upscale class hotel. The remaining properties are classified as midscale and upper midscale levels. The newest property, the 150-key Quality Inn & Suites Conference Center New Port Richey, was delivered in December 2015. Most hotels that were included in the competitive supply are Figure 42. Hotel Competitive Supply Summary Hotel by Class Keys Midscale 358 keys 1 Lake Tarpon Resort 98 2 Quality Inn & Suites Conference Center New Port Richey 150 3 Quality Inn & Suites Tarpon Springs 110 Upper Midscale 247 keys 4 Hampton Inn Suites Tarpon Springs 84 5 Holiday Inn Express & Suites Clearwater North Dunedin 76 6 Holiday Inn Express & Suites Trinity 87 Upscale - 485 keys 7 Innisbrook Resort & Golf Club 485 ALDERMAN RD CURLEW RD Source: CoStar, ESRI, STR Global PALM HARBOR ST. PETERSBURG 48 Final Report