Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15- Willdan Bozeman MT Strategic Plan SubmittalProposal to Prepare a Strategic Plan City of Bozeman Montana Engineering and Planning | Energy Efficiency and Sustainability | Financial and Economic Consulting | National Preparedness and Interoperability T 951.587.3500  800.755.6864 | F 951.587.3510  888.326.6864 | 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200, Temecula, CA 92590 | www.willdan.com i Cover Letter December 1, 2015 Mr. Chris Kukulski, City Manager City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman, Montana 59771 Re: Proposal to Prepare a Strategic Plan for City of Bozeman Dear Mr. Kukulski: Willdan Financial Services (“Willdan”) is pleased to submit the following proposal to the City of Bozeman (“City”) to prepare a Strategic Plan. Willdan understands that the objective of this project is to assist the City of Bozeman, and community stakeholders to development and implementation of an inspiring Vision and Strategic Plan that can be used to guide the City through successful growth, decision‐making, budgeting, and resource allocation over the next three to ten years. To undertake this engagement, Willdan is joined by John How and Forrest Sanderson of KLJ’s Bozeman office. Together, the proposed Project Team firm is uniquely qualified to prepare a comprehensive Strategic Plan and inform the City’s critical public policy and resource deployment decisions. As we understand the assignment, Bozeman is seeking the development of a comprehensive strategy for the City that will be the product of a local planning process and will be designed to guide the City toward best-in-class public service delivery and fiscal sustainability. Accordingly, Willdan is prepared to provide the following specific deliverables:  Vision Statement and Mission  Methodology and Approach to Strategic Planning Facilitation and Public Engagement  Strategic Plan Development Services  Operational and Administrative Framework  Implementation Plan  Final Consolidated Strategic Plan Report and Internal/External Presentations In particular, the Strategic Planning process will enable the City of Bozeman to examine the community’s growth patterns and demographics, and identify the need for service with respect to future trends and growth. Ultimately, this plan will be establish priorities for public service delivery and serve as a mechanism for coordinating the efforts of individuals, organizations, private industry, and local governments concerned with the City's economic development and future. The final deliverables will provide the City with research, analysis, economic benchmarking, and implementation plan monitoring and reporting tools based on best-in-class industry methodologies and structured for easy use by City staff to implement the study’s priorities and recommendations after the contract period. The ultimate outcome of this engagement will be to deliver a custom-built, flexible analytical tool and implementation plan that will assist City staff, developers and other stakeholders to objectively analyze public service delivery policies and alternatives that will serve to grow the City’s tax and employment base. Our Project Team is excited about this opportunity to serve the City of Bozeman. To discuss any aspect of our submission, or arrange for an interview, please contact Ms. McKay directly at (202) 510-0511, or via email at mmckay@willdan.com. Sincerely, Willdan Financial Services Molly S. McKay Mark Risco Principal Consultant President and CEO Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan ii Table of Contents Cover Letter ......................................................................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................................ ii Project Understanding ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Scope of Services ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Project Approach and Work Plan .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Required City of Bozeman Staff Support ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Project Timeline .................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Similar Project Experience and References ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Cost Proposal .................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Fee Breakdown ............................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................................................... A-1 Qualifications, Project Team, and Resumes ............................................................................................................................... A-1 Molly McKay ............................................................................................................................................................................... A-3 James Edison ............................................................................................................................................................................... A-5 Ernesto Vilchis ............................................................................................................................................................................. A-7 Jose Ometeotl ............................................................................................................................................................................. A-8 John How, AICP ......................................................................................................................................................................... A-10 Forrest Sanderson, CFM............................................................................................................................................................ A-12 Shari Eslinger............................................................................................................................................................................. A-13 Sample Reports ............................................................................................................................................................................. A-14 Required Form .............................................................................................................................................................................. A-15 Non-Discrimination Affirmation Form ...................................................................................................................................... A-15 Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 3 Project Understanding The City of Bozeman is a community of nearly 40,000 residents within 19 square miles; located in the southwest of Montana, it lies in the fastest growing County in Montana, Gallatin County. The purpose in seeking a strategic plan is to improve the quality of life in the City of Bozeman in part by building a robust and healthy economy that is both diversified and sustainable. In so doing, there are a variety of factors that must be considered including making sure that the most financially appropriate choices are made in the interest of the taxpayer and to preserve local character and community spirit. We also understand the importance of ensuring ongoing projects such as the City’s Unified Development Code rewrite, Midtown Redevelopment Plan and Transportation Master Plan along with the future update to the Downtown Plan must be incorporated into the City’s vision. A comprehensive strategy plan will incorporate the following in an effort to develop and diversify the economy of the City of Bozeman through effective and diversified partnerships, strategic investments of resources:  Assessment of the Bozeman community’s growth patterns and demographics to identify the need for service with respect to future trends and growth.  Identification of a larger vision and blueprint for incorporating and implementing existing service delivery, transportation, infrastructure and land use plans as a whole as the foundation that "informs” future departmental and/or service delivery plans.  Preparation and finalization of a Strategic Plan that includes short-, medium-, and long-term initiatives that will enable the City of Bozeman to take immediate action on certain tasks as well as take initial steps in the planning for long-term projects. The Strategic Plan process will analyze the current market situation and identify definite steps and specific actions to facilitate re-development, create new job opportunities, encourage entrepreneurship and innovation, enhance fiscal sustainability and investment in targeted development areas, place appropriate emphasis on market sectors, increase private investment throughout the City, and build on and preserve the City’s distinct sense of place. Scope of Services Project Approach and Work Plan The overarching focus of the Willdan Team’s approach to strategic planning is to facilitate collaborative process of data collection, information sharing and consensus building with the Client Team and the Bozeman community. This will require an iterative process and partnering with both internal and external stakeholders. The outcome of this facilitated strategic planning process will be a detailed, time-bound implementation plan for comprehensive public service delivery with established metrics with which to measure outcomes. The proposed detailed scope of services follows: Task 1: Strategic Plan Vision Statement Objective: To clarify the City of Bozeman’s identity, purpose, and targeted outcomes with a long term perspective, as well as the ability to respond quickly to opportunities. Outputs/Deliverables:  Demographic, Fiscal and Economic Assessment  Summary of Existing and Pending Service Delivery Plans  Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshop and Vision Statement To define where or what the Bozeman Community wants to be in a specified point in the future, the Willdan team will work through a collaborative, iterative process with the Client Team to establish, revise, and/or validate the City of Bozeman’s organizational vision, mission, long term goals, and standards for prioritization.  Demographic, Fiscal and Economic Assessment: To evaluate the Bozeman community’s growth patterns, demographics, and fiscal sustainability, the Willdan Team will conduct a trends analysis of key fiscal and economic variables including, but not limited to: population, households, income, age and education segmentation, labor Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 4 force, payroll, business entities, real property and sales tax base, real estate data, tourism activity, and other factors to be determined in consultation with the Client Team. These findings will inform the need for public services with respect to future trends and growth.  Summary of Existing and Pending Service Delivery Plans: To inform the Strategic Plan Vision Statement, the Willdan Team will conduct a comprehensive review of existing and pending Service Delivery Plans (Transportation Master Plan, Water Master Plan, Library Strategic Plan, Integrated Water Resources Plan, Transportation Plan, Community Plan, Economic Development Plan, Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, and the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (PROST) Plan).  Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshop and Vision Statement: Willdan Project Manager, Molly McKay, will conduct a consensus building workshop with select groups/individuals to evaluate the City’s perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (“SWOT”) according to the issues outlined in the summary of existing and pending service delivery plans. These topics will inform deliberations regarding the draft and final Vision Statement to be adopted during the consensus building workshop. The outcomes of Task 1: Strategic Plan Vision Statement will be the foundation for all future tasks related to the Strategic Plan process. Task 2: Methodology and Work Plan Objective: To design and execute an ongoing Project Management Plan to direct the Project Team’s research, analysis, stakeholder outreach/public engagement, and client communications throughout the engagement. Outputs/Deliverables:  Client Kick-Off Meeting (In Person)  Project Management Plan and Information Request Memorandum  Public engagement plan, possibly incorporating Bozeman’s Online City Hall service  Steering/Advisory Committee Establishment  Monthly Progress Report Conference Calls;  Internal Client Team Meeting: Interim Presentation of Preliminary Findings; and  Internal Client Team Meeting: Final Project Close Out. Willdan’s activities will be directed by a Project Management Plan (“PMP”) to be developed in consultation with the Client Team Project Manager and other appropriate City staff at the outset of the engagement. Upon receipt of the notice to proceed, the Project Team will schedule a kick-off meeting with the City of Bozeman’s Client Team representatives and other stakeholders. The Project Team will review project goals, existing documentation and resources, and the proposed deliverables schedule to inform the Project Management Plan that will direct the Project Team’s research, analysis, stakeholder outreach/public engagement, and client communications throughout the engagement. Willdan entirely agrees that for strategic planning to be effective, the active involvement of governmental, private, and nonprofit sectors is critical at the Steering Committee level. Willdan will work with the Client Team to establish a Steering Committee to reflect the inclusive interests of the businesses community, educational institutions, faith-based entities, utilities, and civic groups. Willdan expects that the project initiation phase will include internal and external stakeholder interviews with the Client Team, and—as appropriate—the wider business, real estate development and investment community to collect data on real estate market trends and conditions and public service/infrastructure needs. Accordingly, Willdan will work closely with the Steering Committee who will oversee the overall planning process. Additionally, the Committee will be tasked with identifying a comprehensive list of people who best reflect the City’s diversity and interests as part of the public engagement process. Upon creation of the Steering Committee, Willdan will conduct an initial meeting with representatives of Bozeman City, and other governmental, private and nonprofit representatives will be held to finalize project scope, tasks, and schedules. Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 5 First and foremost, this meeting will finalize expectations regarding all final deliverables related to the assignment. The “product” or comprehensive Strategic Plan will be structured to assist in organizing and accessing the resources that will serve as road map for future action. Task 3: Public Engagement Meetings and Social Media Outreach Objective: To engage community stakeholders in Strategic Plan alternatives through a documented public engagement process and build community consensus and buy-in in the final Strategic Plan. Outputs/Deliverables:  Private Stakeholder Interviews and/or Focus Groups (up to 50 private and up to five focus group meetings by topic, to be determined with input from the Client Team)  Public Engagement Meetings (up to three public Stakeholder Meetings by geography or topic, to be determined)  Social Media Outreach (Infographic Fact Sheets and Surveys via City of Bozeman Electronic Town Hall and other media outlets, i.e., Facebook, Twitter, etc.)  Summary Memorandum of Findings Willdan, with local support from KLJ, will design and execute a Public Engagement Plan throughout the assignment. Willdan is highly experienced in community outreach with a wide variety of public and private stakeholders. In an engagement such as the proposed Strategic Plan, it is expected that there should be three tiers of community outreach:  Private Stakeholder Interviews and/or Focus Groups: One-on-one interviews with strategic partners who will be actively involved in implementation of the Strategic Plan (up to 50 private and/or up to five focus group meetings to be completed within the first 90 days of project initiation). The target list will be developed with input from the Client Team and will be managed by Ms. Molly McKay, Principal Consultant of Willdan’s Washington, DC Office. A preliminary list of potential “strategic partner” stakeholders include: o City of Bozeman Economic Development Council o City of Bozeman Planning Board o Downtown Bozeman BID and Tourism BID Boards o Montana State University o Yellowstone International Airport o High Tech, Manufacturing, Photonics and Optics, Bioscience, Pharmaceuticals, and Healthcare Stakeholders o Local Area Real Estate Brokers/Developers and Business Owners o Other Stakeholders to be identified by the Client Team  Public Outreach Meetings: Willdan, with local support from KLJ, will conduct up to five (5) interactive work sessions with stakeholders, as well as present and participate in monthly Strategic Plan Steering Committee meetings and three (3) City Commission meetings, and a regularly scheduled meeting. Beyond the required meetings, the Willdan Project Manager will work with City staff to develop communication strategies that will best engage the various stakeholder groups in meaningful ways that promote accessibility and interactive feedback. The Steering Committee presentations will include project update briefings submitted to the Client Project Manager one week prior to the meetings and will include an agenda and list of interactive questions to be drafted with input from the client team.  Social Media Outreach: With input from the Client Team, Willdan will design and execute a variety of public outreach tools to collect feedback regarding the Strategic Plan’s potential key initiatives and priorities. This feedback may be collected through a combination of Infographic Fact Sheets, a survey tool administered via City of Bozeman Electronic Town Hall, and/or other media outlets, i.e., Facebook, Twitter, etc. Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 6  Ongoing Outreach: During the planned monthly conference calls, the Project Manager and Client Team will conduct routine “check-in’s” on outstanding community outreach action items to ensure active follow up on target contacts and important feedback such as commitments from potential strategic partners. Willdan staff will manage the meetings, collecting feedback from the public participants to be compiled in a summary memorandum of findings at the completion of each meeting and at the culmination of the task. These conversations are critical to gathering stakeholder input to review the Strategic Plan initiatives, with the ultimate goal being to develop an implementation plan to guide future efforts. Task 4: Draft Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops Objective: To formulate a Strategic Plan for the City of Bozeman based on the culmination of the baseline fiscal and economic assessments and public engagement tasks. Outputs/Deliverables:  Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops (up to three)  Draft Strategic Plan Willdan will plan and facilitate up to three (3) strategic planning sessions including the Steering Committee and public stakeholders that will involve breakout and interactive discussion about the final proposed strategies/initiatives (the Draft Strategic Plan), including key elements of the implementation plan such as responsible parties and funding sources. Based on results of the Draft Strategic Planning meeting, Willdan will provide a summary report to be used in compiling the final comprehensive Strategic Plan. A final meeting will be held with the Steering Committee to review the summary report. Willdan will then use the resulting analysis to provide the Steering Committee with a draft copy of the comprehensive Strategic Plan which will include:  Strategies and initiatives for service delivery to include prioritized projects to implement objectives and goals;  Organizational and institutional resource requirements  Funding sources;  Estimation of time frames on initiatives; and  Performance measures that will be used to evaluate whether and to what extent goals and objectives have been or are being met. Following review of the draft and subsequent changes, Willdan will finalize the plan and present copies to the Steering Committee for distribution. Ultimately, this plan will be structured to ensure create jobs and foster a more sustainable and diversified community along with economy that will focus on a broad array of manufacturing, service, and tourism related industries. The Strategic Plan will serve as a mechanism for coordinating the efforts of individuals, organizations, private industry, and local governments concerned with Bozeman City’s public service delivery capacity and economic sustainability. Willdan will provide a prioritization list that has up to 10 Strategic Plan strategies/alternatives, fully supported by a recommended Implementation Plan for achieving the goals of each strategy. This Implementation Plan will provide the foundation for Bozeman City’s action steps for the next three to ten years. Developing a plan that will be acceptable to a majority of stakeholders and that will provide unified direction is a critical component of this deliverable. Accordingly, the draft Action Plan will be presented at a consensus building Workshop at a regularly scheduled monthly Steering Committee Meeting to allow for review and comment on the following key questions: 1. What is the Action Plan’s Vision Statement? 2. What are the Action Plan’s key goals and strategies (ranked by priority for short-, mid-, and long-term implementation)? 3. What are the expected outcomes of each strategy (qualitative and quantitative)? Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 7 4. Who is responsible for implementation of each strategy? Who are Bozeman City’s key strategic partners required to successfully implement each strategy? What are these partners’ roles, responsibilities and financial/other commitments? 5. What are the ongoing monitoring and reporting benchmarks required to measure the successful implementation of each strategy? What is the source of the data for these benchmarks? Who is responsible for collecting and analyzing the Strategic Plan benchmarking data throughout plan implementation? The Strategic Plan will include a detailed implementation program. The strategic planning process will culminate in the compilation of research, analysis, input from City officials, staff, business leaders, organizations and the City of Bozeman community into a consolidated draft Strategic Plan to include the following elements:  Implementation Dashboard: the plan will include an implementation matrix that defines short-term (one to three years), mid-term (three to five years) and long-term (five-plus years) goals, objectives and strategies as well as performance metrics. Performance metrics include: o Target deadlines for completion; o Sources and uses of funding; and o Institutional and organizational framework (primary organization/agency responsible and key partners that can assist in carrying out the strategy).  Strategic Plan Dashboard Performance Metrics: the plan will recommend measurable criteria based on readily available data that the City can use to track and report on its progress in achieving its public service delivery goals, for example: Within 45 days prior to the completion of the project, the Project Team will provide drafts of all plan documents for review and comment by the Client Team. Willdan is skilled in developing high-quality, visual documentation of these strategy options as a critical component in supporting decision-making and developing a unified direction through community conversations. Task 5: Final Comprehensive Strategic Plan and Presentation Objective: To produce a substantive and comprehensive final report of work performed under the proposed scope of work and conduct a capstone Work Session with the City of Bozeman Development Services and other stakeholders. Outputs/Deliverables: Compiled Strategic Plan Willdan will present the draft Strategic Plan to the City Commission, Economic Development Council, City Planning Board, Downtown Bozeman BID Board, Tourism BID Board, and other applicable advisory boards. The team will attend three public meetings and/or study sessions to be determined in coordination with City staff. The plan shall include the following:  A comprehensive Vision and Mission Statement and core set of values for the Strategic Plan  A summary of the relevant existing and pending service delivery plans and initiatives that were referenced during the preparation of the Strategic Plan  The list of stakeholders  Summaries of the SWOT analyses and Consensus Building Workshop  Summary Demographic, Fiscal and Economic Assessment  Summary of Strategic Plan Initiatives  Implementation Plan (including the ongoing reporting/monitoring Dashboard)  Final, written report with appropriate graphics, maps and formatting:  10 copies (9 copies and 1 original) of the final report (Adobe Acrobat readable copies of all documents submitted on a flash drive device)  Source files for all documents in Microsoft Word and Excel Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 8  Final Report Presentation Work Session with City staff/SP Steering Committee and PowerPoint document Willdan will prepare and deliver to the City a substantive and comprehensive final report of all work performed under the proposed scope of work (“Final Report”). The Final Report will be organized according to the above tasks, and will include all deliverables and documents provided. Each scope task will form separate chapters within the Final Report. This report will provide a clear, high level road map of concrete recommendations, along with clear accountabilities. It will be informed by both rigorous analysis, smart growth best practices, and engaging key stakeholders both within the City of Bozeman and across the broader development and investment community. We will present, document, and address methodologies and findings during a final project presentation and capstone Work Session with the appropriate City personnel and other internal and/or public stakeholders to be identified in consultation with the City. Subsequent to the final presentation, Willdan will update and revise the final document per direction from the Work Session. A final approved document including a PDF version will be provided to the City at the conclusion of these meetings and upon acceptance of the final deliverable by the City. The Final Report will encompass findings from the analyses described in the preceding scope of work, in a substantive and comprehensive manner, and will include an Executive Summary and each corresponding deliverable. Required City of Bozeman Staff Support To complete our tasks on schedule, we will need the cooperation of City of Bozeman staff. We suggest that the City assign a key individual as project manager. As the plan is developed, it is expected that the City appointed project manager will: 1) Help resolve policy issues; 2) Coordinate responses to informational requests; and 3) Coordinate review of work products. To meet the schedule, we will ask for responses to initial information and follow-up requests within five business days. If there are delays on the City’s part, the City’s project manager shall be immediately contacted to help steer the project back on schedule. Willdan will endeavor to minimize the impact on City staff in the completion of this project. Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the Authority’s data and documentation to complete our analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy, and that we will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party. Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 9 Project Timeline The following is a proposed project timeline or work plan to illustrate how the project team will complete the required deliverables based upon a start date of January 11, 2016 and completion by July 16, 2016. General project timeframes by task are summarized below. A specific project timeline will be developed following consultation with, and in concert with, the Client Team. Work Plan Project Month - 2016 Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Assumed Project Start/End Month (Subject to Contract Execution)January February March April May June July Task 1: Strategic Plan Vision Statement Task 1.1:Demographic, Fiscal and Economic Assessment ❶ Task 1.2:Summary of Existing and Pending Service Delivery Plans ❷ Task 1.3:Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshop and Vision Statement ❸ Task 2: Methodology and Work Plan Task 2.1:Project Management Plan and Information Request Memorandum ❹ Task 2.2:Public Engagement Plan ❻ Task 2.3 Ongoing Client Communications and Status Update Meetings/Calls ❼❼❼❼❼❼❼ Task 3: Public Engagement Meetings and Social Media Outreach Task 3.1:Private Stakeholder Interviews and/or Focus Groups (up to 50/5)❽❽❽ Task 3.2:Public Outreach Meetings (up to 3)❾❾❾ Task 3.3:Social Media Outreach ❿❿❿ Task 3.4:Summary of Findings ⓫ Task 4: Draft Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops Task 4.1: Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops (up to three)⓬ Task 4.2:Draft Strategic Plan ⓭ Task 5: Final Comprehensive Strategic Plan and Presentation Task 5.1:Final Strategic Plan ⓮ Task 5.2:Final Presentation ⓯ ❶= Project Meeting or Deliverable Milestone Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 10 Similar Project Experience and References Provided on the following pages are project summaries of comparable engagements demonstrating experience in market analysis, visioning and strategic plans prepared by the project team. We are proud of our reputation for customer service, and encourage you to contact our past clients in regard to our commitment to excellence. These project examples illustrate the Willdan Team’s specific and highly technical experience required to successfully address the needs of the City of Bozeman’s proposed Strategic Plan. Kalispell Core Area Market Analysis and Economic Development Strategic Plan Willdan recently completed a market and financial feasibility analysis specific to the preparation of an economic development strategic plan related to the expansion of the City of Kalispell’s existing Tax Increment Financing District. The objective of this analysis is to fund the removal of existing freight rail line from the historic downtown Main Street area to a newly constructed rail-served industrial park. The Willdan Team was responsible for developing high quality market and economic analytics to inform the final Implementation Plan and also supported a wide range of public outreach efforts throughout the year-long public planning effort for a community located at the gateway to Glacier National Park, a destination for more than three million tourists annually. The plan includes the installation of a two-mile linear park and related community amenities, a business relocation and retention strategy, and a funding/financing implementation strategy to ensure successful implementation of the Kalispell Core Area Plan. Client Contact: Katharine Thompson, M.P.A. Community Development Manager City of Kalispell 201 First Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Tel #: (406) 758-7713 Email: kthompson@kalispell.com Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 11 Glacier Industrial Park Development Advisory Services and Transaction Support In 2013, Flathead County Economic Development Authority (“FCEDA”), in partnership with the City of Kalispell retained Willdan to prepare the Core Area Revitalization plan, a study focused on creating jobs and economic growth opportunities, improving public safety, and the development of affordable housing in Kalispell, Montana. Upon conclusion of the Core Area Revitalization Study, FCEDA retained Willdan to:  Source capital necessary to complete the Project,  Negotiate leases with potential tenants at Glacier Rail Park,  Acquire property in the Core Area,  Provide project management,  Provide New Markets Tax Credit advisory services, and  Dispose of the acquired properties for redevelopment At the center of this plan lies the Glacier Rail Park. Glacier Rail Park (the “Project”) is the multi-phase development of a 40- acre full service multi-modal and industrial rail park located in the outskirts of Kalispell. The Project will enhance the region’s access to national and international markets and expand operations for current and new rail-served businesses, while also creating new regional job opportunities for Kalispell residents. The Project also includes the removal of the “Iron Curtain,” a public safety hazard which bifurcates the city, blocks public safety vehicles and access to critical care facilities, limits vehicular and pedestrian connectivity, limits redevelopment opportunities and prohibits the expansion of businesses in the Core Area of Kalispell. The Project will construct 17,140 linear feet of new rail track, 28 acres of leasable industrial space, improve 11,200 feet of access road, and create a safer downtown and residential corridor along Montana Highway 2. Client Contact: Kellie Danielson, CEcD President/CEO Montana West Economic Development/Flathead Valley Economic Development Authority Kalispell, Montana 59901 406.257.7711 kellie@dobusinessinmontana.com Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 12 City of Fort Lauderdale, FL – Citywide Economic Development Strategic Action Plan The City of Fort Lauderdale’s Sustainable Development Department retained Willdan to develop the City’s Five-Year Economic Development Strategic Action Plan. Following substantial community outreach including more than 100 individual stakeholder interviews and seven public meetings, the project team undertook a series of analyses, including: an Economic Base Profile; an Economic Development Issues Identification and Prioritization Analysis; and an Economic Benchmarking Assessment comparing key statistical trends in Fort Lauderdale to nine competitive cohort cities. To inform the policy recommendations resulting from the economic performance indicators, Willdan conducted substantial national case study research on best practices in transit oriented development, business incubation/acceleration, and retail retention and recruitment. The results of these analyses directed the identification of 10 Economic Development Strategic Action Plan Initiatives related to entrepreneurial business development/job creation, retail recruitment and retention, small business loan