Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies

Redevelopment plan comes with a catch

For an area in Largo to be revitalized, residents must be displaced. The key issue dividing officials? How much aid to offer those tenants.

CLEARWATER - On Tuesday, the County Commission will decide whether to create a redevelopment district in Largo that could revitalize a blighted, crime-plagued area but would displace possibly hundreds of poor residents.

With one board member absent, the commission split on whether to approve the district during its meeting Aug. 16. A final decision was delayed until a full board could consider the proposal, which Largo officials have spent several years developing.

At issue is how much aid to offer displaced tenants, who will enter a white-hot housing market that puts homes and rentals beyond their reach. County and Largo administrators agree that a lack of affordable housing in Pinellas is a growing problem that will demand more attention from elected leaders.

They disagree over whether the proposal, known formally as the Clearwater-Largo Road Corridor Redevelopment Plan, does enough for those who will be forced to leave.

"The city of Largo recognizes that affordable housing is a growing crisis in Pinellas County," said Carol Stricklin, assistant director of Largo's community development department. "However, we feel ... the solutions are regional in nature and should not be confined to the district."

The plan calls for expanding an existing redevelopment district from 77 to 287 acres. The proposed district is bounded roughly by Ponce De Leon Boulevard/Wyatt Street to the north, the CSX Railroad corridor to the west, Fourth Avenue NW to the south and the Pinellas Trail to the east.

Two of the residential zones in the proposed district - designated as city home and mixed use - are home to 383 mobile homes. Zoning for most of the area caps density at 7.5 units per acre. Largo wants developers who will level the mobile home parks to have an increased base density of 15 units per acre.

In addition to offering counseling to tenants searching for new homes, the plan allows developers to increase further the number of units they can build on an acre in exchange for payments to the displaced and construction of affordable housing.

For instance, a developer building in the city home zone could build 21 units on an acre rather than 15 in exchange for relocation assistance: $2,500 for a single-wide mobile home, $5,000 for a double-wide. To move from 21 to 24 units on an acre, developers would have to dedicate 30 percent of their projects to affordable housing.

In the mixed use corridor zone, a developer could add three units per acre to the original 15 in exchange for relocation payouts and three more units if it agrees to designate 30 percent of any project as affordable housing.

Under federal standards, monthly rent for a family of four must not exceed $904 to qualify as affordable. For a family of two, the figure is $735 a month.

If you assume each mobile home in the area is occupied by two people, about 766 residents could be affected. Largo officials, however, say that not all of the mobile homes have tenants and stress that displacement will not take place all at once but over time as developers step forward.

Housing stock in the area is stressed, and prostitutes roam some streets. Business leaders and many residents strongly support Largo's proposal. They want the area cleaned up and the local economy improved.

County staff members, however, want Largo to do more, and they plan to advise the County Commission to vote against the proposed district, the same position they took at the meeting Aug. 16.

Assistant County Administrator Jake Stowers points out that the compensation and requirements to build affordable housing in exchange for increased density are completely voluntary. For instance, a developer could choose to build at 15 units per acre.

What Stowers would like to see is the incentives kick in at 71/2 units per acre, in essence requiring developers to make some concessions to get to the level of 15 units per acre.

"The issue of attainable housing stock is very important," Stowers said. "The people being relocated need support."

At the meeting Aug. 16, Commissioners Calvin Harris, Bob Stewart and board Chairman John Morroni supported the district. They argued that the city had done enough for displaced tenants and that the area was in dire need of revitalization.

Commissioners Ken Welch, Susan Latvala and Karen Seel voted against approval. Although they agreed redevelopment is desirable, they said more needed to be done to ensure that those displaced by the plan can find adequate housing.

If no board members have a change of heart, the deciding vote will likely be cast by Commissioner Ronnie Duncan, who was absent Aug. 16. Although Duncan said he is open to discussion, he is inclined to vote against the district.

Payouts and promises to build some attainable housing, he said, are simply not enough. Rather, places to live for those forced to leave must be identified.

"We have got to be able to show that we are putting affordable housing units on the ground somewhere or finding affordable housing units somewhere for these people," Duncan said. "Those are folks that we in government have a responsibility to."

Will Van Sant can be reached at 445-4166 or vansant@sptimes.com