funding, economic development placemaking marketing/branding public transportation/parking facility advocacy. Implementation of the EDSAP is guided by an organizational and institutional assessment, a detailed annual funding plan, and an “Annual Economic Development Benchmarking Dashboard” to track progress in achieving the Plan’s targeted outcomes. Client Contact: Al Battle Jr.; Deputy Director, Department of Sustainable Development 914 NW 6th Street, Suite 200 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 Tel #: (954) 828-8952 Email: abattle@fortlauderdale.gov Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 13 Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 2012 Economic Impact Study Willdan Financial Services quantified the impact of the Washington Reagan National Airport, Dulles International Airport, the Dulles Toll Road, and the Metrorail Silver Line expansion. The study included the calculation of direct, indirect and induced economic impacts of employment, payroll (labor income), visitor spending, state and local taxes, and business revenue. Economic impacts were calculated by the IMPLAN® (IMpact analysis for PLANning) economic impact modeling system – considered the industry standard for aviation economic impact studies. IMPLAN Group LLC’s software tools and region-specific data are the basis for multi-regional Social Accounting Matrices (SAMs) and Multiplier Models of national, state, regional and local economies. The study concluded that the Airports Authority's operations generated more than 380,000 jobs and $15.4 billion in payroll in the region in 2012 - equivalent to 4.5 percent of the Metropolitan Washington Area's GDP. The 2012 study was accepted by MWAA’s Board of Directors in May 2014 and was subsequently submitted to the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments and the Virginia Department of Aviation to serve as a resource to inform decisions and investments of public and private entities within the Washington Metropolitan region. Client Contact: Margaret A. Bishop Community Relations Manager Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 1 Aviation Circle, MA-16 Washington, DC 20001-6000 Tel #: (703) 417-8383 Email:margaret.bishop@mwaa.com Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan 14 Cost Proposal Per the RFP instructions, provided below is Willdan’s all-inclusive fee for the scope of work described herein. The proposed lump sum fee or scope of work for all outlined services is $123,444. The fee quoted below includes all labor, travel, lodging, materials, printing, overhead and profit and any other expenses associated with this engagement. The Project Manager is available to discuss potential modifications to any aspect of the proposed cost proposal and related deliverables during contract negotiations. Fee Breakdown The table below provides a breakdown of the total price quoted on the prior page by task and team member. Staff Role by Task Managing Principal Principal/ Project Manager Market Analyst Regional Technical Advisor Local Public Engagement Support Local Public Engagement Support Staff Support (Engineer II) Total Hours by Task Total Cost by Task % of Total Total Project Hours & Fees Work Plan J. Edison M. McKay E. Vilchis J. Ometeotl J. How F. Sanderson S. Eslinger Task 1: Strategic Plan Vision Statement 21%24,104$ Task 1.1:Demographic, Fiscal and Economic Assessment 4 8 40 4 0 0 0 56 8,780$ Task 1.2:Summary of Existing and Pending Service Delivery Plans 0 24 0 4 4 4 8 44 7,420$ Task 1.3:Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshop and Vision Statement 8 16 0 0 8 8 8 48 7,904$ Task 2: Methodology and Work Plan 9%10,640$ Task 2.1:Project Management Plan and Information Request Memorandum 4 8 0 0 4 4 0 20 3,464$ Task 2.2:Public Engagement Plan 0 8 0 0 4 0 0 12 2,064$ Task 2.3 Ongoing Client Communications and Status Update Meetings/Calls 4 8 4 4 4 4 4 32 5,112$ Task 3: Public Engagement Meetings and Social Media Outreach 39%44,584$ Task 3.1:Private Stakeholder Interviews and/or Focus Groups (up to 50/5)16 32 0 16 32 32 32 160 24,336$ Task 3.2:Public Outreach Meetings (up to 3)0 32 0 0 16 16 16 80 12,608$ Task 3.3:Social Media Outreach 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 16 3,200$ Task 3.4:Summary of Findings 4 8 0 0 4 4 8 28 4,440$ Task 4: Draft Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops 20%22,584$ Task 4.1: Strategic Plan Consensus Building Workshops (up to three)16 24 0 0 16 16 0 72 12,256$ Task 4.2:Draft Strategic Plan 4 40 0 0 8 4 0 56 10,328$ Task 5: Final Comprehensive Strategic Plan and Presentation 10%11,532$ Task 5.1:Final Strategic Plan 4 16 8 4 8 4 0 44 7,268$ Task 5.2:Final Presentation 8 8 0 0 4 4 0 24 4,264$ Subtotal Hours 72 248 52 32 112 100 76 692 100% Hourly Rate 200$ 200$ 145$ 145$ 116$ 150$ 122$ Total Labor 14,400$ 49,600$ 7,540$ 4,640$ 12,992$ 15,000$ 9,272$ 113,444$ 113,444$ Expenses - Air travel, ground transport, lodging (estimated 10 Person Trips @ $700 each), printing, express mail, and other direct project expenses:10,000$ Total Fixed Price Fee (Including Reimbursable Expenses)123,444$ Willdan KLJ Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-1 Appendix Qualifications, Project Team, and Resumes Willdan possesses sufficient staff depth to perform the services delineated within the City’s RFP on time and within budget. Willdan has assembled a senior level Project Team of subject matter experts with more than a decade of experience working together, supporting both public and private clients across the United States to implement strategic plans and provide market and fiscal analysis, finance strategies, and strategic municipal policy support. The proposed Project Team has collectively worked in 36 states and 40 countries. The team’s key resources are comprised of the following individuals.  Molly McKay, Principal Consultant: Project Manager and Strategic Planning Lead;  James Edison, Managing Principal: Public Finance Expert;  Ernesto Vilchis, Project Director: Senior Market Analyst;  Jose Ometeotl, Regional Technical Advisor;  John How, KLJ Planner and Local Public Engagement Lead;  Forrest Sanford, KLJ Planner and Local Public Engagement Support; and  Shari Eslinger, KLJ Engineer and Local Public Engagement Support. These individuals specialize in the nexus between public and private development, with particular expertise in evaluating market opportunities, structuring public-private partnerships, and providing economic development strategic planning services to municipalities, and to state, regional, and national governments. The proposed Project Manager, Ms. McKay, has more than 20 years of experience in a wide variety of municipal management and strategic planning capacities in the US and abroad. Ms. McKay also has recent experience in the region having served as lead financial and economic advisor to the Kalispell, Montana Core Area Implementation Plan. Willdan Financial Services Willdan Financial Services (“Willdan”) is one of four operating divisions within Willdan Group, Inc. (“WGI”). WGI provides technical and consulting services that ensure the quality, value and security of our nation’s infrastructure, systems, facilities, and environment. The firm has been a consistent industry leader in providing all aspects of municipal and infrastructure engineering, public works contracting, public financing, planning, building and safety, construction management, homeland security, and energy efficiency and sustainability services. Established on June 24, 1988, Willdan Financial Services, a wholly owned corporation, is one of the largest public sector financial consulting firms in the United States. Since that time, we have helped over 800 public agencies successfully address a broad range of financial challenges, such as financing the costs of growth, generating revenues to fund public services, and fostering the economic sustainability of communities nationwide. Our staff of over 70 full-time employees supports our clients by conducting year-round workshops and on-site training to assist them in keeping current with the latest developments in our areas of expertise. Furthermore, Willdan as a whole is composed of over 600 employees, including a cadre of public finance experts. Local Teaming Partner – KLJ The Willdan Team’s local public engagement tasks will be supported by KLJ. Willdan and KLJ established a productive working relationship in 2013 while consulting for the City of Kalispell, Montana related to the Core Area Plan’s initiative to relocate the active freight rail line to a new rail served industrial park. Since 1938, KLJ has provided multi-disciplinary engineering-based solutions for national, large-scale operations, with the local expertise to drive projects forward and deliver successful results. Our strong regional connections, in-depth local knowledge, responsive personal service and industry experience create strategic advantages. Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-2 Currently, KLJ maintains 24 offices with more than 750 professionals providing services to the upper Great Plains, Rocky Mountain region and Florida. KLJ is an employee-owned company that is constantly evolving to better meet the needs of our clients. KLJ maintains a focus on innovation, helping clients succeed by developing lasting infrastructure that responds to the social, civic and economic needs of our communities. We are organized into nine functioning markets: transportation, government/municipal, rail transportation, water resources, energy, oil and gas, environmental, telecommunications and aviation. We also have technical workgroups including survey, right-of-way (ROW), structural, environmental and construction management. Structuring our company according to specific areas of expertise creates a highly collaborative project management environment. As we work with communities across the upper Great Plains and the Rocky Mountains to plan infrastructure improvements and facilitate positive growth, we are able to dedicate professionals with progressive experience tailored to move each project forward. KLJ in Bozeman The KLJ Bozeman office continues to expand. The Bozeman office currently has professionals with expertise ranging from structural engineering to archaeology to land use planning and civil site design. Having these types of professionals locally not only provides KLJ in-house local expertise, but also connections throughout the region to provide assistance and prospective. John How, AICP will provide project support for local outreach efforts and his staff will assist with meeting preparation, compiling notes and creating necessary visuals. John is the office manager for the Bozeman office and has more than eight years of experience working with communities throughout Montana and North Dakota as an AICP-certified planner. Team Composition and Project Management The proposed Project Manager, Molly McKay, will serve as the day-to-day client point of contact. The engagement will be further supported by James Edison, Principal-in-Charge, to provide quality assurance/quality control oversight. The initial demographic, fiscal and economic assessment will be performed with staff support from Ernesto Vilchis, Willdan Market Analyst. The Public Engagement Plan will be directed by Molly McKay, with local support provided by KLJ staff John How, Forrest Stanford and Shari Eslinger. Willdan staff, James Edison and Jose Ometeotl, will attend selected focus group meetings to provide technical expertise on targeted topics to be determined in consultation with the Client Group. Additional staff support is available to execute public meeting events if needed. The Project Manager will deliver project status update briefings to the City Commission and/or Strategic Plan Steering Committee to solicit input on draft and final Strategic Plan according to the project timeline and deliverable schedule. Profiles and resumes for the selected team members are provided on the following pages for your review. City Commission and/or Strategic Plan Steering Committee City of Bozeman Project Manager James Edison, Principal-in-Charge and Public Finance Advisor Molly McKay, Project Manager and Strategic Planning Lead Jose Ometeotl, Regional Technical Lead Ernesto Vilchis, Market Analyst John How, KLJ Planner and Local Public Engagement Lead Forrest Sanford, KLJ Planner and Local Public Engagement Support Shari Eslinger, KLJ Engineer and Local Public Engagement Support Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-3 Molly McKay Principal Consultant Ms. McKay possesses more than 20 years of economic policy and planning experience providing consulting services to public and private clients. Ms. McKay frequently serves as an economic advisor to municipalities, investors and developers, engineering firms, nonprofit organizations, and others throughout project feasibility, financing and implementation. In this advisory role, Ms. McKay conducts research and scenarios testing to evaluate market and economic conditions, measure the public costs and benefits of innovative financing and incentive mechanisms, and provide strategic planning support services related to inform economic development policy frameworks. Ms. McKay designs and develops custom-built multivariate financial, fiscal and economic modeling tools (IMPLAN, RIMS, REMI), industry cluster analyses, local and regional economic competitiveness benchmarking, project management plans, case studies, best practices, evaluation summaries, and project implementation, monitoring and reporting plans. Ms. McKay frequently serves government entities across all public service sectors including planning and economic development departments, utilities, housing authorities, transit agencies, airport authorities, and global development institutions. Clients include the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the General Services Administration, US Agency for International Development, The World Bank/International Finance Corporation, Jamaica Ministry of Tourism, City of Miami Department of Planning and Economic Development, City of Fort Lauderdale Sustainable Development Department, Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, and the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. In the past 15 years, she has completed more than 100 economic development and strategic planning analyses in 21 states and abroad in 15 countries in the Middle East, Africa, and the Caribbean, triggering more than $5 billion in economic development investment. Economic fieldwork includes Aruba, Barbados, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico, St. Maarten/St. Martin, St. Croix, St. Lucia, Puerto Rico, and Trinidad and Tobago. Her professional skills are anchored by an educational foundation in applied economic analysis, commercial financing structures, urban planning, sustainable environmental management and cutting-edge economic policy tools. Before joining Willdan, she was a senior associate of the Economic Policy and Planning Practice of AECOM Economics (formerly Economics Research Associates) from 2003 to 2012; a manager in the Real Estate Consulting and State and Local Tax Practices of Ernst & Young (1997 to 2002), and program coordinator, ULI-the Urban Land Institute’s International and Advisory Services (1995 to 1997) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) in Washington, DC (1992 to 1995). Ms. McKay is a member of the ULI Redevelopment & Reuse Council and the ULI Regional Land Use Leadership Institute. Project Experience Kalispell Core Area Market Analysis & Implementation Plan: Prepared a market analysis and tax increment financing plan related to the expansion of the City’s existing Tax Increment Financing District to fund the removal of existing freight rail from the historic Downtown Main Street to a newly constructed rail-served industrial park. Responsible for developing high quality market and economic analytics to inform the final Implementation Plan and to achieve public support for TIF plan. The plan includes the installation of a two-mile linear park and related community amenities, a business relocation and retention strategy, and a funding/financing implementation strategy to ensure successful implementation of the Kalispell Core Area Plan. Education Master of Arts (Honors), International Politics & Economics, University of Exeter, Devon, UK Bachelor of Arts (Honors), University of Kansas Study Abroad: University of Law, Economics & Political Science, Aix-Marseille III, Aix- en-Provence, France and the Guadalajara Language Institute, Mexico Post-Graduate Studies: Real Estate Finance & Investment, Johns Hopkins University Cary Business School, Washington, DC Accreditation Certification in Social Science Research Methodology, University of Exeter, Devon, UK Areas of Expertise Economic Development Strategic Plans Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis Public/Private Financing Plans Infrastructure Financing Plans Tax Increment Financing District Formation Real Estate Advisory Services Reuse & Redevelopment Plans Affiliations American Planning Association International Economic Development Council (IEDC) ULI – the Urban Land Institute 20 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-4 City of Fort Lauderdale, FL – Citywide Economic Development Strategic Action Plan: Served as Project Manager for the City’s Economic Development Strategic Action Plan. This citywide Economic Development Strategic Action Plan includes an Economic Development Profile Report; as well as identification and recommendation of potential citywide economic development incentive programs for business retention and recruitment that are applicable to six geographic sub-areas and citywide; an entrepreneurial development and empowerment strategy, a targeted industry growth strategy, and a retail recruitment strategy; an implementation program and “economic dashboard” of benchmarking metrics to measure the success of strategies and initiatives; and sources and uses of funding to support plan implementation (grants and other alternative funding opportunities allocated to each of the plan’s five-year implementation horizon). City of Miramar, FL – Economic Development Strategic Plan: Currently serving as Project Manager for the City’s Economic Development Strategic Plan. This planning effort includes the preparation of a baseline Economic Profile Report; as well as identification and recommendation of potential citywide economic development incentive programs for business retention and recruitment that are applicable to three geographic sub-areas and citywide;, a targeted industry growth strategy, a cultural arts and historic district placemaking strategy; an implementation program and “economic dashboard” of benchmarking metrics to measure the success of strategies and initiatives; and sources and uses of funding to support plan implementation (grants and other alternative funding opportunities allocated to each of the plan’s five-year implementation horizon). Village of South Nyack/Rockland County, NY – Economic Sustainability Plan: Currently serving as Project Manger and lead fiscal analyst on the preparation of an Economic Sustainability Plan to address the impact of the pending demolition and relocation of the Tappan Zee Bridge in the Hudson River Valley in New York. Providing key fiscal and economic analysis and implemenation planning services to ensure the reversion of land by the New York Thruway Authority to the Village of South Nyack is redeveloped into a net tax positive asset for the community over the long term. The redevelopment plan includes 14 acres for public and private use, a shared use path with regional connectivity, a future Bus Rapid Transit station, and a commuter parking facility. Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA) Consolidation Study Market Analysis & Cost- Benefit Analysis: Conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the potential relocation/disposition of seven properties owned and operated by the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority. Identified operational benefits, cost savings and strategies for operating facilities along with procedures for implementing multiple consolidation scenarios. The analysis included assessments of historic transit-oriented redevelopment and reuse potential of the DL&W Terminal building, operating costs, fiscal and economic impact, and local real estate market conditions. Belair Road Corridor Comprehensive Market and Economic Development Plan: Served as Project Manager on a team with a deep cross-section of expertise in economic development, transportation, and urban design among other disciplines to implement recommendations from the Urban Land Institute Baltimore Regionalism Committee’s Technical Assistance Panel related to the “Corridor Revitalization Framework Strategy for Belair Road” to provide market and financial feasibility analysis of: priority redevelopment nodes; priority redevelopment opportunity sites; linkages between nodes economic development strategies; and a sense of place/branding strategies that incorporate residential neighborhood conceptual design, streetscape and transportation strategies, and a range of public policy strategies. The study also evaluated existing public incentives as precursors to readiness for private sector development and made specific economic development plan implementation recommendations. M. McKay Resume Continued Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-5 James Edison Managing Principal Mr. Edison specializes in the nexus between public and private, with particular expertise in public-private partnerships, and the benefits of economic development to municipalities and state, provincial, regional and national governments. He has particularly deep expertise in land use economics with a specialty in finance and implementation, including fiscal impact and the public and private financing of infrastructure and development projects, both in the United States and internationally. He has worked for both public and private clients on the implementation of public-private transactions, providing market and fiscal analysis, finance strategies, and negotiation support. His public sector experience includes local and regional economic impact studies, fiscal impact evaluations, new government formation strategies, and the creation of impact fees, assessments and special taxes to fund infrastructure and public facilities. Mr. Edison has conducted numerous evaluations of the economic and fiscal impact of specific plans, and consulted on a wide variety of land use planning topics related to community revitalization and the economic and fiscal impacts of development. He has evaluated markets for entire new towns as well as for individual proposed residential, retail, entertainment, office, R&D, hotel and mixed-use projects throughout the western United States and abroad. As a former bond attorney, Mr. Edison understands the legal underpinnings and technical requirements of public financing instruments, and has advised both public and private clients on the use of individual instruments and the interaction between those instruments and the needs of developers and project finance. He has also conducted project feasibility studies for a wide range of development, often in connection with community revitalization or expansion efforts. He has conducted fiscal impact evaluations in a wide range of contexts, including specific plans, individual development projects, community revitalization programs, annexations and government reorganizations. Project Experience City of New Haven, CT – Economic Impact Analysis: Mr. Edison served in the role of project manager for this engagement, which involved the redevelopment of the site of the former New Haven Coliseum. The project required building an economic impact model that included an estimate of the direct, indirect and induced impacts (employment and economic activity) of the project’s construction and ongoing operations. Mr. Edison prepared a report and tables that documented the estimated impacts of the project, along with an explanation of each calculation and assumption. To wrap up the engagement, Mr. Edison presented the final report at a meeting with the Board of Aldermen. City of Fort Lauderdale, FL – Citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan: Mr. Edison served in the role of Senior Public Incentives Advisor for the City’s economic development strategic plan. This citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan includes an Economic Development Profile Report; as well as identification and recommendation of potential citywide economic development incentive programs for business retention and recruitment that are applicable to six geographic sub-areas and citywide; an entrepreneurial development and empowerment strategy, a targeted industry growth strategy, and a retail recruitment strategy; an implementation program and “economic dashboard” benchmarking metrics to measure the success of strategies and initiatives; and sources and uses of funding to support plan implementation (grants and other alternative funding opportunities allocated to each of the plan’s five-year implementation horizon). Education Juris Doctorate, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley Master of Public Policy, Richard and Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley Bachelor of Arts, magna cum laude, Harvard University Professional Registrations Member of State Bar, California Licensed Real Estate Broker, California Affiliations Council of Development Finance Agencies CFA Society of San Francisco Congress for the New Urbanism Urban Land Institute Seaside Institute International Economic Development Council 15 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-6 City of Kalispell, MT – Core Area Market Analysis & Economic Development Strategic Plan: Mr. Edison served in the role of senior advisor for this engagement. The objective of this project was to map out the redevelopment of the area, which is a regional center within the State of Montana, addressing the needs of the community while focusing upon achievable results. This project required considerable public outreach, as well as the development of a SWOT analysis. County of Monterey, CA – East Garrison Specific Plan Financing and Implementation: East Garrison, located on the easternmost portion of Fort Ord (the former United States Army post in Monterey County), consisted of approximately 1,400 residential units, including single family detached, town homes, apartments, affordable housing, a town commercial center, and arts facilities. Mr. Edison assisted the developer and the County with a wide range of financing issues, including the availability and structuring of public finance, fiscal mitigation measures, economic impacts, the implementation of affordable housing, and the negotiation of business terms between the developer and the County. He also assisted the developer in negotiations with the Fort Ord Reuse Authority over the base wide capital improvement program and the structuring of the payment of impact fees generated by the development. Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA) Consolidation Study Adaptive Reuse Market Analysis & Cost-Benefit Analysis: Conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the potential relocation/disposition of seven properties owned and operated by the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority. Identified operational benefits, cost savings and strategies for operating facilities along with procedures for implementing multiple consolidation scenarios. The analysis included assessments of historic transit-oriented redevelopment and reuse potential of the DL&W Terminal building, operating costs, fiscal and economic impact, and local real estate market conditions. City of Redding, CA – Oasis Towne Center Financing and Fiscal Analysis: Hired by the Levenson Development Company (LDC) to assist with an economic and fiscal impact study and a financing plan for the Oasis Towne Center; a retail development of approximately one million square feet in Redding, California. Mr. Edison advised LDC on how to structure the financing of the development in order to provide public benefits from the project and minimize the need for public resources. He prepared an economic and fiscal analysis and negotiated a series of service plans and fiscal mitigation measures with the City. Mr. Edison also prepared a financing plan for infrastructure needed not only for the immediate project but also for development within the entire Oasis Road Specific Plan area. City of Foster City, CA – Gilead, Chess Drive, and Mirabella Fiscal Impact Studies: The City of Foster City hired Mr. Edison to provide an evaluation of the fiscal impact of three specific plans. He evaluated the impact on services of each plan, the anticipated new revenues and expenditures, and the necessity for new public facilities to serve the projects. City of Foster City, CA –Pilgrim-Triton Area Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis: The City of Foster City engaged Mr. Edison to provide an analysis of the fiscal impacts of the development of the proposed Pilgrim-Triton Specific Plan. He provided an examination of the fiscal implications of a range of project alternatives, including the effects on the City’s General Plan and services needed for new development within the Specific Plan area. City of Vallejo, CA – Costco Expansion Urban Decay, Economic, and Fiscal Impact Analysis: In response to the request of the City of Vallejo, Mr. Edison examined the economic impact of a proposed expansion of an existing Costco. The analysis included projections of the impact on sales tax, employment, property tax and the net impact to the City’s budget. Based on the analysis, the City Planning Commission approved the Costco expansion. J. Edison Resume Continued Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-7 Ernesto Vilchis Project Director Mr. Vilchis has served local government and assisted developers through the provision of financial economic consulting. With over 10 years of professional experience, his areas of expertise include community and economic development, land use planning, affordable housing and transit oriented development, and neighborhood revitalization. Mr. Vilchis also possesses experience in regard to the structuring of ground leases and joint development agreements. Mr. Vilchis will draw upon past peer review engagements that involved the assessment of the financial feasibility of developer proposals for approximately 450 residential units in a specific San Francisco neighborhood. Another similar engagement he conducted for the City of Oakland required an analysis of the financial feasibility of a proposed 102 market-rate housing development. Before joining Willdan, Mr. Vilchis was a senior associate with Keyser Marston Associates from 2010 to 2012. In this role he provided consulting services to local governments in a wide variety of areas including structuring their ground leases, joint development agreements, disposition of surplus property or the provision of public financing. A highlight of his project experience is outlined below.  Assess financial feasibility of retail component for the planned Transbay Transit Station in San Francisco, California.  Develop financial model to assess the fiscal impact of a proposed Infrastructure Finance District in the Rincon Hill Neighborhood in San Francisco, California.  Evaluate the financial feasibility of a developer’s proposal to redevelop a historic theater in downtown Woodland, California, and a mixed-use complex in Downtown Santa Rosa, California.  Review financial feasibility of developer proposals for 400-500 residential building in South of Market Neighborhood in San Francisco, California.  Conduct a market study of the retail sector and project demand for commercial space for the City of Union City’s (California) Intermodal Transit Station. Mr. Vilchis also was employed by AECOM (formerly Economics Research Associates) from 2008 to 2010. In the role of associate, he provide consulting services to local governments and private developers in the areas of community and economic development, land use planning, affordable housing and transit oriented development, and neighborhood revitalization. An overview of his project experience in this role is outlined below.  Conducted market assessment and financial analysis for the potential development of Laguna Caren, a 1,000 acre site, in the outskirts of Santiago, Chile.  Project retail and residential demand for the redevelopment plan of downtown Salinas, California.  Assist the City of Pittsburg, California in the development of their affordable housing strategy by assessing affordable housing supply and demand, identifying challenges and opportunities for the development of affordable housing in the area.  Conduct fiscal impact analysis of a proposed 100 acre development in the City of Grass Valley, California. Education Dual Masters in Public Affairs and Urban and Regional Planning, Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University Bachelor of Arts, University of California, Berkeley 20 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-8 Education Master of Planning in Community and Local Economic Development; University of Southern California, Los Angeles Bachelor of Science in City and Regional Planning, with a Concentration in US Latino Studies; Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Professional Affiliations California Redevelopment Association American Planning Association International Council of Shopping Centers Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing Official Southern California Planning Congress (Former Board Member) 9 years Experience Jose Ometeotl Senior Project Manager Mr. Ometeotl specializes in real estate and redevelopment/planning consulting services for public agencies, including the Montana communities/organizations of Kalispell, Evergreen, Flathead County, Flathead County Economic Development Authority and Montana West Economic Development. These services extended to redevelopment plan adoptions and amendments, five-year implementation and ten-year housing compliance plans, bond financing consultant reports, multiple property acquisitions, analysis of large commercial and mixed-use residential projects, housing rehabilitation, and the drafting of DDAs and OPAs. In addition, he has served as a senior-level staff member for two redevelopment consulting firms in California where he provided research, document preparation, financial analysis, and project management and implementation services for public agencies. Mr. Ometeotl has also served as a community development planner for the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and the University of Southern California’s Center for Economic Development. Before joining Willdan, Mr. Ometeotl held a principal position with The Ometeotl Group. While there, he designed and implemented comprehensive acquisition and development strategies for communities throughout the western United States. He has also facilitated the financing and structuring of several New Market Tax Credit transactions, and coordinated and served as fiscal consultant for tax allocation bond issuances throughout California. In addition, Mr. Ometeotl negotiated in excess of $3 billion in real estate development transactions, whereby he conducted the pro forma analysis; led the negotiation team; and coordinated a network of support, assistance, and ongoing training to clients and staff. Project Experience Core Area Market Analysis & Economic Development Strategic Plan – City of Kalispell, MT: Mr. Ometeotl served in the role of redevelopment advisor for this engagement. The objective of this project was to map out the redevelopment of the area, which is a regional center within the State of Montana, addressing the needs of the community while focusing upon achievable results. This project required considerable public outreach, as well as the development of a SWOT analysis. Glacier Industrial Park Development Advisory Services – Kalispell, MT: The Montana West Economic Development Authority retained Mr. Ometeotl upon conclusion of the Core Area Revitalization Study, to: source capital necessary to complete the Glacier Industrial Park project; negotiate leases with potential tenants at Glacier Rail Park, acquire property in the Core Area; provide project management; provide New Markets Tax Credit advisory services, and dispose of the acquired properties for redevelopment. Azusa/Arrow Redevelopment – Azusa, CA: The City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to acquire a development site. Subsequent to the acquisition of this site, Mr. Ometeotl solicited and retained a regional site retailer, as well as a full-service sit-down restaurant. The site is presently under construction. Citrus Crossing Redevelopment – Azusa, CA: The City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to negotiate and facilitate the redevelopment a 25-acre shopping center. Mr. Ometeotl worked closely with the developer to secure such anchor tenants as Fresh & Easy, Ross, Regency Theatres, and CVS. Mr. Ometeotl also negotiated agreements with other tenants, including Applebee’s, Pinkberry, Chipotle, Panda Express, and Jamba Juice. To accommodate new housing and continuous traffic throughout the site, the development was designed in a horizontal mixed-use format. Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-9 Downtown Revitalization – Azusa, CA: The City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to undertake the rehabilitation and tenant solicitation of several downtown parcels owned by the Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Ometeotl successfully located a medical service provider and two full-service sit-down restaurants in the downtown area. Economic Development Loan Program – Azusa, CA: Utilizing CDBG funds, the City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to develop and implement an Economic Development Loan Program. The purpose of the program was to provide loans for working capital, new construction, tenant improvement, and employment opportunities for downtown core businesses. Interstate 210 LED Billboard – Azusa, CA: The City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to develop bid specifications for the upgrade/marketing of an existing obsolete electronic reader board along the 210 Freeway. Mr. Ometeotl also structured the billboard’s revenue and leasing model. Target Store – Monrovia, CA: Lowe Enterprises engaged Mr. Ometeotl to acquire the 5-acre development site, and negotiate tenant relocations and the development agreement among City of Monrovia, Lowe Enterprises, and Target Corporation. The development of the site is currently pending resolution of issues surrounding the redevelopment. Restaurant Attraction/Incentive Program – Upland, CA: The Upland Community Redevelopment Agency engaged Mr. Ometeotl to create the Restaurant Attraction/Incentive Program. The primary objective was to provide financial assistance to restaurant owners wishing to establish a new sit-down, full-service restaurant in targeted areas of the City. Business Development – San Joaquin, CA: The City of San Joaquin engaged Mr. Ometeotl to create a small business development incubator program. The primary objective was to provide financial and technical assistance for business owners within the greater San Joaquin region. North Downtown Public Facilities – Compton, CA: Fostered by Mr. Ometeotl, this project is a true public/private partnership between the City of Compton Community Redevelopment Agency and Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group for the development of a 5.80 acre site. The site development entailed a new senior activity center, community center, and joint-use parking structure. The project implementation result was the Agency’s capability to undertake construction of new facilities, while not impacting bonding capacity or taking advantage of a net $20 million New Market Tax Credit benefit for this $60 million project. J. Ometeotl Resume Continued Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-10 John How, AICP Planner John has worked with several communities throughout Montana helping them create vibrant, yet sustainable communities through land use plans and policies. He has extensive experience as a project manager developing visioning plans for growth policies and land use plans, working on comprehensive master plans, updating zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations and leading public engagement efforts for various projects. John has also conducted market analysis and affordable housing studies, parks and trails planning, infrastructure assessments and transportation plans. He is proficient in ArcGIS, Google SketchUp and Microsoft Office. John is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. Project Experience Project Manager, Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) Analysis – Bozeman, MT: John is working with a team of architects to analyze the impacts of affordable housing, design guidelines and zoning code changes with the City of Bozeman’s NCOD. The district’s guidelines, which comprises historic structures as well as non-historic buildings, is outdated and is causing issues with new home development as well as new commercial growth within Bozeman’s downtown core. The KLJ team is currently reviewing best practices for encouraging affordable housing within historic districts as well as researching new design guidelines to promote quality development while keeping construction costs at bay. Project Manager, Sweetgrass Region Impact Study – Sweetgrass Development, MT: John developed an impact study for a five-county region in north-central Montana that analyzed growth impacts to schools, housing, infrastructure and community facilities such as police, fire and hospitals. He interviewed 100 key businesses across the five-county to gauge their growth forecasts in the next five years; the growth forecasts supplemented KLJ population pyramids and State of Montana census figures. John also prepared action items and implementation plans for land use strategies, affordable housing policies and infrastructure upgrades across the region. The largest impact was to housing stock and the inability of new workforce employees to find quality, affordable housing. As such, the study focused on helping the Sweetgrass Region construct affordable housing and infrastructure improvements to capitalize on projected growth. Project Manager, Growth Policy and Transportation Plan – Richland County, MT: John is the project manager for the Growth Policy, which is a planning document to guide growth and development throughout the county. He is working with a team to ensure the land use policies and transportation strategies coincide with each other. He is also leading all public input meetings and presentations to governing bodies within the county. The growth policy will be an updated, concise document that provides policies and strategies for land use, housing, infrastructure, transportation, natural resources and economic development that county and city officials can implement to improve the quality of life in Richland County. Project Manager, Rail Park Market and Feasibility Analysis, Flathead County Economic Development Authority – Flathead County, MT: KLJ conducted a market analysis, which included a competitive assessment, financial feasibility, cultivation of partnerships, target industry identification, leads for recruitment, funding options and identification of an operating model to determine the appropriate businesses for locating to the park. John also organized and led multiple meetings to obtain input from FCEDA, BNSF, the local short line operator, the City of Kalispell and the two Kalispell businesses using the existing rail to determine potential site layout options. A final site layout was selected that accommodates the requests of the businesses in town and provides multiple locations for additional new businesses, which require access to rail, to move into the site. Education Master of Science, Urban and Regional Planning, University of Iowa Bachelor of Science, Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska at Omaha Bachelor of Arts, Psychology, University of Nebraska at Lincoln Professional Registrations American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Professional Memberships American Planning Association Western Central Chapter Montana Association of Planners Toastmasters International 25 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-11 Project Manager, Housing Impact Study – Toole County, MT: KLJ collaborated with Toole County and the cities of Shelby, Sunburst, Kevin and Sweetgrass to develop a housing impact study that analyzed the current housing trends and future growth projections for the region. Using data from realtors, public, previous studies including housing assessments from the Montana Department of Commerce and most importantly, interviews with local businesses, our team was able to compile scenarios for accommodating future growth and the impacts associated with continued development. KLJ created development summaries for each community that listed potential housing needs, available lots for development, market prices for vacant and residentially zoned property and deficiencies in certain housing types. In addition, KLJ was able to determine a projected economic growth rate for the county based on input from local businesses and their five- year business plans. J. How Resume Continued Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-12 Forrest Sanderson, CFM Planner Forrest joined KLJ’s Billings office after a distinguished career as a professional planner working with Montana’s state and local governments. He has created seven new rural zoning districts, completely revised and updated three municipal zoning ordinances and amended existing zoning regulations more than 150 times. In addition, Forrest has reviewed more than 250 subdivisions creating in excess of 1,500 lots, served as a floodplain administrator for more than 20 years in four separate jurisdictions and written or assisted in the writing of numerous master plans, growth policies and subdivision and zoning regulations to implement planning documents. This experience encompasses small resort communities that desired to remain as they are to rapidly growing and developing cities, counties as well as state and regional projects. Project Experience Community Development Director, City of Red Lodge – Red Lodge, MT: Forrest served as planning director, building official, subdivision administrator, environmental certifying officer, floodplain administrator, grant administrator and zoning administrator for the City of Red Lodge. His typical responsibilities addressed subdivision administration (major and minor), zoning administration (all city districts) and all amendments to existing zoning maps. He also provided financial, technical and administrative support to the Red Lodge Public Works Department, served as liaison between the City Council and Carbon County Commissioners, provided administrative and technical support and administration to three subcommittees of the Red Lodge City Council and implemented the City Council’s policies and legislative actions for the Planning, Building, Public Works, Police and City Administration Departments. Under his direction, the Red Lodge Growth Policy was written in 2007 and implemented by subdivision and zoning regulations in 2008. The Growth Policy was updated in 2013 and implemented by zoning regulations in 2014. The documents specifically addressed needs and provided solutions to workforce and affordable housing issues. Director of Planning and Zoning, Flathead County Planning and Zoning Office – Flathead County, MT: As director of Planning and Zoning, Forrest served as subdivision administrator, environmental certifying officer, floodplain administrator and zoning administrator for all unincorporated areas of Flathead County. His typical responsibilities addressed subdivision administration (major and minor), zoning administration (all county districts) and all amendments to existing zoning maps. As the director of planning and zoning for Flathead County Forrest directly prepared, or had prepared under his supervision, over 70 amendments to the various zoning districts and district regulations in rural Flathead County. Many of these changes were made to expand opportunities for residents near the Cities of Kalispell, Columbia Falls, and Whitefish. Division Head, Lake County Land Services – Lake County, MT: During his nine years with the County, Forrest rose from assistant planner to associate planner to Planning and zoning division head. In each of these positions his focus was on county (major and minor) subdivision administration, Polson city-county district subdivision administration, city and county zoning administration, city and county zoning district creation, amendments to existing city and county zoning maps, amendments to city and county zoning regulations, neighborhood planning, amendments to the city and county subdivision regulations, floodplain administrator for both city and county, Lakeshore protection supervisor and grant writing administration. Forrest was the primary planner for the County Board of Adjustment, County Planning Board, Polson City-County Planning Board and City of Polson Board of Adjustment Over his nine years with Lake County, Forrest created or assisted in the creation of seven new rural zoning districts in Lake County. He assisted in the creation of the 1994 City-County Master Plan and Zoning Regulations for the City of Polson. Upon the adoption of zoning regulations, Forrest was appointed by the City Council and County Commissioners as the zoning administrator for the newly-formed district. Education Bachelor of Science, Montana State University, Bozeman Professional Registrations / Certifications Certified Building Inspector, ICC Certified Floodplain Manager - Association of State Floodplain Managers American Institute of Certified Planners Affiliations Professional Memberships American Planning Association Western Central Chapter Montana Association of Planners Association of Montana Floodplain Managers Association of State Floodplain Managers Continuing Education Primary Leadership Development Course – Helena, MT Essentials of Management (six-day course for upper level managers) – State of Montana Professional Development Center Essentials of Management (eight-day course for managers) – State of Montana Professional Development Center MSF Safety Trainer course – Effective Supervision 8 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-13 Shari Eslinger Engineer Shari is a LEED Green Associate, Notary of the Public, and a certified SWPPP Administrator. She is well-versed in lean process management, and is highly organized and efficient. She has the ability to multi-task effectively and has the flexibility to work within various practice areas. She is an active participant in ASCE Montana Chapter as well as MSU’s student chapter, KLJ’s Young Professional Development Program and a local STEM advocate. She also serves on Governor Steve Bullock's Economic Development Advisory Council as the Prospera Business Network Region Representative. Project Experience Project Tracker/Observer/Designer/Land Acquisitions, Gallatin Gateway Broadband Project – Bozeman/Belgrade/Gallatin Gateway, MT: RUS Broadband Initiatives project intended to bring fiber optic telecommunications lines to Gallatin County, and its surrounding areas, over a three- year period. Funding includes seven contracts totaling $38 million, granting the design and construction of 560 miles of fiber optic network within the RUS project corridor. All permitting, right-of-way acquisition, design work (outside and inside plant), construction observation, project tracking and GIS records were executed by KLJ. Engineer, Big Sandy Water System PER – Big Sandy, MT: KLJ was contracted to do a Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) on the Town of Big Sandy’s drinking water system and submit their assessment on the current state of that system. It was found the water line infrastructure needed to be replaced and a report was to be submitted to the town of Big Sandy stating those findings and suggested alternatives. Technical Skills Coordinating information across multiple offices to support specific project goals requires both high-level organizational skills and efficiency. Shari works with professionals from multiple KLJ offices facilitating both internal operations and completion of specific project tasks. The following provides an overview of skills that will benefit the study.  Research for stakeholder and community input initiatives  Survey creation, processing and administration  City and multiple agency communication  Meeting facilitation  Database administration Education Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering Montana State University Professional Registrations / Certifications Engineer Intern – MT Notary of Public – MT Certified SWPPP Administrator – MTDEQ LEED Green Associates – USGBC Professional Memberships ASCE Associate Member Continuing Education Bismarck State College - ArcGIS I – Introduction to ArcGIS 10.1 Version Bismarck State College - ArcGIS II – Essential Workflows 10.1 Version Master Graphics – Civil 3D training 4 Years Experience Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-14 Sample Reports A required by the City of Bozeman’s RFP for a Strategic Plan, we have included the following sample reports.  City of Kalispell, Montana Core Area Implementation Plan  City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida Economic Development Strategic Plan Bozeman, MT Strategic Plan A-15 Required Form Non-Discrimination Affirmation Form 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92590-4856 800.755.6864 | Fax: 888.326.6864 www.willdan.com fson Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 3 Table of Contents I. Introduction & Executive Summary 7 II. Baseline Demographic & Economic Overview 9 Population 9 Households 9 Age Profile 10 Income Profile 10 Unemployment and Labor Force 12 Educational Attainment 13 Skills Gap 14 Kalispell Tourism Market 14 III. Residential Market Analysis 17 New Housing Construction Trends in Kalispell 17 Housing Market Sales Prices & Pace in Kalispell 17 Kalispell Apartment Market Trends 19 Flathead County Housing Market Trends & Projections 19 Housing Affordability in Flathead County 20 Residential Development Opportunity in the Core Area 21 IV. Retail Market Analysis 23 Core Area Site Characteristics 23 Retail Trade Areas 24 Primary Trade Area 24 Secondary Trade Area 25 Retail Competition Overview 25 V. Office Market Analysis 32 VI. Business Park/Industrial Market Analysis 33 Key Recommendations 33 VII. Hotel and Hospitality Market Analysis 35 VIII. Opportunities and Constraints: Implications for Core Area Plan 36 Strengths and Opportunities 37 Constraints/Threats 39 IX. Core Area Economic Development Recommendations 40 Scenario 1 – Status Quo (Maintain Rail in Core Area) 40 Scenario 2 – Conservative (Limited Expansion of Core Area Retail) 41 Scenario 3 – Optimistic (Major Expansion of Core Area Retail) 42 Long-Term Redevelopment Potential 43 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 4 Rationale 43 Recommended Retail Recruitment Strategies 44 Leasing and Management 44 Phasing and Action Items 44 Conclusions 45 X. Kalispell Linear Park Conceptual Plan 47 Introduction 47 Linear Park Layout and Programming 47 Key Regional Trail Connection Points 48 Proposed Linear Park Programming “Bump out” Nodes 48 Street Extensions/ Railroad Crossing Conversions 49 Connection to the City of Kalispell Parks and Recreation Network 49 Linear Park Capital Cost Assumptions 49 Rail Line Removal 50 Linear Park Trail 50 Summary of Construction Costs 50 Linear Park Operating Cost Assumptions 52 XI. Core Area Financial Feasibility & Implementation Plan 53 Summary of Key Findings 53 Annex A: Detailed Assumptions & Calculations 59 Annex B: Public Park/Recreation Development Opportunities – Case Studies 60 Portland Trails, Maine 60 Potomac Overlook Regional Park Nature Education Center, Arlington, Virginia 61 Carolina Thread Trail & Cawtaba Lands Conservancy, North and South Carolina 62 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 5 Index of Tables/Figures Figure 1: Population Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017) .......................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Household Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017) .......................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 3: 2012 Population by Age ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 4: 2017 Population by Age ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5: Income Profile for the City of Kalispell................................................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 6: Income Profile for Flathead County .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 7: Per Capita Income, Flathead County, 1997-2010 .............................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 8: Percent Change in Nonfarm Labor Income, Flathead County ........................................................................................................... 12 Figure 9: Flathead County Employment Trends 2005 - 2010 ........................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 10: Unemployment Rate, Flathead County, Not Seasonally Adjusted .................................................................................................. 13 Figure 11: Educational Attainment in Flathead County ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 12: Educational Attainment in the United States .................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 13: Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (2010 and 2023 Projection) ............................................................................................... 16 Figure 14: Residential Construction Pipeline, City of Kalispell .......................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 15: Home Sales and Median Sales Price in Kalispell (2007-2012) ....................................................................................................... 18 Figure 16: Median Home Values, Kalispell Zip Code 59901 ............................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 17: Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income ......................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 18: Occupancy of Housing Units, Flathead County, 2010 ..................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 19: Housing Affordability Index, Flathead County 2007-2010................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 20: Average Annual Housing Unit Construction ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 21: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives – Residential Development ............................................................................................ 22 Figure 22: Target-Anchored Shopping Center (Highway 93 North) .................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 23: Kalispell Retail Competition Map ...................................................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 24: Retail Gap Analysis - City of Kalispell .............................................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 25: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives – Retail Development ..................................................................................................... 29 Figure 26: Incremental Residential Retail Spending Power & 10-Year Supportable Retail Development (2022) ........................................... 30 Figure 27: Food, Retail & Entertainment Demand from Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (Square Feet) .............................................. 31 Figure 28: Current Kalispell Office Market Lease Rate Trends ......................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 29: Leads for Rail Industrial Park ........................................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 30: Profile of Kalispell Area Hotel/Lodging Properties ........................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 31: Downtown Kalispell .......................................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 32: Proposed Core Area Redevelopment .............................................................................................................................................. 43 Figure 33: Current Conditions: Kalispell Center Mall Parking Lot ..................................................................................................................... 45 Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations ............................................................................. 51 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 6 Figure 35: Kalispell Linear Park Annual Operating Cost Estimates .................................................................................................................. 52 Figure 36: Core Area Financial Feasibility Analysis – Summary Results ......................................................................................................... 53 Figure 37: Core Area Plan Real Property Tax Revenue Assumptions –Incremental Taxes Per Square Foot from Similar Redevelopment Activity ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Figure 38: Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of Scenarios ........................................................................................................................ 55 Figure 39: Core Area Grant Funding Resource Strategy .................................................................................................................................. 56 Figure 40: Potomac Overlook Regional Park Environmental Stewardship Programming ................................................................................ 62 Figure 41: Carolina Thread Trail Park Identification Signage ........................................................................................................................... 62 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 7 The City of Kalispell commissioned this Core Area Commercial Market Analysis (“Market Analysis”) to assist it in the redevelopment of the Core Area. The City has developed a vision to revitalize the Core Area while retaining its character and identity. This Market Analysis will identify the opportunities to realize the vision, the impediments to implementation, and provide direction on bringing the plan from concept to reality. This study analyzes the plan’s impact on fiscal revenues, job creation (both one-time construction and ongoing permanent jobs), and indirect spending. It also evaluates the environmental, social, and other public benefits that are difficult to quantify, but have a positive impact on the community. The City’s vision is to increase the appeal of the Core Area by:  Removing the railroad tracks that bisects the Project Area and replace the tracks with a Linear Park;  Improving and upgrading existing properties to remove the blighted areas within the Core Area; and  Developing a compatible mix of commercial retail, neighborhood services, residential housing and public areas that meets the needs of residents and fosters a greater sense of community. In turn, the proposed redevelopment will strengthen the local economy by increasing the local tax base, attracting new residents and businesses, creating new jobs, and increasing tourism. This report will assess and analyze development opportunities in the following sectors:  Retail  Office  Business Park  Hotel and Hospitality  Institutional  Single and Multi Family Housing The report will also identify ways in which public policy can encourage appropriately scaled new development that will positively shape and reinforce the Core Area of Kalispell through:  Retention of existing retailers  Strategy for the recruitment of new commercial uses  Impact of any recent and proposed development projects  Apparent strengths and weaknesses in Kalispell for the following development sectors; Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 8  Elements that may now (or in the future) support or constrain the goals of the Core Area Strategy;  The consumers’ experience within Kalispell and the Core Area;  Characteristics within Kalispell that have the greatest impact on development;  Voids and opportunities in the marketplace that will affect local retailers and national chains; and  Public improvements and public and private investment strategies to reinforce project goals and objectives. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 9 The City of Kalispell and Flathead County are both growing. Figure 1 shows that Kalispell had 20,603 residents in 2012. This number represents a growth rate of 1.70 percent per year from the 2010 US Census to 2012. Flathead County grew from 90,928 residents as reported in the 2010 US Census to 94,275 in 2012. The county grew at a rate of 1.84 percent per year during that time. The city and county are both expected to continue adding residents, but the rate of this growth is expected to slow over the next five years. Between 2012 and 2017 Kalispell is expected to grow its population by more than 1,200 residents, an annual growth rate of 1.20 percent. Flathead County will reach a population of 100,620 in 2017 by having an annual growth rate of 1.35 percent. The 2010 US Census identified 8,638 households in the City of Kalispell, as shown in Figure 2. By 2012, this number had grown by an annual rate of 1.53 percent to 8,903 while the population grew more quickly at 1.70 percent per year. Though the population of the City is expected to grow 1.2 percent annually from 2012 to 2017, the number of households is expected to rise 1.44 percent to 9,546 by 2017. The city added households more slowly than population from 2010 to 2012, but will add households more quickly than population from 2012 to 2017. Flathead County reflects this trend as well. While the population of the county grew by an annual rate of 1.84 percent from 2010 to 2012, the number of households only grew by 1.66 percent per year, from 37,504 to 38,748 in the same period. However, as the rate of population growth in the county is expected to decline to an annual rate of 1.35 percent, the annual household growth rate will increase to 1.58 percent per year, bringing the total number of households expected by 2017 to 41,808. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 10 As in indicated in Figure 1 and Figure 2, both the City of Kalispell and Flathead County are expected to add households faster than they grow their populations. This signals anticipated demand for new housing starts. Friends and family cohabitating out of economic necessity will choose to form new households once their economic conditions allow it. The expected rise in household formation by 2017 indicates both a strengthening economy as well as reflects a larger national trend of decreasing household sizes regardless of economic conditions. Both the City of Kalispell and Flathead County have a larger portion of the population in the 25 to 64 age range, the portion of the population that traditionally financially supports the other ends of the age spectrum. As Figure 3 shows, the population in 2012 in Kalispell that is in this age bracket is smaller than the same age cohort in the county as a whole; 50.6 percent as compared to 54.9 percent. The bulk of the difference in the remaining population comes in the younger age bracket. In the city, 33.5 percent of the population is under the age of 25 while just 30.4 percent of the county’s population is in this younger demographic. The City of Kalispell is younger than Flathead County. These trends are expected to continue through 2017. While the Kalispell is expected to remain generally younger than Flathead County, both places will cope with an aging population. Figure 4 shows that the portion of the population age 65 and older is expected to grow. By 2017, the city’s retirement-aged population will be 17.5 percent of the population while the county will have a 16.9 percent share of older residents. In 2012 the median household income in the City of Kalispell was $37,319, as shown in Figure 5. The share of households earning more than $75,000 per year was 19.2 percent. By 2017, the median income is projected to grow to $41,906, an increase of 12.29 percent, or 2.46 percent on an annualized basis. By 2017, 22.3 percent of households will earn more than $75,000. The per-capita income is also projected to grow from $21,768 in 2012 to $24,169 by 2017, increasing by 16.15 percent. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 11 Figure 6 demonstrates that residents of the county tend to be slightly wealthier than City residents. The median household income for Flathead County was $42,873 in 2012, and 23.7 percent of the county’s households made more than $75,000 annually. By 2017, the median income is projected to grow to $50,288, an increase of 17.30 percent (3.46 annually), and the share of households earning more than $75,000 per year will increase to 27.5 percent. From 2012 to 2017, the region’s per-capita income is projected to grow from $23,242 to $25,782. Flathead County’s per capita income rose steadily from 1997 to 2008, as demonstrated in Figure 7. This metric peaked in 2008 when the per capita income for the county surpassed $35,000 in 2010 dollars. When the economy faltered in 2009, it caused the per capita income levels of the count’s residents to fall for the first time in a decade. In 2010, the per capita income for the county rose, but still fell short of the pre- recession figures slightly. Nonfarm labor income measures how an economy is doing. Nonfarm income grew 28 percent between 2003 and 2007, as shown in Figure 8. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 12 Nonfarm labor income declined in 2008 and 2009 as major industries including construction and wood products manufacturing experienced upheaval. Some recovery occurred in 2010 as the wood products industry and construction industry stabilized at lower levels, but the economy will take several years of consistent growth to fully stabilize to pre-recession strength. Unemployment rates for Flathead County began to climb as the United States entered a recessionary period in 2008. Prior to that time, unemployment rates held steady under 5 percent. By 2009, the unemployment rate in Flathead County had risen to more than 10 percent. Figure 9 shows the trend of rising unemployment rates by year in Flathead County, Montana from 2005 to 2010. Figure 9 also demonstrates that while the labor force declined from its peak in 2008, the labor force did not diminish in the recession to below the labor force numbers from 2005. This shows that the decrease in the labor force is not the result of outmigration or retirement, but rather a diminishment of the number of residents no longer seeking employment. Figure 10 shows the not seasonally adjusted unemployment rates for Flathead County, including their fluctuations from season to season. A clearer picture of the unemployment trend can be seen by observing Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 13 the linear unemployment on the graph. This trend line shows that the overall rate has been dropping approximately one percentage point per year since 2010, when the average rate was around 10 percent. At peak unemployment season in 2010, the unemployment rate was nearly 14 percent. By September 2012, the monthly employment rate for the county had dropped to 7.3 percent. This rate has subsequently risen, an expected trend given the cyclical nature of unemployment. However, the overall trend since the beginning of 2010 has been one of declining unemployment rates in Flathead County. According to the Montana Department of Labor and Industry, the recession hit the Flathead economy harder than any other major urban area in the state. The nonfarm labor income decline of 2.7 percent in 2008 and the 9.3 percent decrease in 2009 were the largest among the counties reported. Flathead County’s unemployment rate rose to 11.3 percent in November 2010, higher than any of the other large counties in the state. These sizable impacts were the result of permanent closures (such as Columbia Falls Aluminum Company) combined with cyclic declines in major industries such as wood products, nonresident travel, and construction. According to the Montana Department of Labor and Industry, it will be at least 2015 before real nonfarm labor income (an overall measure of the economy) in Flathead County regains its 2007 peak. However, the Kalispell economy is undergoing recovery. The evolution of Kalispell into a regional trade and service center continues to be one of the growing sectors of the economic base. Educational attainment in Flathead County compares favorably to the rest of the country for those without a college degree. As Figure 11 and Figure 12 show, the share of the population over the age of 25 without a high school diploma in Flathead County is just 8.07 percent compared to 14.61 percent nationally. Continuing this trend, the share of the population over age 25 that has a high school diploma or an equivalent degree but not college experience is 32.1 percent in Flathead County, while just 28.64 percent of the nation fall into this category. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Unemployment Rate Linear (Unemployment Rate) Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 14 Flathead County also boasts impressive educational attainment for the segments of the population with college degrees. The share of the population over the age of 25 with some college or an associate’s degree in Flathead County is 32.49 percent compared to the national figure of 28.55 percent. Additionally, the share of the adult population in Flathead County with a bachelor’s degree or higher is 27.34 percent, less than one percentage point off of the national figure of 28.2 percent. Despite boasting strong educational attainment, the skill set of the local workforce in Flathead County does not adequately address the skills that businesses in the area need. According to a report by the Flathead County Community College,, a “skills gap” exists in the county. Businesses have a difficult time finding employees who have the skills necessary to accomplish the jobs that they provide. To address this issue, the report recommends elevating the training resources available for advanced manufacturing in three specific fields: wood products, technology-oriented manufacturing, and entrepreneurial manufacturing. Dedicating resources to these specific industries would educate and attract a pipeline of current and future workers in the skills that businesses need. Flathead Valley Community College led a group of public, private, and educational partners to develop a curriculum designed to better teach workforce development skills. The private partners provide some of the resources needed to teach the students, and in return have a better educated workforce from which to select employees. The private sector partners have identified that they anticipate hiring 457 employees using these new skills between 2013 and 2015. New jobs in these fields bring with them new money to the local economy, fueling demand for redevelopment. The Kalispell economy benefits greatly from tourism spending due to its proximity to Glacier National Park and to the Canadian border. According to the National Park Service 2012 Economic Impact Study, more than 2 million visitors spent approximately 110 million dollars in Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 15 Glacier National Park and in communities near the park (based on 2010 data). That spending supported 1,695 jobs in the local area. The figures are based on $12 billion of direct spending by 281 million visitors in 394 national parks and nearby communities and are included in an annual, peer-reviewed, visitor spending analysis conducted by Michigan State University for the National Park Service. According to Glacier National Park Superintendent Chas Cartwright, Glacier National Park has historically been an economic driver in the state. The economic impact study demonstrates the substantial value of the diverse goods and services provided by local businesses to the park visitor, as well as the role of the park as an employment opportunities for the Flathead County region. Most of the spending and jobs are related to lodging, food, and beverage service (52 percent) followed by other retail (29 percent), entertainment/amusements (10 percent), gas and local transportation (7 percent) and groceries (2 percent). The Canadian visitor market also represents a significant share of the overall visitor market. Canadian visitors travel to Kalispell to shop for apparel, electronics, household goods, and other retail goods to take advantage of Montana’s lack of state and local sales taxes. Kalispell also draws a steady business traveler market due to its role as the governmental hub of the region (the County seat) and frequent trade shows and conferences. Taking the Glacier National Park visitor market as an example, the visitor spending generated by this market segment is substantial and is an indicator of the source of inflow support for retail goods and services in the Kalispell region. Based on 2010 visitation of 2.1 million visitors and an average annual growth rate of 2.1 percent, Willdan estimates that Glacier National Park could expect to attract an additional 633,000 annual visitors over the next ten years. Assuming current per capita visitor spending patterns, Glacier National Park visitors are expected to generate $37.1 million in incremental (net new) annual spending by 2023. This potential redevelopment activity generated by visitor spending in the Core Area is analyzed further in the retail and lodging market analyses in this report. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 16 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 17 The City of Kalispell commissioned this Core Area Housing Market Analysis (“Market Analysis”) to assist it in the redevelopment of the Core Area. The City has developed a vision to revitalize the Core Area while retaining its character and identity. This Market Analysis will discuss the current state of the housing market in the City of Kalispell. The analysis provides and overview of residential construction trends and projections to inform further dialogue on housing production in the Core Area and City. From 2003 through 2009, the creation of residential lots outpaced new residential construction every year but 2007. As Figure 14 shows, Kalispell added residential lots faster than housing units for nearly a decade. Once the economy slowed down in 2008 and 2009, construction companies slowed production to meet demand, but lot developers slowed production even more. As a result, builders constructed on the existing lots and have been slowly decreasing the pipeline of developable lots available for residential building. Meanwhile, the 2012 figures for new residential construction demonstrate that economic recovery has begun in Kalispell. The average sales price per square foot for homes in Kalispell was $99, an increase of 23.8 percent compared to February 2011. The median list price in May 2013 for single family homes in Kalispell is $249,900. The list prices increased by 3.15 percent from the previous month. The price per square foot for listings in this area is $153. However, the median sale price in February for single-family homes was $169,626, reflecting an increase of 7.0 percent from the prior month. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 18 There are currently 547 resale and new homes for sale in Kalispell, including 36 homes in the pre-foreclosure, auction, or bank-owned stages of the foreclosure process. There are currently 6 new homes and 46 homes in excess of $500,000. The average listing price for homes for sale in Kalispell was $351,600 for the week ending March 20, 2013 which represents an increase of 4.8 percent, or $15,983, compared to the prior month. The high average listing price can be directly attributed to the 46 homes for sale in excess of $500,000. The February 2013 median home value in zip code 59901 is $147,500. Over the past six months, approximately 15 homes sold per month in the Kalispell market. Reviewing Kalispell building permit and construction data, approximately 50 new homes have been constructed annually in Kalispell since 2010. At the current rate of sales and new home development, it would take approximately 4 years to exhaust the current for sale housing supply. The average sales price per square foot for homes in Kalispell has increased 23.8 percent compared to February 2011. With both the median list and sales price of for-sale homes in Kalispell continuing to rise, it would appear that the housing market is improving. In speaking with the Kalispell Building Department, local realtors and the Flathead Valley Association of Realtors, local and national housing indicators point to increased production and demand for housing. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 19 Based on primary market research conducted by Willdan, the Appleway Court and Depot Place apartment projects have brought renewed life to the rental community in Kalispell. Appleway Court identifies a 98 percent occupancy rate and leasing at Depot Place appears to be moving at a brisk pace. There are scant listings of available rental units in Kalispell. Current lease rates for traditional apartment communities in Kalispell are approximately $0.85 to $1.25 per square foot per month. Lease rates for single-family homes or units within single family homes dips slightly due to amenities, location and availability. Current rates are approximately $0.65 to $1.00 per square foot per month. Given the nature of the depressed housing market and continued population growth the apartment segment will continue to see strong activity. Housing affordability for renters can be measured by calculating what a resident pays in gross rent as a percent of their household income. Residents paying 30 percent of their household income on rent are said to be living in unaffordable units. Figure 17 shows that in Flathead County, 9.80 percent of the renters spend between 30 and 34.9 percent of their household income on rent. The figure also shows that 36.8 percent of the population spends more than 35 percent of their household income on rent. In total a staggering 46.6 percent of the renters in Flathead County live in units that are considered by industry standard to be unaffordable. Montana’s housing market had a strong year in 2012, with every major market across the state reporting an increase in activity as compared to 2011. The Montana Association of Realtors (“MAR”) received sales data from the eight largest associations in the state, and in all eight there was an increase in the number of single-family homes sold compared to 2011. Overall, in the 8 major markets in Montana, 8,579 single-family homes were sold in 2012 compared to 7,051 in 2011, a gain of 1,528 homes or 21.67 percent. “It is very exciting to see the Montana housing market continue to improve,” said MAR President Pam Wood. “Every major market in the state showed increased sales activity in 2012 when compared to the previous year, and that is very important as housing plays a major role in the overall economy.” Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 20 The Gallatin Association of Realtors saw the largest increase in single- family home sales in 2012, with an uptick of 364 homes sold in 2012 compared to the previous year, for an increase of 33.18 percent. The Northwest Association of Realtors was next with an increase of 307 homes (24.86 percent), followed by the Billings Association gain of 279 homes (15.96 percent). The average sales price of a home rose in six of the eight markets, the median sales price rose in seven of the eight markets and the average days a home was on the market fell in four of the eight major areas. Those figures do not include townhouses or condos, although six of the eight markets in the state reported an increase in the number of those sales as well. Record-low interest rates and an increase in consumer confidence played a key role in Montana’s housing market improving in 2012. In relation to housing sales during the first quarter of 2013 there were 159 non-distressed sales in the first quarter of 2013. This compares to 112 in 2012 and 102 in 2011. Although the total number of sales is nearly the same as 2012, the fact that bank-owned sales are down 42 percent and non-distressed sales are up 42 percent is a significant indicator that the market continues to improve. Nearly 14 percent of housing units in Flathead County are vacant for seasonal use. Another 23 percent are renter occupied with about 56 percent of units occupied by owners. The remaining 6 percent of units are vacant for various reasons including those properties listed for rent, for sale, or those having been subject to foreclosure. Building and electric permits for Flathead County were robust during the early part of the prior decade, but have declined precipitously since 2007. Single family construction declined nearly 85 percent during that time frame in Kalispell and outlying areas. According to City staff, single family construction over the past 18 months has begun to return with nearly double the permitted new housing units in 2012 as those of 2011. Flathead County remains one of the most unaffordable real estate markets in Montana. Housing affordability as measured by the Housing Affordability Index has improved somewhat following the recent real Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 21 estate downturn. Figure 19 outlines the housing affordability from 2007 to 2010. A measure of a population's ability to afford to purchase a particular item, such as a house, indexed to the population's income. The Housing Affordability Index (HAI) measures whether a family earning the median income for an area qualifies for a typical loan on a median- priced home. An index value over 100 means the typical family qualifies for a loan on a typical home. Conversely, an index value under 100 indicates the typical family will not qualify for a loan. Values for the computation come from Multiple Listing Service, Federal Housing Finance Board, and the U.S. Census Bureau. Based on historic trends over the past ten years, adjusted to reflect the ongoing economic recovery, the City of Kalispell produced an average of 232 new housing units annually. Utilizing a conservative estimate and the baseline average annual housing production of 50 units (based on a 10-year average of 232 units), it is plausible to expect approximately 1,250 new homes may be constructed in Kalispell over the next 25 years. The proposed housing would include a mix of apartments, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit units, and a minor component of condominium Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 22 units targeted for the latter phase of redevelopment (after year 7 of Plan implementation). Based on the financial feasibility analysis detailed in the Annex to this report, it is possible to achieve a sufficient return on new construction investment if assuming market rate rental rates of at least $1.10 per square foot. It is plausible to assume that residential construction in the Core Area will continue along current production rates in the near term with cautious developers achieving success when delivering units to satisfy pent up demand. Based on these parameters, the Core Area Plan assumes that a series of small residential projects over a seven to ten year buildout horizon as detailed in the following table. Given the Core Area’s size, opportunity for development and potential housing product types, we anticipate that the Core Area could expect to capture approximately eight to 14 percent of that total production, or 105 to 175 units over the 25 year life of the Westside TIF District. In total, this program assumes that the Core Area would capture an average of four to seven units annually. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 23 This study examines key real estate market and economic variables (i.e., population growth, household income, consumer expenditure patterns, employment trends, etc.) to test the potential for retail development and/or redevelopment opportunities within the Core Area. The results of the demographic and economic analysis indicate there is little unmet retail demand within the Core Area and Kalispell. The opportunities to expand the Core Area’s retail trade exist in the introduction of additional soft goods retailers and full service restaurants. Retailing and shopping habits have changed over the past decade. Primarily the change occurred due to a shift in lifestyles. In the 1980s and 1990s going to the mall was the dominant form of shopping. Today, nearly 70 percent of purchases that are made come from discount retailers. This trend has established Wal-Mart as the largest seller of women’s ready-to-wear apparel. Returning to the streets of our local neighborhoods is replacing the mall experience. Today over 60 percent of consumers prefer to buy their shoes in a neighborhood store. Today’s consumer enjoys having the opportunity to live, shop and work in their neighborhood. Main streets are becoming savvy and retailers are now able to compete with the mall on any level. The average consumer walks by storefronts at an average rate of seven seconds per storefront. Retailers understand that they have to make the most of this foot traffic and advertise their store through window and facade displays. Individual retailers are employing interesting window displays and unique merchandising techniques to capture shoppers’ attention. Competition is growing and national tenants are now searching out locations on main streets. Presently, the Core Area’s existing retail square footage is comprised of businesses that have limited synergy and cohesiveness. The expanse of the area, multitude of uses and lack of pedestrian or vehicular interconnection inhibits the future development of the Core Area. The study area is generally defined as follows; Highway 2 on the north, Center Street on the south, Meridian Road on the west and Woodland Park Drive on the east. Although there is significant access to the Core Area via Highways 2 and 93, the Highways significantly impact development opportunities and the walkability of the Core Area. There is insufficient local access within the Core Area as several of the north/south connectors have been closed to accommodate railway traffic. Willdan surveyed local and regional stakeholders to analyze existing retail conditions. Survey interviews indicate that many of Kalispell’s residents identify the Core Area as lacking sufficient parking, hampered by Highway 93 and not containing significant synergy amongst uses. Main Street, as Kalispell’s primary downtown shopping district, Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 24 competes with new retailers often opening stores in the northern portion of Kalispell, adjacent to existing large scale retail developments and new housing product. The northern Kalispell retail developments serve as the primary regional shopping district in the greater Flathead Valley area. The retail development is anchored not only by big-box retailers, but also by discount department stores, hotels, restaurants, and a multiplex movie theatre. Retailers that can appeal to the demographics of Main Street’s primary trade and serve neighborhood-shopping needs, or create a unique specialty niche that draws shoppers to the district from beyond as an alternative to regional shopping centers, will most likely succeed as an alternative to the regional shopping centers of northern Kalispell. The profile of the retail market within the Primary Trade Area shows that a great portion of the retail establishments are located within a 10 mile radius of the Core Area. The population of the City of Kalispell comprises 20 percent of the Trade Area’s total population, but 53.4 percent of the County’s retail businesses are in the 10 mile radius of the Core Area. These numbers show that Kalispell is a major source of retail activity in the Primary Trade Area. There are a variety of neighborhood business districts within close proximity to the Core Area including the intersection of Highways 2 and 35, Main Street (south of 18th Street), and downtown Kalispell. The regional shopping centers are located at the northern periphery of Kalispell. The Core Area is anchored by a number of large retailers and employers such as the Kalispell Center Mall, Smith’s Foods, Albertsons Grocery, and Super One Grocery. For the purposes of this study, the market area was split into both primary and secondary trade areas. The primary trade area consists of those consumers who shop the Core Area district on a regular/weekly basis for most of their needs. This accounts for a majority of the retail expenditures in the Core Area. The study’s primary trade area is defined as fifty (50) miles from the Kalispell Center Mall. The secondary trade area extends further north into Canada and to the west, east and south, up to one hundred (100) miles. The primary trade area is delineated by distance, the regional retail nodes to the north, northeast and south, area population and Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 25 demographics, and the flow of retail traffic in all directions. The primary trade area residents account for most of the sales of the convenience and neighborhood-oriented retailers and services located in the study area. The primary trade area generally accounts for between 50 percent and 65 percent of sales. However, more destination-oriented tenants, such as breweries, art galleries and restaurants, draw from not only the trade area, but also from beyond the defined trade boundary, as well as from the local business and tourist population. The secondary trade area consists of tourists and those residents who live in the region surrounding the primary trade area who patronize retailers within the Core Area, but not as their primary source of shopping. The secondary trade area is defined by distance. This area has a current population estimate of approximately 141,500 persons, which is expected to increase slightly to approximately 149,000 persons, or 5.3 percent by the year 2017. Persons per household are currently 2.41. More households in the secondary trade area are owner-occupied (55.4 percent) than in the primary trade area, with the remaining 23.2 percent renter-occupied. The median household income level for the secondary trade area of $40,154 is 6 percent lower than is found in the primary trade area. The median age is 42.5 years. The retail competition map (Figure 23) identifies the Primary Trade Area retail competition by type of development. The Core Area faces significant retail competition in nearly every category. In particular, the Evergreen and Northwest Kalispell region offer large format retail, goods and services not readily available in the Core Area. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 26 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 27 As part of this field evaluation, the project team conducted site visits to all major shopping areas in and just beyond the defined trade area. The core of retail in Kalispell is found either on Highway 93 near West Reserve Drive or at the intersection of Highways 2 and 35. Both of these retail areas offer several discount and big-box retail stores. In addition to the regional shopping centers, the Core Area competes more directly with neighborhood shopping districts. Figure 24 shows the retail gap for selected sectors in the City of Kalispell. “Supply (retail sales)” estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. “Demand (retail potential)” estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail establishments. Supply and demand estimates are in current dollars. The “Leakage/Surplus Factor” presents a snapshot of retail opportunity. This is a measure of the relationship between supply and demand that ranges from +100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positive value represents 'leakage' of retail opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. The Retail Gap represents the difference between Retail Potential and Retail Sales. ESRI uses the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to classify businesses by their primary type of economic activity. Retail establishments are classified into 27 industry groups in the Retail Trade sector, as well as four industry groups within the Food Services & Drinking Establishments subsector. Several industries show leakage, meaning that demand exceeds supply in Kalispell. These industries include:  Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores  Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores  Electronic Shopping & Mail-Order Houses  Vending Machine Operators  Direct Selling Establishments  Drinking Places - Alcoholic Entrepreneurs seeking to open businesses in these sectors can expect strong sales because the market demands more of those products than the market currently supplies. On the other hand, the majority of the retail sectors show a market surplus, meaning that businesses in Kalispell supply more products and services than are demanded by the local population. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 28 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 29 It is important to note that the retail gap analysis does not reflect inflow spending from the visitor market, as evidenced by the volume and location of the Kalispell region’s retail supply and continued development activity during the economic downtown. To illustrate the spending power of the visitor market, Willdan analyzed data reported by the US National Park Service, testing projections of visitation levels and per capita spending by major retail and entertainment categories. Assuming an average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent (based on 10- year historical trends), it is expected that the visitor market could grow from 2.1 million visitors (2010) to approximately 2.9 million visitors in 2022, or an increase of approximately 663,000 visitors. Associated incremental retail and entertainment spending will further support the strategy to revitalize the Core Area and attract new retailers. Based on spending patterns reported by the National Park Service (in 2010 dollars, held constant to illustrate a conservative case), new visitors to Glacier National Park could be expected to spend $149.4 million annually by 2022, or an increase of $37.2 million over 2010 retail spending. Assuming national chain quality annual sales productivity requirements of $300 per square foot, this spending translates to support for approximately 295,000 square feet of new retail space in the Kalispell region. Taking a similar perspective with the residential spending market, it is expected that nominal population and household income growth will also generate incremental demand for new or redeveloped retail and entertainment space. It is projected that Flathead County’s households will grow from 39,000 households to 45,000 by 2022. Average household incomes are expected to increase from $42,800 to $60,000 generating $3.5 in incremental gross income in Flathead County by 2022. Based on US Consumer Expenditure Data reported by the Consumer Expenditure Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, September, 2012, approximately 35 percent of gross household income is expended on food at home (grocery), restaurants, entertainment, apparel, personal care, and other retail goods. Assuming a conservative capture rate of five percent of total available county-wide spending power and retail sales productivity rates of $300 per square foot, the Core Area could expect to attract approximately 205,200 square feet of new/redeveloped retail space. Based on these parameters, the conceptual redevelopment program includes three scenarios for retail development or redevelopment. The Status Quo scenario assumes no new retail development; the conservative scenario assumes that the Core Area will support 77,500 square feet of new retail (location unspecified). Scenario 3, the optimistic case, assumes that that Kalispell Center Mall will redevelop and expand and, along with other new retail businesses throughout the Core Area, will create approximately 117,500 of new retail space. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 30 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 31 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 32 Willdan researched Loop Net and the Multiple Listing Service to identify the available office properties in the Core Area and downtown Kalispell. There are currently 16 available office units, accounting for nearly 20,000 square feet of office space. The type and variety of available space would lend itself to small professional office, medical, real estate and financial services. Given that available properties had quoted lease rates of $4.20 to $13.20 per square foot per year, the current office lease rates in the Core Area do not support the costs of new construction. Given the identified lease rates and number of available properties, the development of additional office space would not be supported by the market in the near term and is proposed as potential adaptive redevelopment and reuse of existing space (substitution of existing demand). Based on the financial feasibility test detailed in the Annex to this report, office renovation would require lease rates of between $12 to $15 per square foot and new office construction would require lease rates of $17 to $22 per square foot. The current economics of the office market suggest that small format, independent professional office or medical office could be an attractive market for a developer in a position to redevelop existing office space. Accordingly, the Core Area conceptual redevelopment program includes approximately 17,500 square feet of new or redeveloped office space over a 25-year buildout timeframe (assumed for Scenario 2: Conservative and Scenario 3: Optimistic). Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 33 To test the supply and demand for a new rail-served industrial park, the Flathead County Economic Development Authority (FCEDA) retained KLJ Associates to perform a market analysis and feasibility study as part of ongoing engineering planning underway. KLJ determined that based on recent trends, the potential is increasing for the industrial rail park to create jobs and support new industries especially as manufacturing and other rail-oriented industries continue to recover from the recession and expand operations. The report concluded that service-oriented professions continue to be the largest employers in the region. However, Plum Creek and Applied Materials are large scale lumber and manufacturing companies that lend credence that these industry types can thrive in the Valley. Table 4 of the KLJ report identifies the top 10 Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degrees and the top 5 Certificate of Applied Science (CAS) degrees from Flathead Valley Community College (FVCC) for year 2011-2012. Data indicates that degree earners such as Welding and Inspection Technology (19), Heavy Equipment Operator (17), Electrical Technology (9) Small Business Management (6), HVAC (5) and Cabinet and Furniture Technology (3) are graduates that can support manufacturing and industries associated with rail. Figure 3 of the KLJ report indicates that more than 50 percent of all AAS graduates and CAS graduates have a degree that could service manufacturing, agricultural/forestry, and rail-oriented industries. Should potential businesses want to relocate or start-up in the rail park, they would have a ready and available pool of human capital to meet and expand business needs. Table 9 of the KLJ report, recreated here as Figure 29, indentifies three companies with a high likelihood of relocation or expansion, and four other companies with a medium likelihood of relocation or expansion. Construction and construction-related industries like lumber and landscaping dominate this list.  KLJ recommended that MWED and FCEDA should pursue industries such as Lumber companies, scrap steel, and other Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 34 grain elevators/agricultural uses. In addition, industries related to creating machinery and other precision instruments should be targeted for the rail park.  KLJ also determined that emerging technologies such as electronics and pharmaceuticals and metallic ores/non- metallic minerals may be viable industries to locate within the park as long as they can prove a need for rail shipments. If they cannot prove a need for rail service, the business should not be allowed.  KLJ recommended that businesses that would utilize transload facilities are important to target because of their need to ship materials via truck and rail. Example industries that could utilize transload facilities are big box retailers, large good producers (recreational toys such as ATVs, boats, snowmobiles), and liquid/petroleum products. Creating a rail park with a transload operator will help stimulate rail freight movements for the Flathead County and thus improve economic development potential for the entire Flathead Valley. More importantly, the transload operator will market freight shipments to potential businesses as a viable and economical option.  For sale and for lease sites should be created to foster a mix of relocation or expansion options for potential businesses. While no “one size fits all” financial model can be established in terms of the number of sale versus lease sites, FCEDA should reserve at Least 25 percent of the sites for each option.  FCEDA should work with the City of Kalispell and BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad to create development agreements, deed restrictions or similar owner/lease agreements to foster rail-only industry development within the park. Should a site become available that does not have access to rail siding, a potential non-rail oriented business could occupy the site. However, the site may provide rail-oriented business that may only require infrequent rail service (two or three times per year) the opportunity to conduct business without having to pay a premium for rail siding.  In addition, as the Valley continues to grow, some industries may only have a need for shipping rail without having to have direct access to rail siding on a daily, weekly or monthly schedule.  FCEDA should lease out transload operations to a qualified transloader that has previous experience loading and unloading rail cars as well as loading truck shipments onto rail and vice versa. A qualified transloader will improve efficiency at the park, thus improving relations with businesses in the park as well as businesses throughout the area. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 35 While the industrial trade in Kalispell continues to wane, tourism has become a bigger part of the Kalispell economy. Tourists are coming to Montana for many reasons, including sightseeing, outdoor recreation, and shopping. Kalispell is the gateway to Glacier National Park, which had 2.2 million visitors in 2010. Many of these visitors drive through or fly into Kalispell on their way to Glacier National Park. In addition to recreation, Canadian shopping tourism is strong in Kalispell. Canadians make planned trips to Kalispell to take advantage of favorable exchange rates, no state sales taxes, and retail establishments like Target, that are unavailable in their country. The region’s tourism activity generates a secondary retail market segment that further amplifies the primary countywide residential trade area of 90,000 residents. While this demand would also suggest support for new hotel construction, data reported by the Kalispell Convention and Visitors Bureau indicates that there are currently 100 hotel rooms currently under construction or in the pipeline and it is unclear whether additional hotel rooms could be supported until this inventory is delivered to the market and revenue per available room and occupancy rates stabilize. For these reasons, it is recommended that new hotel construction be considered as a mid- to long-term opportunity in the Core Area. According to the American Hotel and Lodging Association, new construction cannot be supported until revenue per available room reaches $180 and annual average hotel occupancy is at least 68 percent. Based on current hotel research data acquired by Willdan, the average annual occupancy rate across 19 active hotel properties is approximately 58 percent.                     Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 36 In order for the City to implement its vision and remove the railroad tracks, it must develop a partnership and plan with each of the two existing businesses that still use rail service. These two businesses are very important to the City of Kalispell. If the City were unable to relocate these businesses, then the tracks would not be considered abandoned and could not be removed. The Flathead County Economic Development Agency (FCEDA) recently purchased property just east of the City limits that would be a prime candidate for the businesses’ relocation. The acquisition of this industrial park has injected new enthusiasm for the Core Area Redevelopment Project as residents see the vision moving closer to reality. In addition, the City has secured Federal Brownfield remediation funds to assist with site remediation and demolition. The City plans to develop a Linear Park that would replace the railroad tracks and link Woodland Park from the east to the Great Northern Historical Trail on the west side of town. This park would improve the pedestrian and bike access throughout the Core Area thereby improving safety and mobility. It would also provide the public an opportune place to gather, socialize and enjoy the camaraderie within the neighborhood. The Linear Park would be one component to transforming the neighborhood into a lifestyle center of activity. Another component to building the community is the addition of more and varied dining and entertainment uses. The Downtown and Core Area has a limited number of dining and drinking establishments that are spread out such that they do not create a destination area for residents and tourists to visit. The addition of several establishments within a short proximity could generate positive energy to grow the entire district. One example may be the creation of a microbrewery tasting room. Flathead Valley craft breweries produce over 40 varieties of beers. A tasting room would promote these local businesses while creating a gathering place for area residents and tourists. One of the biggest threats to the Core Area Revitalization is the growth away from the Core Area. Over the past eight years, big box retail has developed on the north side of town along the Highway 93 corridor. The scarce availability of vacant, developable land within the City combined with abundant land on the outskirts of the City has encouraged suburbanization. The cluster of retailers in this corridor Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 37 generates strong traffic patterns, which in turn attracts new retailers such as Cabella’s. If the Core Area’s current conditions continue unabated, this trend will further diminish the competitive position of Core Area retailers. The City has already lost the downtown movie theaters when the owner decided to build the Signature Theaters Stadium 14 Cinema. The City should continue to take proactive measures to maintain the existing retail base while strengthening and enhancing the Core Area retail mix. Based upon Willdan’s observations and analysis, the Core Area Plan has significant strengths that will support implementation. These strengths include:  BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad is currently working with the City of Kalispell and FCEDA to design a rail- served industrial park that could accommodate the rail users in the Core Area  BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad has indicated their willingness to work with the community and rail users to identify scenarios where rail service is no longer necessary through the Core Area.  FCEDA has acquired a developable site to which rail-served business could relocate.  The City already has a Brownfield Program to assist with cleanup of sites requiring remediation.  The City’s history presents a unique identity to the Core Area.  Active private investment in Kalispell retail/dining, small format office, and new infill housing is underway (i.e., $3.7 million in new construction/renovation for Brannigan’s Pub, Depot Place, etc.).  The City has a vibrant local art community evidenced throughout the Core Area and downtown.  Woodland Park serves as a key terminus point on the east side of the proposed Linear Park.  The recently completed Depot Place housing project demonstrates that there is demand for higher density, affordable housing in the area.  The public support for the project gives it a higher probability for success and makes it easier to implement.  The Kalispell Center Mall owner/operator has indicated positive support for the Core Area Plan’s redevelopment goals and is a potential source of funding for components of the Linear Park plan and community gathering place (trail feature) on the mall property. The Plan highlights many of the constraints of the Core Area. These weaknesses include:  The property north of the railroad tracks is underutilized because it is separated by the railroad track from the Downtown. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 38  The lack of investment/re-investment has created blight and neglected properties.  Many streets within the Core Area are not pedestrian friendly due to a lack of sidewalks, curbs and gutters.  Traffic flow through the North-South connectors of the Core Area is hindered by the limited at-grade railroad crossings.  There is a perceived parking problem in the downtown area. Spaces close to retail shops are often occupied by employees and workers in the area. The two hour time limits imposed on these spaces to stop employee and all day parking inhibits customers who would like to leisurely walk and shop in the downtown area.  There is a lack of green space, trees and park settings in the Core Area.  The Core Area lacks restaurant and entertainment venues. The distance separating the current establishments and those in the downtown diffuses the vibrancy versus having the establishments together in a closer cluster.  The charm and parking efficiency of Kalispell’s Main Street is diminished by State Highway activity. It is important that the City of Kalispell continue to lobby for State and Federal highway funding to finish the $32 million construction of the Highway 93 bypass to reclaim Main Street as a fully functioning, safe, pedestrian-oriented, historic shopping destination. The City of Kalispell has a great opportunity to move forward and address these weaknesses by:  Relocating the rail-served businesses in order to replace the railroad tracks with a Linear Park.  Developing a cohesive building and lot plan design that incorporates the character from downtown’s historical architecture with a modern appeal.  Enhancing streetscapes by adding sidewalks with gutters and curbs, widening existing sidewalks to accommodate patio dining and improve pedestrian traffic, incorporate angled parking to increase the amount of available spaces, and upgrading lighting to improve aesthetics and promote safety.  Improve city appearances by creating incentives to reinvest in neglected property, cleaning up alley ways and overgrown vegetation, enforcing city ordinances on abandoned vehicles and community decay, and renovating the East Side Rail Bridge to be a symbolic gateway into the Downtown area.  Encourage development to create a cohesive neighborhood with a vibrant atmosphere. The addition of the Linear Park, high-density housing, and nightlife and entertainment establishments would transform the neighborhood into a desirable lifestyle center. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 39 The threats to the vision that the City has laid out for the Core Area are:  The cost may be prohibitively expensive for the City to attain a suitable return on investment.  The business owners, FCEDA, and the City of Kalispell must collaborate on the relocation of the rail-served businesses.  The relocation requires development time for site planning, construction, and financing.  If the railroad tracks are not removed, the City would not be able to fully implement its vision.  Grant money from the Brownfield Program must be expended within the funding period.  If the Flathead Valley Electric Cooperative cannot move the substation near Woodland Park, the Linear Park plans may need alteration.  Legal restrictions may inhibit development. One example is the deed restrictions on the downtown theaters that prohibit their use to show movies. Another example is the limited number of liquor licenses. In 1947, the state enacted a quota system that limits the number of issued licenses based on local population. These restrictions have raised the value of liquor licenses on the secondary market into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.  The development of big box retail on the north side of the City along Highway 93 is attracting businesses away from the Core Area. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 40 The City of Kalispell is actively engaged in transforming the Core Area into a destination and hub of activity for its residents, employees, and tourists. Willdan recommends that the Core Area’s retail strategy should not be to compete with northern Kalispell retail developments but instead to create a destination that offers something unique and outside that found in the traditional power center developments. There is opportunity for the current Core Area merchants to create an alternative to the existing regional shopping centers. Kalispell’s Core Area is presently a viable shopping and dining destination with significant potential to increase its retail activity through adaptive reuse and redevelopment of existing space by capturing a greater share of tourism spending generated by business travelers and visitors to Glacier National Park. We provide a range of potential redevelopment program scenarios and the interdependent variables impacting the conditions of feasibility for each alternative in the following discussion. The conceptual redevelopment program targets identified take into account full buildout of the Core Area over the 25-year life Tax Increment Financing District. This scenario was tested to identify the development potential of the Core Area should rail service continue to operate. Acknowledging the previously identified impediments of continued rail service to development of the Core Area, there still is opportunity for development. To mitigate the impacts of continued rail service, Scenario 1 assumes that the City will create a cohesive marketing and development strategy focused on infill development and retention of existing users. The objective of this scenario would be focused development and retention of existing retail businesses in the Core Area. This scenario assumes that the rail-served industrial park is not constructed and the rail is not relocated from the Core Area to the new Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 41 park. Consequently, the Core Area Linear Park Plan is not implemented and redevelopment and reuse is challenged by conditions of access, blight, and other factors. This scenario assumes that the Kalispell West Side TIF District generates only the baseline incremental tax revenues of approximately $407,838 annually over the life of the TIF. The Enhanced Core Area Retail will result in adding a slight amount of retail to fill in the void areas, and will improve the existing conditions within the Core Area. The void areas are retail tenants that are underrepresented. They are determined by calculating expenditures, existing retail square footage and future sales projections. The Enhanced Core Area assumes the following:  Rail service through the Core Area will be discontinued.  A Linear Park has been developed and implemented to capture the former rail line right of way.  Street connections previously closed by the rail line have been reopened.  Street and sidewalk widths will remain unchanged and that pedestrian traffic, limited vehicular traffic will continue to co- exist.  Parking will continue to be limited to city parking lots, parallel parking on Highway 93 or on adjacent side streets.  An effective management structure will be established to coordinate overall leasing, marketing, design, merchandising, parking and maintenance of the Core Area.  Existing retailers will improve their merchandising, marketing and management strategies. Many of the Core Area’s businesses could generally increase sales and new commercial businesses could be supported including men’s and women’s apparel, brewery tasting rooms, bakeries and restaurants. This assumes that the City would implement the removal of the railroad tracks, undertake extensive streetscape improvements and the existing vehicular circulation patterns would remain in effect along Main Street. This model also assumes that the overall Core Area businesses organize to improve their merchandising techniques and develop an effective marketing campaign focusing on the tourist and visitor market and to promote more regular visits from persons outside of the primary trade area. Further business development projects that the Core Area could benefit from include the expansion of its restaurants and apparel categories. By expanding these two categories, the Core Area could eventually be the primary destination for visitors to Kalispell and significantly expand its primary trade area. Additional pedestrian traffic could increase existing business sales with appropriate management and marketing. This model assumes that the same enhancements of removal of the railroad tracks, extensive Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 42 streetscape improvements and maintaining the existing vehicular patterns along Main Street would be implemented. Further, this assumes the City would be able to enhance its current cultural entertainment programming in the Core Area. Assuming the rail is removed and the Core Area Linear Park Plan is implemented, additional retail expansion is expected to occur. The needed additional improvements include:  The development of a major new cultural/entertainment- attraction such as a lifestyle center or regional brewery tasting room.  The establishment of a new Flathead County Library Significant new family-focused attractions that create a welcoming environment for families with young children, such as play structures, public art, and small-scale recreational features such as a playground water feature. Limited retail expansion could be achieved by expanding a few segments of the retail district, to encourage people outside of the trade area to come to the Core Area as a destination for those specific segments. The most promising segments identified for additional expansion include apparel and restaurant businesses. By expanding these two categories, the Core Area could eventually be the primary destination for visitors and significantly expand its primary trade area. Additional pedestrian traffic could increase the visibility and sales of existing business. This scenario was evaluated to identify the upper limit of the Core Area’s retail and entertainment development potential. Accounting for existing vacancies and based on the retail gap data reported by ESRI Business Analyst, the district can support up to 115,000 square feet of new retail business development over 25 years, assuming the following major improvements:  Removal of the railroad tracks, extensive streetscape improvements and maintaining the existing vehicular patterns along Main Street  The provision of additional parking (on-street, structured or angled).  The widening of pedestrian walkways and the inclusion of additional public open space within the Core Area. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 43 Willdan forecasts that the improvements outlined in this model could significantly expand the Core Area’s primary trade area by attracting both new unique retailing concepts and shoppers from much of the greater Flathead Valley region. Assuming the enhancements outlined above in Scenarios 2 and 3 are implemented, coupled with additional improvements, major retail expansion could occur. This model is designed to strengthen the existing retail offered and to expand the variety, and thus the appeal of the Core Area to a wider market, without losing its existing appeal and charm. Additional off-street and angled parking along with improved pedestrian access throughout the Core Area will enhance consumer appeal, increase accessibility and therefore help sales potential. The rationale for the recommended expansion alternatives within the Core Area is presented below: The addition of targeted retail, combined with the re-tenanting of the existing retail, will create a more balanced mix, as well as strengthen the family appeal of the street to attract the tourist, business and secondary trade area population. The use of select national tenants will increase the vitality and credibility (name recognition) of the retail mix to strengthen the appeal of the street to visitors and tourists, as well as those living in the secondary trade area and beyond the defined trade areas. While the residential demographics of the primary trade area offer a stable residential base of over 90,000 persons, the median household income and ratio of rental property reflects the demographic trends of regional downtowns like that of Kalispell. Additionally, retail and restaurants have added sales potential in the area, due to both the existing trade area population and tourists drawn to the area that are presently underserved by the existing stock of commercial enterprises. A healthy mix of national, regional and independent tenants is needed to maintain an energetic retail district. National tenants add stability to a shopping district and give the consumer the perception that they can find a selection of standard items. Local retailers add the unique and eclectic element to a retail street that malls cannot offer. A successful Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 44 mix between the two tenant types develops unique retail with the convenience of name brand tenants together in a single area. Leasing and Management One of the most important elements in the success of any commercial development or redevelopment effort is strategy for leasing and management of the area. Just as a successful shopping mall is leased with a targeted tenant mix to maximize sales for all tenants, the leasing of an urban commercial district must follow a similar lead. The unique combination and mix of a successfully leased shopping district will assure its ongoing vitality. The challenge of managing and leasing a shopping district such as the Core Area is complex and diverse. Multiple landlords, some absentee, make implementing consistent street management or complementary leasing efforts difficult. Successful shopping districts, however, are typically well organized in their efforts to promote, market and attract desirable tenants. It is most important that the businesses throughout the Core Area be organized in a tight-fitting group with consistent and realistic goals. Well-compensated and qualified individuals should direct such an organization, much as a successful mall is leased and managed. The manner of financing such activities is an important part of assuring joint efforts to this goal. The existing Business Improvement District (BID) can be an effective tool for this purpose. Phasing and Action Items As a means of improving the vitality of the Kalispell Core Area, the following action items are recommended. Such improvements will aid in efforts to attract and preserve quality retailers and restaurants in Kalispell’s downtown. Near-Term (3-4 months)  Improve merchandising efforts by existing Core Area retailers and restaurants to enhance visual merchandising of their product lines and to promote cross shopping among businesses. Such efforts should include improved storefront design, window display, lighting, inventory control and choice, among others.  Development of a management group and appropriate funding to assure clean and attractive streetscapes, open spaces, and storefronts.  A review of existing wayfinding and signage directing vehicles to the parking surrounding the Core Area and downtown is encouraged. Mid-Range (6-9 months)  The enforcement of short-term parking (1 to 2 hours) in appropriate areas within the Core Area and its side streets to allow vehicular traffic and to encourage turnover of prime parking spaces. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 45  The development and implementation of an overall marketing and advertising campaign designed to expand the trade area and overall sales.  The organization of an effective tenant recruitment program to attract targeted retailers and restaurants to the study area. Include a common 800-phone number and active participation in the International Council of Shopping Centers and other trade group activities.  The installation of permanent directories to be located downtown to direct pedestrians and shoppers to the Core Area and various shops and restaurants.  The creation of an ongoing assemblage of the inventory of all leasable commercial space (occupied, vacant, and planned) in the study area with appropriate data including square footage, lease rates, lease terminations, footprints, etc. This will facilitate the efficient flow of information to existing and prospective tenants, brokers, landlords and investors.  The creation and design of marketing materials, including a brochure for leasing and marketing purposes, to attract potential retailers and restaurants.  The continuation and expansion of study area programming and promotional activities (i.e., seasonal activities, Holiday festivals) to provide additional incentives for shoppers to come to the Core Area’s shopping, dining, and entertainment enterprises. Long-Range (12 months)  Expand existing BID or create new BID for Core Area  Plan for ongoing routine repair and updating of the public realm.  Finalize planning, site design and layout for Linear Park.  Identify State and Federal funding to complete the $32 million construction of the Highway 93 by-pass and reconfigure angled parking on Main Street. Willdan’s analysis of the current Core Area’s real estate and market conditions indicate that there is unmet demand for retail and Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 46 restaurant uses. The Core Area’s unique combination of holding the county seat, government employment center, residential and visitor customer base provides a stable economic marketplace for expansion. The Core Area has the potential to achieve higher market capture rates by implementation of the Plan’s key objectives of:  Removing the railroad tracks that bisects the Project Area and replace the tracks with a Linear Park.  Improving and upgrading existing properties to remove the blighted areas within the Core Area.  Developing a compatible mix of commercial retail, neighborhood services, residential housing and public areas that meets the needs of residents and fosters a greater sense of community. In turn, the proposed redevelopment will strengthen the local economy by increasing the local tax base, attracting new residents and businesses, creating new jobs, and increasing tourism. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 47 One of the primary objectives of the Kalispell Core Area Plan is to formulate a funding and implementation strategy for installation of the Kalispell Linear Park (“KLP”). The City of Kalispell’s overarching vision is to further the revitalization of the Core Area by removing the existing live freight rail line that bisects the town and replace the tracks with a Linear Park, attracting private investment to upgrading infrastructure, remove blight, and achieve a diversified mix of infill activity through new construction and adaptive reuse/redevelopment of commercial, retail, residential, neighborhood services, and community gathering areas, and other public amenities. Willdan provides a summary of the high-level planning parameters associated with the Linear Park’s layout and proposed programming elements, as well as the underlying capital and operating assumptions that are the foundation of the park’s implementation strategy. Based on input from City of Kalispell staff, the Kalispell Core Area Steering Committee, and other community stakeholders, there is broad public support for the removal of the existing freight rail line and the installation of a new Linear Park in Kalispell. The removal of the active rail line not only provides new commercial and residential redevelopment opportunities, but also the ability to reconnect Kalispell’s street grid to create a fully functioning, pedestrian-oriented Main Street community retail destination. Upon relocation of the rail line, the City of Kalispell is opening opportunities for private land owners and businesses to strategically reposition property located the downtown core for redevelopment and reuse. The City’s role is to create the optimal conditions for private investment through the following key action steps:  attract the maximum private investment and development activity with a minimum level of public funding/support  upgrade basic public infrastructure to provide optimal conditions for development/redevelopment activity (sidewalks, street lights)  improve transportation flow through new street crossings previously blocked by rail activity, better connecting drivers with employment and commercial activity centers  safely connect pedestrians to active and passive recreational amenities by investing in new trail heads at key locations. After more than 20 years of public debate, the City’s long-term investment in the Kalispell Core Area planning initiative is now taking the next step in moving towards the active implementation phase of the downtown rail-served business relocation by the BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad. The possible subsequent implementation of the Linear Park plan is strategically structured to, eliminate blight, catalyze private investment in the downtown Core Area, and achieve substantial enhancement in the community’s amenities. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 48 The following provides a high-level overview of current proposed layout and programming targets for the KLP: Key Regional Trail Connection Points  North & East Connection: Create a contiguous linear connection via BNSN Railway Highway 2 overpass (the new “Kalispell Gateway Bridge”) between Woodland Park (at the east end of study area) and Lawrence Park (in the NE quadrant of city).  West Connection: Connect the KLP to the existing Meridian Trail Head via a new trail head at West 5th Avenue WN (connecting hikers 8 miles out to Kila trail and 4 miles up to North Reserve).  South Connection: Connect hikers 11 miles south to Somers/Flathead Lake). Proposed Linear Park Programming “Bump out” Nodes  Depot Park: Locomotive climbing equipment at Depot Park: The City of Kalispell and FCEDA have begun discussions with BNSF Railway regarding the possibility of donating an out of service locomotive for public park use. This question needs to be further explored with BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad and others involved in the rail relocation initiative.  Mall Clock Tower Pedestrian Plaza: potential for a developer- funded and constructed open air farmer’s market and creation of a focal gathering “third place” on privately-held Kalispell Center Mall property (with potential for capital investment and ongoing operating support from Mall owner/operator).  Senior Outdoor Fitness Park: proposed at Meridian Road and Appleway Trail; this facility could be a small scale facility (new or existing adaptive reuse structure) with outdoor exercise equipment, and portable vending carts.  Flathead Electric Co-Op Site Comfort Station: the current Flathead Electric Co-Op site is underutilized and is strategically located at a potential trail connection point to Woodland Park (and – long-term, to the proposed outdoor amphitheater site). It is recommended that the City of Kalispell partner with the FEC to redevelop the site to a low-cost/low-intensity comfort station and trail head. This could be accomplished with minimal capital investment through a land swap, long-term lease, or shared-use agreement. It is envisioned that the comfort station would include the following amenities:  trail head parking lot with city of Kalispell-branded directional signage (potentially shared parking with FEC)  Restrooms/healthy snack vending machines Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 49  Solid waste receptacles (potentially to be included in the Linear Park’s new recycling program) Street Extensions/ Railroad Crossing Conversions To maximize the impact of regional trailhead reconnection points, the Willdan team strongly recommends that the Kalispell Linear Plan include funding to achieve the installation of at-grade pedestrian crossings and/or street reconnections key intersections where the streets cross the railroad, as appropriate: Street Extensions / Railroad Crossing Conversions (requires removal of tracks and new construction to reconnect street grid):  5th Avenue EN  6th Avenue WN  7th Avenue WN  8th Avenue WN Based on discussions with city staff, it is expected that the street extension costs would be substantial (approximately $2.4 million). These costs are reflected in the Core Area funding strategy in the following section. To the extent possible, street extension costs would mitigated by retrofitting existing rail crossing equipment and power lines for vehicular/pedestrian crossing use.. The City of Kalispell Department of Parks and Recreation currently maintains approximately 406 acres of parkland, including 138 acres dedicated for the Kalispell Youth Athletic Complex. The parkland inventory includes 321 acres of active parkland and 73 acres of natural open space. Kalispell also owns 12 acres of undeveloped land. The City maintains several beautification areas, including roadway greens and annual plantings, via its Parks Department. The Kalispell Core Area Linear Park Plan offers the potential reconnection of downtown to several trail heads with connections to nearby neighborhoods and vehicle parking. The Linear Park would connect nearly the entire length of the city, providing approximately two (2) miles in paved surfaces, opportunities for environmental and recreational programming, and the installation of climbing equipment at Depot Park, enhancing the cultural heritage of Kalispell’s railroad history. There are three distinct capital components to the Kalispell Linear Park Plan:  Removal of the active rail freight line  Installation of the Linear Park trail/street reconnections  Adaptive reuse and new construction of facilities and equipment related to programmed park nodes Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 50 Rail Line Removal The cost estimates to remove the active rail line is still pending further input from BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad, and other stakeholders; therefore this cost estimate is subject to change pending refinement of the Linear Park plan concept. Linear Park Trail Based on Willdan’s site visits and interviews with city staff (Planning, Community & Economic Development, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation departments), the installation of the Kalispell Linear Park trail is expected to be a low impact construction project. From a utilities perspective, the city’s existing grid of power, water, wastewater, and roads are in a state of good repair with sufficient capacity to serve the proposed Linear Park plan’s trail/road connections and minimal active programming alternatives. The primary capital costs appear to be associated with the street extensions and the installation of street lights, curb cuts, sidewalks, and other basic vehicle and pedestrian-oriented infrastructure upgrades. Construction cost estimates are provided in the preliminary implementation strategy (see Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations and in the detailed calculations and assumptions located in the annex to this report). It is expected that the Linear Park design and construction will be initiated concurrently with the latter phases of the FCEDA Rail Served Industrial Park construction and associated business relocation. It is anticipated that the Linear Park will be implemented in phases, based on availability of funding as follows (see Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations for detail):  Phase I: Assessment 0-3 Months  Phase II: Assessment & Cleanup Plan 3-6 Months  Phase III: Remediation Plan 6-12 Months  Phase IV: Cleanup 12-24 Months  Phase V: Park Design & Planning tbd  Phase V: Business Relocation tbd  Phase VI: Park Construction tbd According to current estimates of park costs and available funding sources, it appears that the installation of the Linear Park is financially feasible, as discussed in the following implementation section of this report. Nine percent of total budget for FY 2014 is planned for reserves (future maintenance). The Parks & Recreation Department currently holds $280,000 in cash reserves (14.3 percent reserve account). It is feasible to explore utilizing the reserve fund to pay for small shortfalls projected in the early years of development. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 51 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 52 Based on the current Kalispell Linear Park Plan concept noted in rough map graphics provided in this memorandum, the length of the park as drawn is 17,221 feet or 3.26 miles. Other potential operating impacts likely to be to Public Works Department to expand solid waste collection points along trail and/or at programmed nodes (especially if recycling program is expanded in City of Kalispell). Note that operating cost estimates for the programmed elements of the Linear Park are illustrative. The Kalispell Department of Parks & Recreation supports implementation of the Linear Park; the scale and intensity of uses can be programmed as part of typical expected growth for parks budget (combined with reserves); expected annual operating costs the operating costs for shared use trail and features are within a range that can be managed and maintained. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 53 To initiate the implementation planning for the proposed Kalispell Core Area Plan --- the Kalispell Linear Park – the Willdan Team conducted work sessions with City of Kalispell staff to collect preliminary data regarding the individual action steps, cost estimates, and potential funding sources. Table 12 in Annex A: Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of Funding provides a summary snapshot of these actions steps. Based on a detailed review of the relationship between costs, revenues and grant funding sources, and proposed phasing, the Core Area plan is financial feasible.  Implementation of the Core Area Plan is vital to the future stability of the City of Kalispell’s tax base.  The capital costs required to construct the Linear Park are supported by a combination of grant funding, incremental real property tax revenues, and TIF funding.  Other funding sources will be pursued and it’s expected that these would adequately address any projected shortfalls (up to $1.1 million in Year 7 of the most conservative case (Scenario 1: Status Quo), assuming 100% of the street extension improvements are funded by the TIF. See Figure 39: Core Area Grant Funding Resource Strategy for a detailed listing of grant funding targets).  Assuming conservative development activity that would result from implementation of the Linear Park Plan as detailed by the market analysis findings, the quantifiable public return on investment is positive. It is expected that the incremental real property values would reach between $71,000 and $133,000 per year at full buildout of the conservative and optimistic scenarios, respectively.  The 25-year cumulative cash flows of anticipated development costs and incremental tax revenues flowing to the West Side TIF are estimated to be between $5.75 million and $7.91 million indicating that investment in the Core Area Plan will yield sufficient incremental tax revenues to the City of Kalispell. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 54 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 55 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 56 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 57 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 58 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisLinear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of FundingTable 1: Redevelopment Program AlternativesTable 2: Conceptual Development Program by Opportunity SiteTable 3: Development Cost AssumptionsTable 4: Financial Feasibility - RetailTable 5: Financial Feasibility - OfficeTable 6: Financial Feasibility - Multifamily ResidentialTable 7: Commercial & Residential Construction Cost AssumptionsTable 8: Real Property Tax AssumptionsTable 9: Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of ScenariosTable 10: Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - Scenario 2: ConservativeTable 11: Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - Scenario 3: Optimistic Table 12: Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of FundingTable 13: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing RecommendationsTable 14: West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 1 - Status QuoTable 15: West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 2 - ConservativeTable 16: West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 3 - OptimisticPage A-1 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 1:Redevelopment Program AlternativesKalispell Core Area Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives Status Quo Conservative OptimisticRetail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 0 62,500 92,500 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0 15,000 25,000 Total- 77,500 117,500 0Office Development (sf)0 17,500 17,500 Residential Development (units)Apartments - For Lease 0 25 75 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0 40 80 Condominium 0 - 20 Total 0 105 175 Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-2 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 2:Conceptual Development Program by Opportunity SiteTotal BuildoutOpportunity SiteOpportunity SiteOpportunity SiteOpportunity SiteOpportunity Sites /1Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 (Core Area)Retail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 92,500 2,500 30,000 50,000 10,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 25,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 Total 115,000 2,500 40,000 - 60,000 15,000 Office Development (sf) 17,500 2,500 - 5,000 - 10,000 Residential Development (units)Apartments - For Lease75 50 25 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units80 40 40 Condominium20 20 Total 175 - 70 40 40 25 1/ Core Area wide opportunity sites are assumed to be throughout the project area and less than one acre on average.Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-3 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 3:Development Cost AssumptionsCosts per Square Foot - New Construction Hard Costs Soft CostsTenant ImprovementsParkingRetail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 150$ 30$ 45$ 36$ 261$ Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 175$ 35$ 68$ 36$ 314$ Office Development (sf) 75$ 15$ 20$ 36$ 146$ Residential Development (units)Unit SizeApartments - For Lease 1,050 100$ 20$ 2.25$ 26$ 148$ Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 800 100$ 20$ 2.25$ 30$ 152$ Condominium 1,250 200$ 40$ 2.50$ 14$ 257$ AssumptionsParking Cost12,000$ Soft Costs (as % of hard costs) 20%Contingency 10%Gross building area per parking space 350$ SFParking Revenue -$ Per Year-$ SaleInterest Rate 7.5%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.TotalPage A-4 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 4:Financial Feasibility - RetailBuildoutYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearYear1 2 3 4 5 6 Retail Development - Gross (Annual)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods30,000 30,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)10,000 10,000 Subtotal Retail (sf) 40,000 - - - - 40,000 - Retail Development - Net SF (Ongoing)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods85% 25,500 - - - - 25,500 25,500 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)85% 8,500 - - - - 8,500 8,500 Subtotal Retail (sf) 34,000 - - - - 34,000 34,000 Net Income$Rent / SFRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods$20.00 4,080,000 - - - - 510,000 510,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)$20.00 1,360,000 - - - - 170,000 170,000 Net Income 5,440,000 - - - - 680,000 680,000 Total Development Costs Cost/ sf Total sfRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods261 30,000 7,830,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)314 10,000 3,135,000 Subtotal Retail (sf)40,000 10,965,000 Debt60% 6,579,000$ Equity40% 4,386,000$ Interest Rate7.5%Term 10 Down Payment4,386,000$ Points + Closing Costs3% 131,580 Total Cash Investment4,517,580$ Annual Payment($5,265,183)($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)Annual Cash Flow 7,018,522 - (658,148) 21,852 21,852 Cash on Cash Return0% -15% 0% 0%Cumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)- - - (658,148) (636,296) (614,443) Return on Investment (Cash on Cost) - Yr 17 15%Assumptions:Leasing Costs3%Operating Costs (% Revenue)25%Stabilized Vacancy Factor5%33%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013Page A-5 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 4:Financial Feasibility - RetailBuildoutBuildout YearYearRetail Development - Gross (Annual)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods30,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)10,000 Subtotal Retail (sf) 40,000 Retail Development - Net SF (Ongoing)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods85% 25,500 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)85% 8,500 Subtotal Retail (sf) 34,000 Net Income$Rent / SFRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods$20.00 4,080,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)$20.00 1,360,000 Net Income 5,440,000 Total Development Costs Cost/ sf Total sfRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods261 30,000 7,830,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)314 10,000 3,135,000 Subtotal Retail (sf)40,000 10,965,000 Debt60% 6,579,000$ Equity40% 4,386,000$ Interest Rate7.5%Term 10 Down Payment4,386,000$ Points + Closing Costs3% 131,580 Total Cash Investment4,517,580$ Annual Payment($5,265,183)Annual Cash Flow 7,018,522 Cash on Cash ReturnCumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)Return on Investment (Cash on Cost) - Yr 17 15%Assumptions:Leasing Costs3%Operating Costs (% Revenue)25%Stabilized Vacancy Factor5%33%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 - - - - - - - - - - 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 ($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)($658,148)21,852 21,852 21,852 21,852 21,852 21,852 21,852 680,000 680,000 680,000 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 15% 15%(592,591) (570,739) (548,887) (527,035) (505,183) (483,330) (461,478) 218,522 898,522 1,578,522 Page A-6 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 4:Financial Feasibility - RetailBuildoutBuildout YearYearRetail Development - Gross (Annual)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods30,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)10,000 Subtotal Retail (sf) 40,000 Retail Development - Net SF (Ongoing)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods85% 25,500 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)85% 8,500 Subtotal Retail (sf) 34,000 Net Income$Rent / SFRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods$20.00 4,080,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)$20.00 1,360,000 Net Income 5,440,000 Total Development Costs Cost/ sf Total sfRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods261 30,000 7,830,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)314 10,000 3,135,000 Subtotal Retail (sf)40,000 10,965,000 Debt60% 6,579,000$ Equity40% 4,386,000$ Interest Rate7.5%Term 10 Down Payment4,386,000$ Points + Closing Costs3% 131,580 Total Cash Investment4,517,580$ Annual Payment($5,265,183)Annual Cash Flow 7,018,522 Cash on Cash ReturnCumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)Return on Investment (Cash on Cost) - Yr 17 15%Assumptions:Leasing Costs3%Operating Costs (% Revenue)25%Stabilized Vacancy Factor5%33%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25- - - - - - - - - 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 680,000 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%2,258,522 2,938,522 3,618,522 4,298,522 4,978,522 5,658,522 6,338,522 7,018,522 7,698,522 Page A-7 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 5:Financial Feasibility - OfficeBuildoutYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearYear1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Office Development (sf)Small format/independent office - - 2,500 - - - 10,000 - - 5,000 - - Absorption Assumptions - % of Total - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 Space Absorbed/ Annual sf 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 75% 75% 100%Total Net New Office Space/sf 17,500 - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 6,250 6,250 6,250 13,125 13,125 17,500 Retail Development - Net SF (Ongoing)Small format/independent office 85% 14,875 - - 2,125 2,125 2,125 2,125 5,313 5,313 5,313 11,156 11,156 14,875 Subtotal Retail (sf) 14,875 - - 2,125 2,125 2,125 2,125 5,313 5,313 5,313 11,156 11,156 14,875 Lease Rate/sfGross Retail Sales (Gross Income)12$ 3,060,000 - - 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 63,750 63,750 63,750 133,875 133,875 178,500 % of SalesOperating Costs-13% - - (3,315) (3,315) (3,315) (3,315) (8,288) (8,288) (8,288) (17,404) (17,404) (23,205) Net Lease Income3,457,800 - - 28,815 28,815 28,815 28,815 72,038 72,038 72,038 151,279 151,279 201,705 Annual Debt Service (Mortgage Payment)Total Development CostsTotal sf 17,500 Cost/ Sf 146 Total Net New Office Space/sf2,555,000$ Debt 60% 1,533,000$ Equity 40% 1,022,000$ Interest Rate 7.5%Term 10 Down Payment 1,022,000$ Points + Closing Costs 3% 30660Total Cash Investment 1,052,660$ Debt Service($2,233,365) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337)Cash Flow 1,224,435 - (194,522) (194,522) (194,522) (194,522) (151,299) (151,299) (151,299) (72,058) (72,058) (21,632) Cash on Cash Return0% -18% -18% -18% -18% -14% -14% -14% -7% -7% -2%Cumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)- (194,522) (389,043) (583,565) (778,086) (929,385) (1,080,684) (1,231,983) (1,304,041) (1,376,099) (1,397,730)Return on Investment (Cash on Cash) 19%Assumptions:Leasing Costs 3%Operating Costs (% Revenue) 5%Stabilized Vacancy Factor 5%Total13%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-8 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 5:Financial Feasibility - OfficeBuildoutBuildout YearYearOffice Development (sf)Small format/independent officeAbsorption Assumptions - % of TotalSpace Absorbed/ Annual sfTotal Net New Office Space/sf 17,500 Retail Development - Net SF (Ongoing)Small format/independent office 85% 14,875 Subtotal Retail (sf) 14,875 Lease Rate/sfGross Retail Sales (Gross Income)12$ 3,060,000 % of SalesOperating Costs-13%Net Lease Income3,457,800 Annual Debt Service (Mortgage Payment)Total Development CostsTotal sf 17,500 Cost/ Sf 146 Total Net New Office Space/sf2,555,000$ Debt 60% 1,533,000$ Equity 40% 1,022,000$ Interest Rate 7.5%Term 10 Down Payment 1,022,000$ Points + Closing Costs 3% 30660Total Cash Investment 1,052,660$ Debt Service($2,233,365)Cash Flow 1,224,435 Cash on Cash ReturnCumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)Return on Investment (Cash on Cash) 19%Assumptions:Leasing Costs 3%Operating Costs (% Revenue) 5%Stabilized Vacancy Factor 5%Total13%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25- - - - - - - - - - - - - 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 14,875 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%(1,196,025) (994,320) (792,615) (590,910) (389,205) (187,500) 14,205 215,910 417,615 619,320 821,025 ####### #######Page A-9 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 6:Financial Feasibility - Multifamily ResidentialBuildoutYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearYear1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Residential Development - UnitsApartments - For Lease- - - 25 25 Cumulative Units Available- - - 25 25 25 25 50 Absorption Assumptions - % of Total0% 0% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 63%Apartments Rented50 - - - 6 13 19 25 31 Net Leasable Area 1,050 - - - 6,563 13,125 19,688 26,250 32,813 Lease Rate/sf/moGross Lease Revenue 1.05 12,237,750 - - - 82,688 165,375 248,063 330,750 413,438 % of Gross Lease RevenueOperating Costs-13% (1,590,908) - - - (10,749) (21,499) (32,248) (42,998) (53,747) Net Operating Income (Before Debt Service)- - - 71,938 143,876 215,814 287,753 359,691 Total Development CostsTotal sf52,500 Cost/ Sf148 Total 7,768,125$ Debt 60% 4,660,875$ Equity 40% 3,107,250$ Interest Rate 7.5%Term 10 Down Payment 3,107,250.00$ Points + Closing Costs 3% 93,217.50$ Total Cash Investment 3,200,467.50$ Debt Service($6,790,239) ($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024)Cash Flow3,856,604 - (679,024) (607,086) (535,148) (463,210) (391,271) (319,333) Cash on Cash Return0% -21% -19% -17% -14% -12% -10%Cumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)- (679,024) (1,286,110) (1,821,257) (2,284,467) (2,675,738) (2,995,072) Return on Investment (Cash on Cash) 18%Housing AssumptionsNumber of Units 50Year Selling Commences 1Absorption (per Year) 75Average Unit Size 1,050Net Saleable Area 1,050Lease Rate/sf $1.50Housing Occupancy Factor 100%Operating Cost AssumptionsLeasing Costs 3%Operating Costs (% Revenue) 5%Stabilized Vacancy Factor 5%Total13%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-10 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 6:Financial Feasibility - Multifamily ResidentialBuildoutBuildout YearYearResidential Development - UnitsApartments - For LeaseCumulative Units AvailableAbsorption Assumptions - % of TotalApartments Rented50 Net Leasable Area 1,050 Lease Rate/sf/moGross Lease Revenue 1.05 12,237,750 % of Gross Lease RevenueOperating Costs-13% (1,590,908) Net Operating Income (Before Debt Service)Total Development CostsTotal sf52,500 Cost/ Sf148 Total 7,768,125$ Debt 60% 4,660,875$ Equity 40% 3,107,250$ Interest Rate 7.5%Term 10 Down Payment 3,107,250.00$ Points + Closing Costs 3% 93,217.50$ YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 75% 88% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%38 44 50 50 50 50 50 50 39,375 45,938 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 496,125 578,813 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 (64,496) (75,246) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) 431,629 503,567 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 Total Cash Investment 3,200,467.50$ Debt Service($6,790,239)Cash Flow3,856,604 Cash on Cash ReturnCumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)Return on Investment (Cash on Cash) 18%Housing AssumptionsNumber of Units 50Year Selling Commences 1Absorption (per Year) 75Average Unit Size 1,050Net Saleable Area 1,050Lease Rate/sf $1.50Housing Occupancy Factor 100%Operating Cost AssumptionsLeasing Costs 3%Operating Costs (% Revenue) 5%Stabilized Vacancy Factor 5%Total13%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024) ($679,024)(247,395) (175,457) (103,519) (103,519) 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 -8% -5% -3% -3% 18% 18% 18% 18%(3,242,467) (3,417,924) (3,521,443) (3,624,961) (3,049,456) (2,473,951) (1,898,446) (1,322,941) Page A-11 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 6:Financial Feasibility - Multifamily ResidentialBuildoutBuildout YearYearResidential Development - UnitsApartments - For LeaseCumulative Units AvailableAbsorption Assumptions - % of TotalApartments Rented50 Net Leasable Area 1,050 Lease Rate/sf/moGross Lease Revenue 1.05 12,237,750 % of Gross Lease RevenueOperating Costs-13% (1,590,908) Net Operating Income (Before Debt Service)Total Development CostsTotal sf52,500 Cost/ Sf148 Total 7,768,125$ Debt 60% 4,660,875$ Equity 40% 3,107,250$ Interest Rate 7.5%Term 10 Down Payment 3,107,250.00$ Points + Closing Costs 3% 93,217.50$ YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2550 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 52,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 661,500 (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) (85,995) 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 Total Cash Investment 3,200,467.50$ Debt Service($6,790,239)Cash Flow3,856,604 Cash on Cash ReturnCumulative Cash Flow (for Payback Year)Return on Investment (Cash on Cash) 18%Housing AssumptionsNumber of Units 50Year Selling Commences 1Absorption (per Year) 75Average Unit Size 1,050Net Saleable Area 1,050Lease Rate/sf $1.50Housing Occupancy Factor 100%Operating Cost AssumptionsLeasing Costs 3%Operating Costs (% Revenue) 5%Stabilized Vacancy Factor 5%Total13%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 575,505 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% 18%(747,436) (171,931) 403,574 979,079 1,554,584 2,130,089 2,705,594 3,281,099 3,856,604 Page A-12 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 7:Commercial & Residential Construction Cost YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearTotal Cost1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Retail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods16,313,000 - - 653,000 - - - - - 13,050,000 - - 2,610,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)4,703,000 - - - - - - - - 3,135,000 - - 1,568,000 Subtotal Retail (SF) 21,016,000 - - 653,000 - - - - - 16,185,000 - - 4,178,000 Office DevelopmentOffice for Lease (per sf) 2,555,000 - - 365,000 - - - 1,460,000 - - 730,000 - - Residential DevelopmentApartments - For Lease7,768,000 - - - 3,884,000 - - - 3,884,000 - - - - Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units4,872,000 - - - - - - 4,872,000 - - - - - Condominium 25,000 - - - - - - - - - 25,000 - - Subtotal 12,665,000 - - - 3,884,000 - - 4,872,000 3,884,000 - 25,000 - - Total Annual Construction Investment 36,236,000 - - 1,018,000 3,884,000 - - 6,332,000 3,884,000 16,185,000 755,000 - 4,178,000 Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-13 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 7:Commercial & Residential Construction Cost Buildout YearTotal CostRetail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods16,313,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)4,703,000 Subtotal Retail (SF) 21,016,000 Office DevelopmentOffice for Lease (per sf) 2,555,000 Residential DevelopmentApartments - For Lease7,768,000 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units4,872,000 Condominium 25,000 Subtotal 12,665,000 Total Annual Construction Investment 36,236,000 Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Page A-14 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 8:Real Property Tax AssumptionsBusinessProperty Type/DescriptionTotal Size (sf or units)Taxable Value - LandTaxable Value - BuildingTaxable Value - LandTaxable Value - BuildingIncremental Assessed Value (Land + Building)Total Incremental Taxes PSF After RenovationSykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Aptcommercial- multifamily imp3,466 695 723 1,883 4,963 3,108 0.90 Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Aptmixed use- retail, storage & apts27,540 2,409 - 2,814 52,521 47,298 1.72 Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Aptrestaurant 7,466 2,409 4,523 2,738 8,042 7,418 0.99 Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Aptretail2,700 2,409 1,652 2,738 2,239 (1,256)(0.47) Appleway Trail Aptsapts71,320 10,665 83,733 73,068 1.02 Brannigan's Pub/Restaurant /1restaurant/bar13,000 7,243 5,330 (1,913)A to Z /2retail7,540 7,414 8,853 9,747 10,120 1,812 0.24 Depot Place Aptsapts35,607 6,281 15,681 9,400 0.26 Kalispell Center Mall /3retail/hotel297,696 103,023 231,119 103,023 231,119 256,192 Assumed Averages for TIF CalculationsIncremental Assessed Value psfRetail Development 0.26$ Office Development 0.24$ Apartments - For Lease 0.98$ Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0.90$ Condominium 1.02$ 1/ Completed remodel value has not been picked up for 2013 yet. Renovation not complete as of 1/1/13. Full renovation value will be added for 2014 tax year. 2/ value only at 50% complete construction for 2013. This project has also applied for a property tax exemption.3/ completed remodel value for 2013 still pending review Before Renovation After Renovation After RenovationPage A-15 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 9:Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of ScenariosRedevelopment ProgramDevelopment Program (sf)Incremental Taxable Value Real Property TaxesDevelopment Program (sf)Incremental Taxable Value Real Property TaxesDevelopment Program (sf)Incremental Taxable Value Real Property TaxesRetail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods0.26$ - -$ -$ 62,500 16,015$ 10,998$ 92,500 23,702$ 16,276$ Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0.26$ - -$ -$ 15,000 3,844$ 2,639$ 25,000 6,406$ 4,399$ Subtotal- -$ -$ 77,500 19,858$ 13,637$ 117,500 30,108$ 20,675$ Office Development (sf)0.24$ - -$ -$ 17,500 4,206$ 2,888$ 17,500 4,206$ 2,888$ Residential Development (units)Apartments - For Lease 0.98$ - -$ -$ 52,500 51,222$ 35,175$ 78,750 76,833$ 52,763$ Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units0.90$ - -$ -$ 32,000 28,695$ 19,705$ 64,000 57,389$ 39,411$ Condominium 1.02$ - -$ -$ - -$ -$ 25,000 25,613$ 17,589$ Subtotal- -$ -$ 84,500 79,917$ 54,881$ 167,750 159,836$ 109,762$ Total Incremental Value/Real Property Taxes -$ -$ 179,500 103,981$ 71,406$ 302,750 194,149$ 133,326$ Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013. GrowthAverage Incremental Real Property Tax Values/sfScenario 1: Status Quo Scenario 2: ConservativePage A-16 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 10:YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearTotal Buildout1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Retail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods 62,500 2,500 50,000 10,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 15,000 10,000 5,000 Subtotal Retail (sf) 77,500 - - 2,500 - - - - 60,000 - - 15,000 Office Development 17,500 2,500 10,000 5,000 Residential Development - UnitsApartments - For Lease 50 25 25 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 40 40 Condominium - Total Units 90 - - - 25 - - 40 25 - - - - Residential Development - sf sf/UnitApartments - For Lease 1,050 52,500 - - - 26,250 - - - 26,250 - - - - Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 800 32,000 - - - - - - 32,000 - - - - - Condominium 1,250 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Units 84,500 - - - 26,250 - - 32,000 26,250 - - - - Incremental Real Property Tax Revenues Tax Value PSF / 1 Retail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods 0.26$ -$ -$ 440$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,798$ -$ -$ 1,760$ Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0.26$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,760$ -$ -$ 880$ Subtotal -$ -$ 440$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10,558$ -$ -$ 2,639$ Office Development0.24$ -$ -$ 413$ -$ -$ -$ 1,650$ -$ -$ 825$ -$ -$ Residential DevelopmentApartments - For Lease 0.98$ -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0.90$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,705$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Condominium 1.02$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotal -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ 19,705$ 17,588$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Annual Real Property Tax Revenues -$ -$ 852$ 17,588$ -$ -$ 21,356$ 17,588$ 10,558$ 825$ -$ 2,639$ Cumulative Tax Revenues 1,358,504 -$ -$ 852$ 18,440$ 18,440$ 18,440$ 39,796$ 57,383$ 67,941$ 68,766$ 68,766$ 71,406$ 1/ 2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 68.67%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - Scenario 2: ConservativePage A-17 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 10:Buildout YearRetail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft GoodsRetail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)Subtotal Retail (sf)Office DevelopmentResidential Development - UnitsApartments - For LeaseLow-Income Housing Tax Credit UnitsCondominiumTotal UnitsResidential Development - sf sf/UnitApartments - For Lease 1,050 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 800 Condominium 1,250 Total UnitsIncremental Real Property Tax Revenues Tax Value PSF / 1 Retail DevelopmentRetail - Apparel and Soft Goods 0.26$ Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0.26$ SubtotalOffice Development0.24$ Residential DevelopmentApartments - For Lease 0.98$ Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0.90$ Condominium 1.02$ SubtotalAnnual Real Property Tax RevenuesCumulative Tax Revenues1/ 2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 68.67%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - Scenario 2: ConservativeYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ Page A-18 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 11:Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - Scenario 3: Optimistic YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrBuildout YearTotal Buildout1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Retail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 92,500 2,500 30,000 50,000 10,000 Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 25,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 Subtotal Retail (sf) 117,500 - - 2,500 - 40,000 - - - 60,000 - - 15,000 Office Development (sf) 17,500 2,500 10,000 5,000 Residential Development (Units)Apartments - For Lease 75 25 25 25 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 80 40 40 Condominium 20 20 Total Units 175 - - - 25 - - 40 - 25 20 - 65 Residential Development (sf) sf/UnitApartments - For Lease 1,050 78,750 - - - 26,250 - - - - 26,250 - - 26,250 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 800 64,000 - - - - - - 32,000 - - - - 32,000 Condominium 1,250 25,000 - - - - - - - - - 25,000 - - Total Units 167,750 - - - 26,250 - - 32,000 - 26,250 25,000 - 58,250 Incremental Real Property Tax Revenues Tax Value PSF /1Incremental Real Property Tax Revenues/ 1 Retail - Apparel and Soft GoodsRetail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0.26$ -$ -$ 440$ -$ 5,279$ -$ -$ -$ 8,798$ -$ -$ 1,760$ Subtotal Retail (sf) 0.26$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,760$ -$ -$ -$ 1,760$ -$ -$ 880$ Subtotal -$ -$ 440$ -$ 7,038$ -$ -$ -$ 10,558$ -$ -$ 2,639$ Office Development0.24$ -$ -$ 413$ -$ -$ -$ 1,650$ -$ -$ 825$ -$ -$ Residential DevelopmentLow-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0.98$ -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ 17,588$ Condominium 0.90$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,705$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,705$ Total Units 1.02$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 17,589$ -$ -$ Subtotal -$ -$ -$ 17,588$ -$ -$ 19,705$ -$ 17,588$ 17,589$ -$ 37,293$ Annual Real Property Tax Revenues -$ -$ 852$ 17,588$ 7,038$ -$ 21,356$ -$ 28,145$ 18,414$ -$ 39,932$ Cumulative Tax Revenues 2,292,245 -$ -$ 852$ 18,440$ 25,479$ 25,479$ 46,834$ 46,834$ 74,979$ 93,393$ 93,393$ 133,326$ 1/ 2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 68.67%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-19 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 11:Redevelopment Phasing & Tax Generation Assumptions - ScenarBuildout YearRetail Development (sf)Retail - Apparel and Soft GoodsRetail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)Subtotal Retail (sf)Office Development (sf)Residential Development (Units)Apartments - For LeaseLow-Income Housing Tax Credit UnitsCondominiumTotal UnitsResidential Development (sf) sf/UnitApartments - For Lease 1,050 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 800 Condominium 1,250 Total UnitsIncremental Real Property Tax Revenues Tax Value PSF /1YrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYrYr13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Incremental Real Property Tax Revenues/ 1 Retail - Apparel and Soft GoodsRetail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0.26$ Subtotal Retail (sf) 0.26$ SubtotalOffice Development0.24$ Residential DevelopmentLow-Income Housing Tax Credit Units 0.98$ Condominium 0.90$ Total Units 1.02$ SubtotalAnnual Real Property Tax RevenuesCumulative Tax Revenues1/ 2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 68.67%Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ Page A-20 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 12:Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of FundingPrivate/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of Kalispell Private/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of KalispellPhasing Unit TypeUnits Total Cost (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) (Total $) (Total $) (Total $) (Plan Year)Summary of Sources and Uses of Funding$4,452,354 6% 6% 88% $281,600 $247,500 $3,923,254 1 Linear Park Land/Easement AcquisitionBN/Property owners donates/transfers deed to City of Kalispell via rail banking mechanismLegal Fees 5,000$ 1 5,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $5,000 1-32 Linear Park Environmental RemediationPhase I 5,000$ 1 5,000$ 0% 100% 0% $0 $5,000 $0environmental assessmentPhase II 50,000$ 1 50,000$ 0% 100% 0% $0 $50,000 $0 1-355,000$ -$ 55,000$ -$ 3 BNSF Track RemovalBNSF removes & recycles rails & tiestbd 17,200 -$ 100% 0% 0% $0 $0 $0 1-34 Park Master PlanServices 20,000$ 1 20,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $20,000 1-3Potential Funding SourcesCore Area Linear Park Improvement Unit Cost$/linear ft rails /1Page A-21 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 12:Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of FundingPrivate/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of Kalispell Private/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of KalispellPhasing Unit TypeUnits Total Cost (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) (Total $) (Total $) (Total $) (Plan Year)Summary of Sources and Uses of Funding$4,452,354 6% 6% 88% $281,600 $247,500 $3,923,254 Potential Funding SourcesCore Area Linear Park Improvement Unit Cost5 Installation of Shared Use TrailShared use trail construction (concrete) $/linear ft 45.00$ 17,200 774,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $774,000Lighting - Poles $/Pole 4,400$ 45 198,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $198,000Lighting - Bollards $/Bollard 2,200$ 45 99,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $99,000Electrical wiring $/linear ft 1.74$ 17,200 30,000$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $30,000 4-6Irrigation $/sq ft 0.30$ 619,200 185,760$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $185,760Sod & seed $/sq ft 0.19$ 619,200 114,552$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $114,552Trees & perennials $/linear ft 1.31$ 17,200$ 22,500$ 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $22,500150 ft 1,423,812$ -$ -$ 1,423,812$ 6Regional Trailhead Connection Points:Trail improvements to include:Trail features to include: grading/paving/mulching, site amenities (seating), branded signage & wayfinding funded by public and private (naming rights/sponsorships)North & East Connection: Connect Woodland Park & Lawrence Park via BN Highway 2 overpass (“Kalispell Gateway Bridge”)4-6West Connection: Connect the Meridian Trail to the Kila Trail via a new trail head at West 5th Avenue WNSouth Connection: Connect the KLP to Somers/Flathead Lake$/trailhead 15,000$ 4 60,000$ 50% 0% 50% $30,000 $0 $30,0007Kalispell Gateway Bridge$/bridge improvements: $/ft 100$ 600 60,000$ 0% 100% 0% $0 $60,000 $0fencing$/linear ft 125$ 300 37,500$ 0% 100% 0% $0 $37,500 $0 4-6travel surface$/sign 15,000$ 1 15,000$ 0% 100% 0% $0 $15,000 $0signage112,500$ $0 $112,500 $08 KLP Trail Feature - Depot Park installation of caboose climbing equipment (donated by BNSF)$/locomotive150 000$1150 000$100%0%0%150 000$$0-$installation of caboose climbing equipment (donated by BNSF)$/locomotive150,000$ 1150,000$ 100%0%0%150,000$ $0-$ $/site 50,000$ 1 50,000$ 50% 0% 50% 25,000$ $0 25,000$ 4-6200,000$ 175,000$ -$ 25,000$ 9 KLP Trail Feature - Appleway Trail Senior Outdoor Fitness Parkinstallation of comfort station amenities:legal fees 2,500$ 1 2,500$ 0% 0% 100% -$ $0 2,500$ site acquisition (land donated to non-profit)$/site 33,600$ 1 33,600$ 100% 0% 0% 33,600$ $0 -$ outdoor fitness equipment /4$/facility 9,000$ 2 18,000$ 100% 0% 0% 18,000$ $0 -$ 4-6restrooms (chemical toilets)$/trailhead 5,000$ 2 10,000$ 100% 0% 0% 10,000$ $0 -$ wayfinding signage/trailhead64,100$ 61,600$ -$ 2,500$ 10 KLP Trail Feature - Flathead Electric Co-Op ParkPhase I & II Environmental5,000$ 1 5,000$ 0% 100% 0% -$ 5,000$ -$ Phase III & IV Environmental 50,000$ 1 50,000$ 0% 100% 0% -$ 50,000$ -$ land acquisition (donation or exchange TBD)$/acre -$ 2 -$ 100% 0% 0% -$ -$ -$ 4-6restrooms$/facility 15,000$ 1 15,000$ 100% 0% 0% 15,000$ -$ -$ parking (potentially to be shared with FEC) /5$/parking lot 10,000$ 1 10,000$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 10,000$ trailhead 4,000$ 1 4,000$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 4,000$ 84,000$ 15,000$ 55,000$ 14,000$ park site prep, caboose relocation, security, amenities (seating), & interpretative signage costsPage A-22 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 12:Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of FundingPrivate/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of Kalispell Private/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of KalispellPhasing Unit TypeUnits Total Cost (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) (Total $) (Total $) (Total $) (Plan Year)Summary of Sources and Uses of Funding$4,452,354 6% 6% 88% $281,600 $247,500 $3,923,254 Potential Funding SourcesCore Area Linear Park Improvement Unit Cost11 Pedestrian Crossing Upgrades (Railroad Conversions) :pedestrian safety features (crossing lights) at:5th Avenue EN $/crossing 598,850$ 1 598,850$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 598,850$ 7th Avenue WN $/crossing 705,091$ 1 705,091$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 705,091$ 7-101 1,303,941$ -$ -$ 1,303,941$ 12 Street Extensions (Railroad Conversions) :6th Avenue WN$/crossing 629,460 1 629,460$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 629,460$ 8th Avenue WN$/crossing 444,541$ 1 444,541$ 0% 0% 100% -$ -$ 444,541$ 7-101,074,001$ -$ -$ 1,074,001$ 13 KLP Trail Feature - Kalispell Center Mall Clock Tower Plazastreetscape upgrades and pedestrian plazatbd tbd tbd 100% 0% 0% -$ $0 -$ developer constructed clock tower constructiontbd tbd tbd 100% 0% 0% -$ $0 -$ 7-10-$ -$ -$ -$ 14 Woodland Park Amphitheater300-400 seats; Location to be determined$/site $50,000 1 50,000$ 0% 50% 50% -$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 7-1015Health, Wellness, Sustainability ProgrammingRecycling Receptacles - private contractor $/Activity Centertbd -$ 100% 0% 0% -$ -$ -$ Public Outreach Boards - donated by medical community $/Activity Centertbd -$ 100% 0% 0% -$ -$ -$ 7-10Portable Vending Pads $/Activity Centertbd -$ 100% 0% 0% -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1/ Cost to BNSF net of iron disposition value is to be determined1/ Cost to BNSF net of iron disposition value is to be determined.2/ assumes City will enter into long-term lease with All Families LLC for center operations3/ Linear Park area assumes: length17,200 width60 total area (sq. ft.)1,032,000 sq. ft/acre45,560 acres23 Tier 1 Park Maintenance cost/acre1,200.00 Annual Maintenance Cost:27,182 4/ Parking costs potentially funded by grant from Roundup for Safety.5/ Appleway Senior Fitness Center assumes cost estimates provided by LifeTrail Advanced Wellness System.Source: City of Kalispell; BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad; Flathead Valley Economic Development Authority; Willdan, 2013.Page A-23 of 33 Table 13:Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisSummary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing RecommendationsPrivate/ Non-Profit Other Grant Funding City of Kalispell Total Cost1 Linear Park Land/Easement Acquisition -$ -$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 2 Linear Park Environmental Remediation -$ 55,000$ -$ 55,000$ 3 BNSF Track Removal -$ -$ -$ -$ 4 Park Master Plan -$ -$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 5 Installation of Shared Use Trail -$ -$ 1,423,812$ 1,423,812$ Subtotal -$ 55,000$ 1,448,812$ 1,503,812$ 6 Regional Trailhead Connection Points: 30,000$ -$ 30,000$ 60,000$ 7 Kalispell Gateway Bridge -$ 112,500$ -$ 112,500$ 8 KLP Trail Feature - Depot Park 175,000$ -$ 25,000$ 200,000$ 9 KLP Trail Feature - Appleway Trail Senior Outdoor Fitness Park61,600$ -$ 2,500$ 64,100$ 10 KLP Trail Feature - Flathead Electric Co-Op Park15,000$ 55,000$ 14,000$ 84,000$ 11 Pedestrian Crossing Upgrades (Railroad Conversions) : -$ -$ 1,303,941$ 1,303,941$ Subtotal 281,600$ 167,500$ 1,375,441$ 1,824,541$ 12 Street Extensions (Railroad Conversions) : -$ -$ 1,074,001$ 1,074,001$ 13 KLP Trail Feature - Kalispell Center Mall Clock Tower Plaza-$ -$ -$ -$ 14 Woodland Park Amphitheater-$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 50,000$ 15 Health, Wellness, Sustainability Programming -$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotal -$ 25,000$ 1,099,001$ 1,124,001$ Total Linear Park Costs - City of Kalispell 281,600$ 247,500$ 3,923,254$ 4,452,354$ 6% 6% 88% 100%Source: City of Kalispell; Willdan, 2013.Near Term: Years 1-3Mid-Term: Years 4-6Long-Term: Years 7-10Page A-24 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 14:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 1 - Status QuoImplementation Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8TIF YEAR2 34567 8 910Base Year Value 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Growth Rate0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Taxable Property Value 11,551,896 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Total12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Increase666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 Increment457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 Expiring Developer Payment(50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) Remaining TIF Revenue407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 Cumulative Value407,838 815,676 1,223,514 1,631,352 2,039,190 2,447,028 2,854,866 3,262,704 3,670,542 Current TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF) 3,020,649 3,478,487 3,936,325 4,394,163 4,852,001 5,309,839 5,767,677 6,225,515 6,683,353 Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) (1,448,812) (30,000) (41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000) Subtotal (6,599,708) - (2,676,454) (1,448,812) (30,000) (41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000) - Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811 2,562,811 2,970,649 702,033 (338,941) 38,897 405,235 (490,868) (1,157,031) (774,193) Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment - Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) - (2,676,454) - - - - - - - Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) - - (1,448,812) (30,000) (41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000) - TIF Funds Remaining5,751,215 2,970,649$ 702,033$ (338,941)$ 38,897$ 405,235$ (490,868)$ (1,157,031)$ (774,193)$ (366,355)$ Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-25 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 14:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 1 - Status QuoImplementation YearTIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) Subtotal (6,599,708) Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811 Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment - Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) TIF Funds Remaining5,751,215 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.910111213 14 15 1611 12 13 14 15 16 17 182022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 20290% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 4,078,380 4,486,218 4,894,056 5,301,894 5,709,732 6,117,570 6,525,408 6,933,246 7,141,191 7,599,029 8,056,867 8,514,705 8,972,543 9,430,381 9,888,219 10,346,057 - - - - - - - - (366,355) 41,483 449,321 857,159 1,264,997 1,672,835 2,080,673 2,488,511 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 41,483$ 449,321$ 857,159$ 1,264,997$ 1,672,835$ 2,080,673$ 2,488,511$ 2,896,349$ Page A-26 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 14:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 1 - Status QuoImplementation YearTIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) Subtotal (6,599,708) Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811 Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment - Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) TIF Funds Remaining5,751,215 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.17 18 19 20 21 22 2319 20 21 22 23 24 252030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 20360% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 7,341,084 7,748,922 8,156,760 8,564,598 8,972,436 9,380,274 9,788,112 10,803,895 11,261,733 11,719,571 12,177,409 12,635,247 13,093,085 13,550,923 - - - - - - - 2,896,349 3,304,187 3,712,025 4,119,863 4,527,701 4,935,539 5,343,377 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,304,187$ 3,712,025$ 4,119,863$ 4,527,701$ 4,935,539$ 5,343,377$ 5,751,215$ Page A-27 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 15:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 2 - ConservativePlan Yr.1234567TIF YEAR23456789Base Year Value2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020Growth Rate0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Taxable Property Value 11,551,896 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Total12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Increase666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 Increment457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 Expiring Developer Payment(50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) Remaining TIF Revenue407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 Cumulative Value407,838 815,676 1,223,514 1,631,352 2,039,190 2,447,028 2,854,866 3,262,704 Current TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF) 2,970,649 3,378,487 3,786,325 4,194,163 4,602,001 5,009,839 5,417,677 5,825,515 Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ 2,562,811$ 2,970,649$ 702,033$ (338,089)$ 58,189$ 442,968$ (434,695)$ (1,061,063)$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 1,287,098 -$ -$ 852$ 18,440$ 18,440$ 18,440$ 39,796$ 57,383$ Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) -$ (2,676,454) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) -$ -$ (1,448,812)$ (30,000)$ (41,500)$ (1,303,941)$ (1,074,001)$ (25,000)$ TIF Funds Remaining7,038,313 2,970,649$ 702,033$ (338,089)$ 58,189$ 442,968$ (434,695)$ (1,061,063)$ (620,841)$ Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-28 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 15:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 2 - ConservativePlan Yr.TIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 1,287,098 Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) TIF Funds Remaining7,038,313 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1710 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 192021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 20300% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 3,670,542 4,078,380 4,486,218 4,894,056 5,301,894 5,709,732 6,117,570 6,525,408 6,933,246 7,341,084 6,233,353 6,641,191 7,049,029 7,456,867 7,864,705 8,272,543 8,680,381 9,088,219 9,496,057 9,903,895 (620,841)$ (145,062)$ 331,542$ 808,146$ 1,287,390$ 1,766,633$ 2,245,877$ 2,725,121$ 3,204,364$ 3,683,608$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 67,941$ 68,766$ 68,766$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (145,062)$ 331,542$ 808,146$ 1,287,390$ 1,766,633$ 2,245,877$ 2,725,121$ 3,204,364$ 3,683,608$ 4,162,851$ Page A-29 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 15:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 2 - ConservativePlan Yr.TIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112 Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 1,287,098 Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254) TIF Funds Remaining7,038,313 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.18 19 20 21 22 2320 21 22 23 24 252031 2032 2033 2034 2035 20360% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 7,748,922 8,156,760 8,564,598 8,972,436 9,380,274 9,788,112 10,311,733 10,719,571 11,127,409 11,535,247 11,943,085 12,350,923 4,162,851$ 4,642,095$ 5,121,339$ 5,600,582$ 6,079,826$ 6,559,070$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ 71,406$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,642,095$ 5,121,339$ 5,600,582$ 6,079,826$ 6,559,070$ 7,038,313$ Page A-30 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 16:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 3 - OptimisticPlan Yr.12345678TIF YEAR23456789Base Year Value2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020Growth Rate0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Taxable Property Value 11,551,896 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Total12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 Increase666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 Increment457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 Expiring Developer Payment(50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) Remaining TIF Revenue407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 Cumulative Value407,838 815,676 1,223,514 1,631,352 2,039,190 2,447,028 2,854,866 3,262,704 Current TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF) 2,970,649 3,378,487 3,786,325 4,194,163 4,602,001 5,009,839 5,417,677 5,825,515 Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) (2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) (1,448,812) (30,000) (41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000) Subtotal (6,599,708) - (2,676,454) (1,448,812) (30,000) (41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000) Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ 2,562,811$ 2,970,649$ 702,033$ (338,089)$ 58,189$ 450,006$ (420,618)$ (1,039,947)$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 2,158,919$ -$ -$ 852$ 18,440$ 25,479$ 25,479$ 46,834$ 46,834$ Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454)$ -$ (2,676,454) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254)$ -$ -$ (1,448,812)$ (30,000)$ (41,500)$ (1,303,941)$ (1,074,001)$ (25,000)$ TIF Funds Remaining7,910,134 2,970,649$ 702,033$ (338,089)$ 58,189$ 450,006$ (420,618)$ (1,039,947)$ (610,275)$ Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.Page A-31 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 16:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 3 - OptimisticPlan Yr.TIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) Subtotal (6,599,708) Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112$ Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 2,158,919$ Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454)$ Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254)$ TIF Funds Remaining7,910,134 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.91011121314 151610 11 12 13 14 15 16 172021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 20280% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 3,670,542 4,078,380 4,486,218 4,894,056 5,301,894 5,709,732 6,117,570 6,525,408 6,233,353 6,641,191 7,049,029 7,456,867 7,864,705 8,272,543 8,680,381 9,088,219 - - - - - - - - (610,275)$ (127,458)$ 373,774$ 875,005$ 1,416,169$ 1,957,333$ 2,498,497$ 3,039,660$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 74,979$ 93,393$ 93,393$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (127,458)$ 373,774$ 875,005$ 1,416,169$ 1,957,333$ 2,498,497$ 3,039,660$ 3,580,824$ Page A-32 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility AnalysisTable 16:West Side TIF District Projections: Scenario 3 - OptimisticPlan Yr.TIF YEARBase Year ValueGrowth RateTaxable Property Value 11,551,896 TotalIncreaseIncrementExpiring Developer PaymentRemaining TIF RevenueCumulative ValueCurrent TIF Value 2,562,811 Cumulative Value (including current TIF)Core Area Plan CostsRail Served Industrial Park(2,676,454) Core Area Linear Park(3,923,254) Subtotal (6,599,708) Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis CumulativeTIF Fund (Balance Forward) 2,562,811$ Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline) 9,788,112$ Incremental Taxes: New Dev/Redevelopment 2,158,919$ Rail Served Industrial Park Costs (2,676,454)$ Core Area Linear Park Costs (3,923,254)$ TIF Funds Remaining7,910,134 Assumptions:2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2418 19 20 21 22 23 24 252029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 20360% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 12,218,599 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 666,703 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 457,838 (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) (50,000) 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 407,838 6,933,246 7,341,084 7,748,922 8,156,760 8,564,598 8,972,436 9,380,274 9,788,112 9,496,057 9,903,895 10,311,733 10,719,571 11,127,409 11,535,247 11,943,085 12,350,923 - - - - - - - - 3,580,824$ 4,121,988$ 4,663,152$ 5,204,315$ 5,745,479$ 6,286,643$ 6,827,807$ 7,368,970$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 407,838$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ 133,326$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,121,988$ 4,663,152$ 5,204,315$ 5,745,479$ 6,286,643$ 6,827,807$ 7,368,970$ 7,910,134$ Page A-33 of 33 Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis 䄀 The Core Area is centrally located to substantial open space, parks, designated wild life areas and recreational areas. Woodland Park is a valuable community amenity, providing the community with active and passive recreation offerings. If the rail tracks were to be removed, the Core Area is poised to be Kalispell’s central connective spine, providing safe pedestrian and bike trail access to regional trailheads to the North, South, East and West. To evaluate a range of potential programming uses for the proposed Kalispell Linear Park, the Willdan project team conducted case study research to find examples of low-capital intensity, revenue producing public amenities that could be developed within strategic “bump out” nodes within the park plan area. Willdan conducted research to identify relevant examples to develop a profile of the capital investment costs, operating costs and revenues, annual attendance requirements for such a public amenity. Willdan researched a range of conceptual uses to develop case study examples of facilities which might be determined appropriate as redevelopment concepts including:  Nature Education Centers  Events Venue/ Outdoor Pavilion Facilities  Greenbelt Trail Services and Amenities Based on Willdan’s review of the potential land uses and the City of Kalispell’s objectives to create a low-capital and low operating cost approach to furthering the revitalization objectives of the Core Area Plan, the following case study profiles were researched to provide high- level “Lessons Learned” for the City’s consideration of future improvements to integrate the Linear Park land to adjacent commercial/mixed uses:  Portland Trails, Maine  Potomac Overlook Regional Park Nature Center, Arlington, Virginia  Carolina Thread Trail & Cawtaba Lands Conservancy, North and South Carolina Willdan evaluated several greenbelt park/trail systems in the United States to evaluate the typical services, amenities, and operating structures. The Portland, Maine Trail maintains a 50-mile network of trails in Greater Portland. Portland Trails offers "Lunch & Learns" to businesses and organizations in greater Portland in which staff travel to area businesses or they lead a Guided Trail Walk to educate employees about Portland Trails, the trail network, current projects. Portland Trails is also involved in school ground greening projects for students. Portland Trails collaborates with the Portland Public Health Department on a worksite fitness program for employees of area businesses. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Last year over 1,000 people from 15 companies participated in the program. The purpose of the program is to encourage the use of the trails and awareness of the urban open spaces available for recreation and alternative transportation. The campaign markets Portland’s opportunities for exercise in a scenic environment. Portland Trails also offers a range of events open to the public including guided trail walks with historical background, information on flora and fauna, and the trail-building process among other topics. The Potomac Overlook Regional Park (PORP) Nature Center, managed by the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority, was established to provide residents and visitors with direct access to local historic and natural resources. The PORP site features unique interpretive exhibits housed within the nature center and woodland trails that lead through natural areas. Potomac Overlook Regional Park offers three miles of wooded trails and staff-led experiential learning programming just five miles from the center of Washington, D.C. The buildings and grounds are free and open to the public year round. The PORP Nature Center was opened in 1974. The initial capital investment costs were not available as the Nature Center facility is a 1,500 square foot preexisting reconverted historic bungalow house. Capital costs for maintenance and repair construction of the current park shelter/comfort station, auditorium, outdoor amphitheater and pavilion, and solar energy conversions is estimated at $100,000. Annual operating costs are approximately $265,000 (primarily for staff costs), of which approximately $20,000 is committed to annual capital costs for path maintenance, way finding, marketing, and signage. With annual attendance in the range of 25,000 visitors generate approximately $40,000 in operating revenues, primarily from birthday parties, weddings, canoe trips, and auditorium/shelter rentals. Elementary school groups also visit the Center as part of curriculum field trips for a modest fee. The park is anchored by its nature education center, a retrofitted mid- 20th century home from which PORP staff operate a range of community and environmental stewardship programs. The Nature Center includes a wide range of interconnected sustainability education programs/messaging boards, including:  Energerium: The main floor exhibit is devoted to exploring the interconnectivity of energy and living systems.  Auditorium: The bottom floor auditorium holds up to 50 people (open for birthday parties and other private functions) and features plant and animal exhibits.  Environmental Stewardship and Cultural Programs: Several environmental organizations, including Arlingtonians for a Clean Environment and the Arlington Regional Master Naturalists, are regular park stewards. In addition, the Nature Center regularly hosts school groups, scout groups, and local companies in educational programs including:  Volunteer Work Days (monthly, first Saturday) with indoor and outdoor projects around the park Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis  Annual Earth Day Celebration (April 17) where volunteers plant trees and milkweed for monarch butterflies  Open House & Heritage Festival (May 2), including music, food, exhibits, and games  Free Summer Concerts (starting May 22) offering Saturday evening performances. Another example of a potential public investment that would serve to leverage the City of Kalispell’s natural resources is the use of trail head and park branding/identification signage along the Carolina Thread Trail in North and South Carolina. Carolina Thread Trail is a network of regional trails that covers 15 counties in North and South Carolina. The goal is to link regional attractions, provide a place to experience a wide range of recreational activities such as walking, bicycling, and picnicking. Since the project was announced in 2007, local businesses have donated $50,000 in signage and services. Because the project uses many existing trails, some of which are already branded with their own community's identity, the challenge became identifying the Thread Trail in cooperation with the existing identity - not instead of it. Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Working in conjunction with the Carolina Thread Trail, the Catawba Lands Conservancy, and a local designer the project team designed and installed multiple sign types to be used along the trails to further the trail community brand. The City of Kalispell should consider the Core Area Revitalization Plan process as an opportunity to adopted a refined community brand that could be further extended throughout the Kalispell Linear Park trail and the downtown Main Street, purposely connecting to a range of the proposed redevelopment options and programming opportunities by providing way finding, “wellness” information, recycling and sustainability messaging, or other community services (potentially at the Meridian Road/Appleway Trail comfort station). Based on a survey of a community trails in the United States reported by Rails to Trails (www.railstotrails.org), the trails can serve as a connector to a wide variety of income generating services and amenities, including:  Restaurants  Water  Grocery Stores  Restrooms  Camping Sites  Phone  Bike Shop Repair/Bike Rental  Internet  Vending/Retail  Souvenirs/Gifts  Visitors Bureau  Medical Services  Shuttle  Parking These uses provide a range of capital and operating intensity alternatives that could be employed at the proposed Meridian Road/Appleway Senior Recreation Comfort Station. The higher the programming/staffing intensity, the higher the need for quality branded wayfinding signage throughout the trail system to drive traffic (and earned revenue) to the center. Draft Implementation Plan Executive SummaryFY20 4FY20 9FY2014 -FY2019December 2, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS – EXECUTIVE SUMMARYI. About the Plan | 3Acknowledgements| 5Fort Lauderdale’s Economic Resurgence| 6Economic Development Plan Framework | 7Vision Plan Guiding Principles| 9Vision Plan Guiding Principles| 9II. City of Fort Lauderdale Demographic Profile & Key Economic Trends | 10III. Economic Benchmarking Dashboard | 20Economic Performance | 23Workforce | 25Innovation | 27Livability | 29Healthy Business Environment | 33IV. Proposed Economic Development Strategic Action Plan Initiatives | 36V. Retail Development Strategy and Targeted Sub-Area Recommendations | 45VI. Targeted Industry & Entrepreneurial Development Strategy | 57We are the City VII.Alternative Incentives Recommendations | 62VIII. Implementation Plan Recommendations | 65Organizational & Institutional Assessment | 66Economic Development Financing Plan | 70Funding Sources & Eligibility Requirements| 76IXNext Steps| 77you never want to leave.IX.Next Steps| 77Appendix A: Sub Area Demographic & Economic Profiles | 79Uptown District/Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport | 80The Galt Ocean Mile | 81North Beach Village | 82The Downtown Regional Activity Center (D-RAC) / East Las Olas | 83Sistrunk | 84SE 17th Street / South Andrews Ave | 85Appendix B: Economic Development Case Studies | 86FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN2 I. About the PlanFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN3 MESSAGE FROM THE MAYORAs Mayor of one of the most diverse cities in the United States and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency, I have the privilege to work, play, live and raise a family alongside the best employees and elected officials in the City. The City of Fort Lauderdale is best described as a vibrant community bursting with economic opportunity, cultural activities and neighbors that pp y,grepresent all cultures, races and ethnicities. Through the collective efforts of community stakeholders, private and public partners, and the input of our neighbors, we are able to improve the quality of life daily while ensuring a the quality of life daily while ensuring a sustainable future for our children. Mayor John P. “Jack” SeilerCity of Fort LauderdaleOctober 2014ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE LEADERSHIPCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE LEADERSHIPMayor John P. “Jack” SeilerCommissioner Bruce G. Roberts, District 1Commissioner Dean J. Trantalis, District 2Commissioner Bobby B. DuBose, District 3Vi M /C i i R R Di t i t 4FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN4Vice Mayor/Commissioner Romney Rogers, District 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE STAFFEconomic and Community Reinvestment Division, Department of Sustainable DevelopmentStructural Innovation Division, Office of the City ManagerDepartment of Transportation & MobilitySTAKEHOLDERSBeach Business Improvement District Advisory CommitteeBh Rdl t Adi BdFort Lauderdale/Hollywood International AirportGreater Fort Lauderdale Chamber of CommerceG t F t L d d l C ti & Vi it Beach Redevelopment Advisory BoardBroward Bank of CommerceBroward CareerSource/WorkforceOneBroward County/Office of Economic & Small Business DevelopmentBroward HealthGreater Fort Lauderdale Convention & Visitors BureauMarine Industries Association of South FloridaNW Community Redevelopment Advisory BoardPort Everglades Port AuthorityPrivate property owners neighborhood Broward HealthBroward Metropolitan Planning OrganizationBroward WorkshopDowntown Development Authority (DDA)Florida Atlantic UniversityPrivate property owners, neighborhood associations, citizens, developers, land use attorneys, investors, and othersRiverwalk Trust/GO RiverwalkThe Greater Fort Lauderdale AllianceTECHNICAL STAFF/CONSULTANTSWilldan Financial and Economic Consulting ServicesWTL + a Real Estate & Economic AdvisorsRenaissance Planning GroupFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN5 MESSAGE FROM THE CITY MANAGERFORT LAUDERDALE’S ECONOMIC RESURGENCEMANAGERAn advantageous economic climate has helpedthe City of Fort Lauderdale establish itself as aworld-class international business center and oneof the most desirable locations for new,diltibiRESURGENCEMedia outlets around the country are taking note of our commitment tobuilding community! Fort Lauderdale is receiving national attention for oureconomic resurgence and our commitment to implementing a communitywide Vision and Strategic Plan to create an active, vibrant, inclusive, andti blCitWhbkdthti ’btitiiexpanding, orrelocatingbusinesses.Known internationally as a preferred destinationfor tourism and marine-related businesses, FortLauderdale supports a diverse range of industries,including high technology, real estate, and filmsustainableCity.Wehavebeen rankedamongthenation’sbestcitiesinavariety of areas, including:All-America City, 2014 National Civic LeagueTop 10 Best Downtowns in 2014 Livability.com and television production.A growing list of nationally-recognizedcorporations have established business operationsin Fort Lauderdale with corporate or LatinAmerican headquarters,including:AT&T,America’s 10 Most Exciting Cities Movoto National Real EstateTop 10 Best Places to Move in 2014 SML National Moving Top 10 Small American Cities of the Future Foreign Direct Investment Magazine q,g,AutoNation, BankAtlantic, Citicorp, Citrix Systems,Galaxy Latin America, Hewlett-Packard, MicrosoftLatin America, Motorola Latin America, RepublicIndustries, South African Airways, SpherionCorporation, SportsLine.com, and VoicestreamWlTop 10 Best Places for Veterans to Live Best Places for Veterans Report Top 10 Great Cities for Family Vacations Vacation Critic Travel Planning Guide Top 10 Best Places to Retire Money Magazine Fit Wit Dtiti f Cdi Fli htN t k Wireless.Fort Lauderdale’s national recognition as aforward-looking economy is evidenced by thenumber of “Top 10” lists and other accoladesawarded overthelasttwelvemonths. TheCityofFavorite Winter Destination of Canadians FlightNetwork.com Most Outstanding Green Government U.S. Green Building Council South Florida Happiest Cities for Young Professionals Forbes Magazine Best Places for Business and Careers Forbes Magazine Fort Lauderdale is further leveraging this successwith the launch of the Citywide EconomicDevelopment Strategic Action Plan.Lee R. Feldman, City ManagerCity of Fort LauderdaleBest Places for Business and Careers Forbes Magazine Top 100 Best Cities to Start a Business WalletHubCertified as a Florida Green Local Government Florida Green Building Coalition Complete Streets Policy Ranked #1 in Florida and #3 Nationally Smart October 2014Complete Streets Policy Ranked #1 in Florida and #3 Nationally Smart Growth AmericaFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN6 The Department of Sustainable Development initiated the EDSAP process toestablish a baseline of key data regarding current economic performance and toexplore best-in-class initiatives employed byother communities that could beABOUT THE PLANThCitWidEiDl tSt t iAtiPl(EDSAP)iCitppyyadopted and implemented by Fort Lauderdale to improve the City’s economicresiliency over the next five years.The EDSAP was developed to provide an action-oriented framework to improveupon these challenging aspects of the City’s economic climate today. The Planis based on more than 100 stakeholder interviews, seven public meetings,ti ltdhdtill b tiithlti lCitfTheCity-WideEconomicDevelopmentStrategicActionPlan(EDSAP)isaCityCommission Annual Action Plan priority for Fiscal Year 2014, an initiativeoutlined in the Press Play: 2018 Strategic Plan under the BusinessDevelopment cylinder of excellence, and aligns with the Fast Forward: 2035City Vision Plan under the "We Are Prosperous" statement.The EDSAP was developed in twophases requiringsubstantial communityandnationalcase studyresearch,andextensive collaboration withmultipleCityofFort Lauderdale and Broward County staff.Fort Lauderdale’s 2014 economic benchmarking assessment indicates aresilient, competitive economy based on a series of key indicators comparing theCity to nine other communities. The City is clearly competing when consideringoveralleconomichealth,workforcequality,andthescaleandrateofinnovationppqgystakeholder input. Phase I includes: 1) an Economic Profile Report ofdemographic and economic trends in the City of Fort Lauderdale and inselected sub-areas; 2) overview of primary Strengths/Opportunities andChallenges/Threats by sub-area identified by the Stakeholder Meeting processand 3) a Retail and Commercial Market Assessment. These full reports arelocated in the Technical Appendix to this Strategic Plan.ove aeco o cea ,wo o cequa y,adesca eadaeoova oachieved by local businesses:ppgThis Executive Summary provides the key components of Fort Lauderdale’s 5-Year Economic Development Strategic Action Plan including:A comprehensive mission statement and core set of values for theStrategic Plan;Economic IndicatorRanking(out of 10 Cities)Economic Performance 3rdWorkforce 3rdAspects of the City’s economic landscape that appear to lag behind competitorsinclude livability (primarily due to the relative cost of living and housingaffordability) and business environment (resulting from the relative cost of doingbusiness in the City when compared to other locations in the western andth tUitdSt t )An economic development trends snapshot for the City;An Economic Development Benchmarking Assessment to test the currenteconomic competitiveness of the City against nine comparable marketsand “economic dashboard” benchmarking metrics to measure thesuccess of the strategies and initiatives;Innovation2ndsoutheasternUnitedStates):An identification and recommendation of economic developmentincentive programs for business retention and recruitment that areapplicable to each geographic sub-area and the City as a whole;An entrepreneurial development and business incubation strategy, atargeted industry growth strategy, and a retail recruitment strategy; andEconomic IndicatorRanking(out of 10 Cities)Livability8thBusiness Environment4thThe Plan’s proposed initiatives will require approximately $7.2 million insustained investment in new personnel, capital upgrades, and operatingexpenditures over the next five years. The City of Fort Lauderdale is dedicated toimplementing the plan, as evidenced by the proposed organizational andinstitutional resources that will be allocated to design, implement and managethe Plan’s 13 proposed key economic development initiatives, and will be heldAn implementation program including sources and uses of funding todirect staff resources and facilitate plan implementation over the five-yearimplementation horizon).The following implementation plan summary is intended to guide the City ofFort Lauderdale’s economic development priorities for the next five years.accountable for its success through annual monitoring and reportingmechanisms.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FRAMEWORKThe following Implementation Plan and monitoring framework provides a visionfor the City's economic future as well as the goals, objectives, and policies foreconomicdevelopmentintheCitythroughtheyear2019.The City of Fort Lauderdale iseconomicdevelopmentintheCitythroughtheyear2019.VisionDefines the optimal desired future state of what an entitywants to achieve over time; provides guidance and inspirationas to what an organization is focused on achieving in five,Lauderdale is delivering economicten, ormore years.GoalsThey are the ends toward which effort and action are directedor coordinated. Together, the plan goals are the individualcomponents needed to achieve the ‘vision’.economic opportunity with cutting-pObjectivesThoughtfully constructed methods or actions that will beemployed to achieve a result (goal). This is ‘how’ the visionwill be achieved.InitiativesThthifittith tillbil tdtedge, 21stcentury iInitiativesThey arethespecifictacticsthatwillbeimplementedtodeliver on or to coordinate an objective.economic development tactics fromtactics from vision to executionexecutionFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN8 GUIDING PRINCIPLESTh C ’ d l ll b VISION STATEMENTThFtLddlEiDl tSt t iAtiThe City’s economic development vision will be achieved by:Establishing development procedures that are predictable, efficient and customer driven, encouraging legitimate involvement of all key TheFortLauderdaleEconomicDevelopmentStrategicActionPlan (EDSAP) is a City CommissionAnnual Action Plan priorityfor Fiscal Year 2014, an initiative outlined in the Press Play:2018 Strategic Plan under the Business Development cylinderofexcellence,and aligns with the FastForward: 2035 Cityencouraging legitimate involvement of all key stakeholders in the processContinuing to build on the strength of the maritime industrySt th i th Cit ’ t i i d t b d ,gyVision Plan under the "We Are Prosperous" statement. TheFort Lauderdale Economic Development Strategic ActionPlan’s Vision Statement is:FtLddl illb ldiStrengthening the City’s tourism industry beyond the City’s coastal areasRetaining strong companies and targeting emerging industries that are compatible with the region’s existing clustersFort Lauderdale will be a leading area for economic prosperity fostered by a solid industry base of first class marine-related activities and premier destinations–gaining ggCoordinating the City’s long-term business, education, and transportation plansEnabling a competitive yet flexible real estate market that balances the needs of industry with pggrecognition as a prominent South Florida location of choice for emerging technology development, entrepreneurship, high-paying job growth and sustainablemarket that balances the needs of industry with Fort Lauderdale’s sense of placeProviding a diverse range of incentives that attract businesses and entrepreneurs who create quality, high-paying jobsgrowth and sustainable development practices. qygpy gjExpanding on the of the opportunities created by Port Everglades and Fort Lauderdale Executive AirportFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 9 II. Demographic Profile & Key Economic TrendsKey Economic TrendsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN10 Economic Vitality"M thi hCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AT A GLANCE……………………………………………………………………….Economic VitalityFort Lauderdale is the business and tourism center of Broward County.LocatedinSouthFlorida(Miami-Dade,BrowardandPalmBeach"More than ever, companies choose Greater Fort Lauderdale for our outstanding quality of life, highly educated and diverse workforce, transportation access and highly rated business and personal tax climate"Withconvenienttransportationfacilitiesincludingaworld‐classinternationalairportwithLocatedinSouthFlorida(MiamiDade,BrowardandPalmBeachCounties), Fort Lauderdale benefits from the synergistic co-location inthe 7th largest metropolitan statistical area (MSA) in the nationThe region, whose combined population is now over 5.5 million, hasroughly one-third of Florida's total population.business and personal tax climate. —Bob Swindell, President/CEO, Greater Fort Lauderdale AllianceWith convenient transportation facilities including a worldclass international airport with connections to major U.S. and foreign destinations, one of the world's busiest seaports and high‐speed global telecommunications connections, Greater Fort Lauderdale/Broward County provides a 21st century infrastructure.And minutes away, you'll find two other international airports and Approximately 60 percent of the population is in the prime workingagesThe region has been designated a mega-region of the future and adriver of U.S. economic growth in Richard Florida's book “Who's YourCity?”seaports! City?Fort Lauderdale businesses can take advantage of one of the mostsophisticated and diverse international infrastructures in the worldSouth Florida has the third largest consular corps in the United States,with approximately70 consulates and 25 foreign trade offices frompp ygthe major countries in Latin America and the Caribbean as well asEurope and AsiaWith convenient transportation facilities including a world-classinternational airport with connections to major U.S. and foreigndestinationsoneoftheworld'sbusiestseaportsandhigh-speeddestinations,oneoftheworldsbusiestseaportsandhigh-speedglobal telecommunications connections, Greater FortLauderdale/Broward County provides a 21st century infrastructureFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 11 CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AT A GLANCEEconomic VitalityNet migration—or the number ofpeople moving into Fort Lauderdaleless the number of people movingout—is projected togrow steadilyhl……………………………………………………………………….Economic VitalityThe City of Fort Lauderdale is experiencing ihidiWithconvenienttransportationfacilitiesincludingaworld‐classinternationalairportwithwithapproximately120,300 net newresidentsby 2017.Unemploymentis trendingdownwardtolessthan“normal”orstabilizedNetMigration, Unemployment & Personal Incomestrong economic growth indicators across multiple frontsWith convenient transportation facilities including a worldclass international airport with connections to major U.S. and foreign destinations, one of the world's busiest seaports and high‐speed global telecommunications connections, Greater Fort Lauderdale/Broward County provides a 21st century infrastructure.And minutes away, you'll find two other international airports and tolessthannormalorstabilizedrates of5%.Personal incomegrowth rates aretrendingupwardbetween4% to 8%22.223.616 221.124.828.329.98.0%10.0%22.0Net Migration, Unemployment & Personal Income Growth Trendsseaports! gpannually through 2017, more thandouble the U.S. average.Gross Metro Productwill achieve aidlh2.712.74.716.22.0%4.0%6.0%2.012.0th Rate (%)ration ('000's)sustainedaverage annualgrowthrate of2.2%over the next 5 Years.-6.2-4.0%-2.0%0.0%-18.0-8.02007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018GrowtNet MigrThese combined trends point to the sustained economic-27.3-6.0%-28.0Net migration ('000s)Unemployment Rate (%)Source: Moody’s Economy.com 2013 Metro-Précis Report, City of Fort Lauderdale; Willdan, 2014. to the sustained economic vitality of the City of Fort LauderdaleFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 12 CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AT A GLANCE………………………………………………………………….Population & IncomeFort Lauderdale is home to approximately 187,000residents in 86,000 households within the largerBrowardCountyregionof18millionresidents………………………………………………………………….Education & WorkforceDoctorate Educational AttainmentFort Lauderdale offers one of the largest and most diverse labor forces in the state of Florida, l h l lBrowardCountyregionof1.8millionresidentsThe job market, a key catalyst for housing demand,is improving, further driving Fort Lauderdale’spopulation growthPopulationgrowthwillaccelerategraduallyto18%Some K-12, No Diploma14%Bachelor's Master's/ Professional Degree10%Doctorate Degree1%along with a growing talent pool43 institutions offering Associate's Degrees or higher within 30 miles of Fort Lauderdale, eleven of which offer MBA degreesPopulationgrowthwillaccelerategraduallyto1.8%by 2017, and foreclosures are being worked off ata faster pace than in MiamiPopulation Trends and Housing StartsHigh School Graduate, GED, or Alternative28%Some College, No DegreeAssociate's Degree7%Degree20%Public high schools that have been ranked among the best in the countryMore than 38% of Fort Lauderdale residents have earned a Bachelor’s, Master’s, Professional or Doctorate-level Degree4 0005,0006,0001 8501,9001,9502,000rmits/Year)s)Population Trends and Housing StartsNo Degree20%7%Fort Lauderdale offers one of the largest and most diverse2,0003,0004,0001 6501,7001,7501,8001,850ng Starts (# of PerPopulation ('000slaborforces in the state ofFlorida, along with a growingtalent pool43 institutions offering Associate's Degrees or higher within30 miles of Fort Lauderdale, eleven of which offer MBAdegrees01,0001,5501,6001,650200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018HousiPopulation (ths) Single-family permits Multifamily permits gPublic high schools that have been ranked among the bestin the countryMore than 38% of Fort Lauderdale residents have earned aBachelor’s, Master’s, Professional or Doctorate-levelFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 13DegreeSource: Moody’s Economy.com 2013 Metro-Précis Report, ESRI Business Analyst, City of Fort Lauderdale; Willdan, 2014 CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AT A GLANCE………………………………………………………………….Population & Income………………………………………………………………….Healthy Business Environment40%840Employment TrendsAlthough Fort Lauderdale supports a diverse populationacross all income brackets, approximately 20.4% ofresidents are living near or below the poverty rate.-2.0%0.0%2.0%4.0%720740760780800820840nt Changeployment ('000s)Poverty level is an indicator of the income equality of acommunity as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau.In 2013, the national average annual threshold income fora single person younger than 65 years old wasitl$12000ffilffithtRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGY-8.0%-6.0%-4.0%640660680700720200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018PerceTotal Emapproximately$12,000;forafamilyoffourwithtwochildren under the age of 18, it was $23,600.The ratio of low income residents to high income residentsin Fort Lauderdale (0.5) is ranked as the third highest in theUnited State by the U.S. Census Bureau.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYTotal Employment ('000s)% change Total employment has continued to increase since theeconomic recession of 2008 and is projected to increase atan average annual rate of 1.7% through 2018 by Moody’s$150,000 -$199 999$200,000+6%Households by IncomeEconomy.ComAccess to both domestic and international markets with threeairports in close proximity, including significant access to LatinAmerica and the CaribbeanAttthldithit lit ti lbi<$15,00017%$15,000 -$24,99914%$75,000 -$99,9999%$100,000 -$149,9999%$199,9995%Agatewaytotheworldwithvitalinternationalbusinessexpertise and the third largest concentration of consular corpsin the United StatesAs home to more than 150 corporate headquarters, GreaterFort Lauderdale is a major business center14%$25,000 -$34,99912%$35,000 -$49,99914%$50,000 -$74,99916%9%FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 14Fort Lauderdale offers a highly favorable tax climate forbusiness and no state income tax14% HiMktCulture Arts & RecreationCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AT A GLANCE………………………………………………………………….Housing Market………………………………………………………………….Culture, Arts & RecreationFort Lauderdale represents the definition of outstanding quality of life,highlighted by a semi-tropical climate, natural beauty and array ofcultural, entertainment and educational amenities. With over 3,000 hoursofsunshineeachyear,FortLauderdaleBeachisaninternationalHousing Characteristicsofsunshineeachyear,FortLauderdaleBeachisaninternationaldestination for recreation, relaxation and enjoyment.Renter-Occupied UnitsOwner-Occupied Units75,000 Housing Units in 2012Fort Lauderdale median home value = $157,000 vs. $136,000 in the State of FloridaFort Lauderdale also offers an outstanding quality of life, highlighted by a semi‐tropical climate, rich natural beauty and array of cultural, entertainment and educational amenities. Blessed with 7Miles of Public Beachp48%52%5,000 new downtown housing units under construction/ plannedin 201410% of Fort Lauderdale homes are valued > $500,000over 3,000 hours of sunshine each year and pleasant year‐round ocean breezes, world‐famous Fort7Miles of Public Beach165Miles of Navigable Waterways85Public Parksin 2014$500,000Fort Lauderdale Housing Values(% of Total Stock)25%<$100KThe Riverwalk serves as the cornerstoneof the City's arts, science, culturalfff972.5Acres of Public Parks200Boat Slips and Moorings47%$100K-$250K18%$250K-$500K5%$500K-$750K2%$750K-$1 Mand historic district whichfeatures the Broward Centerfor the PerformingArts, Museum of Discovery and Science, Museum of Art and Old FortLauderdale Village and Museum.Las Olas Boulevard is Fort Lauderdale's fashion, fine dining andentertainment anchor. In addition, the City's downtown area is home toBrowardCommunityCollegeFloridaAtlanticUniversityFlorida2%$$3%$1 Million +Fort Lauderdale offers diverse housing choices to serve a range of FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 15BrowardCommunityCollege,FloridaAtlanticUniversity,FloridaInternational University, the Broward County Main Library, federal, countyand school district offices.gghousehold incomes MACRO-LEVEL ECONOMIC TRENDS1“More than $3 Billion of public diti t tiTiillikfthiFtLddlVi it tiitdtith ktand private investment is underway in downtown Fort Lauderdale in 2014”– Chris Wren, Executive Director, Fort Lauderdale Downtown Tourism willremainakey source ofgrowthinFortLauderdale.Visitationisexpectedtorisethankstothe Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport’s $2.3 billion investment to expand its runwayand terminal.Tourism from Latin America and the Caribbean is expected to increase as Jet Blue plans to add moredaily flights to these routes. Visits from Europe will also rise as Norwegian Air Shuttle adds flights toLondoninJuly2014Development Authority (DDA)LondoninJuly2014.Housing prices have increased for six straight quarters moving toward recovering some of the homeequity that was lost in the 2008 economic downtown.Substantial construction activity and spillover growth from Miami will enable Fort Lauderdale’seconomic performance to outpace the national economic growth rate in the near term. Proximity toMiami will be a long-term asset, as will as the metro’s own healthy tourism traffic, above-averagepopulation gains relative to the nation’s, and steadily increasing international trade.Finally, Fort Lauderdale’s finance and insurance industry will continue to rebound fuelling growth inhigh-value professional services job creation.Fort Lauderdale’s Economic Strengths: Approximately 5 000 Downtown housing Fort Lauderdale s Economic Strengths: Strong ties to international trade via Latin America boosts business revenuesSpillover of growth from Miami tourism and trade risingApproximately 5,000 Downtown housing units planned/under construction in 2014All Aboard Florida’s new station constructionFort Lauderdale’s Economic Challenges:Emerging high tech/medical tech ecosystem hub taking rootInfrastructure improvements increase Fort Lauderdale’s trade flows and airport traffic, exceeding projectionsWeak for-sale housing market will continue to challenge development amdredevelopment investmentForeclosures will continue to weigh on housing prices and construction exceeding projectionsWeakening Dollar will boost further tourism Highly attractive tourism destination serves as key economic engine boosting private itt d ll t housing prices and construction Business confidence still slow to achieve full recovery Rising insurance premiums will boost living costs and challenge Fort Lauderdale’s ll t f d i b iFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN16investment and local tax revenuesoverall cost of doing business1 Moody’s Economy.com 2013 Metro-Précis Report, City of Fort Lauderdale; Willdan, 2014. ECONOMIC TRENDS – TARGET INDUSTRIES“The success of any city in id l tib dFort Lauderdale’s economic recovery has shifted into high gear.Over the last 12 months,only five of the 51 metro areas with more than 1 million residents added jobs at a fasterrate.In 2013, growth was strongest in construction; builders and contractors make up just5%oftheworkforcebutaccountedfor31%ofnetnewhireseconomic development is based on its ability to strategically utilize its resources and align them with the wishes of its business leaders and citizens. As a small business 5%oftheworkforcebutaccountedfor31%ofnetnewhires.The City of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, the Broward Metropolitan PlanningOrganization, and the Port Everglades Port Authority are investing nearly $1 Billion ininfrastructure improvements for the 21stcentury, including:The Wave Streetcarand citizens. As a small business owner who works closely with the local real estate development community a focused, forward-thinking plan is something that is impressi e to o r clients”TourismVisitor and tourism activity Greater Fort Lauderdale nearly doubled during 1996 to 2012 — from 6.15 million visitors in 1996 to more than 12 million visitors in 201278% f i i t f d ti k t d 22% f i t ti l Florida All Aboard Florida Railroad StationsPort Everglades Panamax ExpansionBased on economic trends, these major public infrastructure investments will spur catalyticeconomicgrowthinthefollowingtargetindustriesimpressive to our clients”. —Jason Crush, Crush Law P.A.Chair, Fort Lauderdale Economic Development Advisory Board78% of passengers originate from domestic markets and 22% from international marketseconomicgrowthinthefollowingtargetindustries.Visitor IndustryVisitor spending in the Fort Lauderdale/Broward County market totaled $9.8 billion in2012, a significant increase over the previous year’s $9 billionVisitors offriends and relatives account fora significant amount ofspending (estimatedat approximately $5.7 billion in additional annual visitor expendituresThe domestic/ international visitor mix isa significant drive of retail spending;international visitors tend to spend more on retail goods than domestic visitorsAildtiittf$350ftthttlti t dAssuming average sales productivityrates of$350persquarefoot,thetotalestimatedannual visitor spending of $15.5 billion translates into substantial spending power onhotels/lodging, retail/dining/entertainment, taxis, car rentals and other local economicbenefitsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN17 “llii ”ECONOMIC TRENDS – TARGET INDUSTRIESMarine IndustryOne of the area's largest industries andemployment sectors: Creates more than134,000 jobsMotorola Mobility (slated to be acquiredby Google) Research in Motion and xGTechnologyForeign Trade & Investment“All-America City 2014”–National Civic League Estimated economic impact: $10.7 billionRepresenting $3.7 billion in wages andearnings annuallyFort Lauderdale’sInternational Boat ShowNearly 92,000 jobs — or 4.7 percent ofall private jobs — in South Florida areprovided by foreign-owned companies,according to the Brookings InstituteBditt tifiiiwis the world’s largest in-water boat show—generating an economic impact of $650millionTechnologyBrowardisattractingforeign companiesina diverse array of high value sectorsincluding medical devices, aviation andlogisticsThe Brookings Institute reports thatSouth Florida is home to more than 6,000high technology firmsA recent report by TechAmerica rankedFlorida fourth in the nation with 292,300technologyjobsmergers and acquisitions account for38,000 jobs in the region provided byforeign-owned companiesMore than 40% of local businesses areengaged in,orsupportinginternationaltechnologyjobsMore than 75,000 of high-tech workerswere employed in the Miami-FortLauderdale metro areaAlargeclusterofcloud technology/mobilegg,pp gcommerceggycommunications companies are alllocated in proximity including Citrix,Eyecast, Foxconn, General Dynamics,FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN18 “All-America City, 2014”ECONOMIC TRENDS – TARGET INDUSTRIESFort Lauderdale – Hollywood international AirportEmploys 12,500 on-airport employeesSupports more than 23.6 million annualpassengers—National Civic League pppgAverages 621 commercial flights on 30 airlines and 125 private flights dailyGenerates total annual employment equal to 135,000 jobs and $3.5 billion in wages(including direct, indirect, induced multiplier effect)Generates a total annual economic impact of $10.6 billion (Florida Department ofTttiIMPLANEiM d li )TransportationIMPLANEconomicModeling)Port EvergladesThe Port accounts for nearly $26 billion in business activitySupports11700jobslocallyandmorethan200000statewideSupports11,700jobslocallyandmorethan200,000statewideResponsible for generating $729 million in state and local taxesPort Everglades is the world's third busiest cruise port after PortMiami and Port Canaveral,with more than 3.7 million annual cruise passengers in 2013It is Florida’s leading cargo container port and ranks No. 12 in the United StatesSouth Florida’s main seaport for receiving petroleum products, including gasoline, jet fueland ethanolThese positive economic trends are a clear indicator of FtLddl’ l dl tiiFort Lauderdale’s role and location as an economic engine of the region – evidence of where the public sector has successfully made strategic infrastructure investments to attract private investment and a high lit l b fFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN19quality labor force. III. Economic Benchmarking DashboardFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN20 COMPETITIVE CONTEXT“Top 10 Best Places to Move in 2014”–SML National MovingCOMPETITIVE CONTEXTThe Economic Development Strategic Action Plan Team undertook an exhaustive review of the most compelling economic indicators for those cities considered either site selection competitors or offering exemplary, innovative examples of sustainable economic development and public ECONOMIC BENCHMARKING examples of sustainable economic development and public policies. Those cities are:Austin, TXDaytona Beach, FLMemphis TNOrlando, FLSavannah, GATampa FLDASHBOARDPost Great Recession, communities nationwide are focused on how toevolve and compete – to achieve sustainable economic prosperity.Throughoutthelong-term,large-scaleVisionPlanningprocess,CityEach of these cities offersgeographic,demographic andMemphis, TNMiami, FLNashville, TNTampa, FLVirginia Beach, VAoug oueoge,agesca eVsoagp ocess,Cyofficials engaged the full spectrum of community perspectives toproduce a cutting edge implementation tool designed to yield tangibleresults. One of the cornerstones of the plan is the goal, “We areProsperous.”The City of Fort Lauderdale understands that residents, businesses,ggp,gpeconomic characteristics similar to Fort Lauderdale from apopulation, trade, and tourism market perspective.The results of this economiccompetitive assessmentindicatedevelopers, investor and visitors have a choice about where to locate,invest, spend a dollar, send a child to school, or visit.To better understand how to achieve the City’s Fast Forward Vision ofbeing a ‘Community of Choice’, the EDSAP process evaluated the Cityof Fort Lauderdale’s current economic competitiveness within theflldldpthat Fort Lauderdale is ranked inthetop fourin four out of fiveindices when compared to theperformanceofninecohortcitiescontext ofmultiple ‘Economic Prosperity’ indicators, including:performanceofninecohortcities.To continually improve ourcompetitive ranking, the EconomicDevelopmentStrategicActionPlanUnemployment RatesInfrastructure InvestmentTax RatesQuality of LifeEnergy CostsLabor CostsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 21DevelopmentStrategicActionPlanproposes 13 key initiatives.Labor Force EducationOffice Rents ECONOMIC BENCHMARKING RESULTSF t L d d l ’ 2014 i b h ki t i di t ili t titi b d Fort Lauderdale’s 2014 economic benchmarking assessment indicates a resilient, competitive economy based on a series of key indicators comparing the City to nine other communities:Economic Performance: 3rdWorkforce: 3rddLivability: 8thBusiness Environment: 4thA detailed explanation of each index follows these summary results. Note each index is scaled 0 to 100. Economic1st 2nd3rd4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10thInnovation: 2ndEconomic Performance Index93 72655146432924149Austin, TX Nashville, TNFort Lauderdale, FLVirginia Beach, VATampa, FL Orlando, FL Miami, FL Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TNWorkforced1st 2nd3rd4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th96 776464 64 48 47 27 24 3IndexAustin, TX Orlando, FLFort Lauderdale, FLNashville, TN Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VAMiami, FL Savannah, GA Memphis, TNDaytona Beach, FLInnovation Index1st2nd3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th1005251 43 38 35 20 16 14 11Austin TXFort Lauderdale, Tampa FLOrlando FLVirginia Beach, Nashville TNDaytona Beach, Miami FLMemphis TNSavannah GAAustin, TXFLTampa, FLOrlando, FLVANashville, TNFLMiami, FLMemphis, TNSavannah, GALivability Index1st 2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th61 595752514542403727Nashville, TNVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GA Austin, TX Tampa, FL Memphis, TNDaytona Beach, FLFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Miami, FLBusiness Environment Index1st 2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th72 716865655757434339Austin, TX Nashville, TN Savannah, GAFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TN Miami, FLFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 22 “lfECONOMIC PERFORMANCERobust economic growth measured by increasing household incomes and private sector job growth fueled by tangible connections with public, private, educational, institutional and cultural partners. “Best Places for Business and Careers”–Forbes MagazinePer capita incomeis the mean money income received in the past 12 monthscomputed for every man, woman, and child in a geographic area. It is a proxy forliving standards within a region. For additional information on how per capitaincome is measured visit http://quickfacts.census.gov.Unemployment Ratemeasures the percentage ofthe total laborforce that isunemployed and actively seeking employment. Data are preliminary estimates forNovember 2013.Gross Regional Product (GRP)is the total dollar value of all goods and servicesddifitiidItifthiidi tdtproducedoveraspecifictime period.Itisoneoftheprimaryindicators usedtogauge the health of a region’s economy, as it represents the size of the economy(expressed as a growth rate). GRP data are only available at the MetropolitanStatistical Area (MSA) level. Fort Lauderdale is part of the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL (MSA). For this reason, Fort Lauderdale is shown tied withMiamiinthirdplaceMiamiinthirdplace.Growth of Private Sector Jobsindicates the creation of economic opportunities forresidents of a region.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN23 ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORSFtLddlk3dillifdtthhi h titifllitiFortLauderdaleranks3rdinoveralleconomicperformanceduetothehighestpercapitaincome ofallcitiesanalyzed, coupled with a relatively low unemployment rate (5.6%), a very healthy Gross Regional Product AnnualGrowth Rate of 3.1%, and a private sector growth rate of 6.4%.01st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th 10thEconomic Performance IndexIndex Range: 0 to 1095736553474430251411Austin, TX Nashville, TNFort Lauderdale, FLVirginia Beach, VATampa, FL Orlando, FL Miami, FL Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TNEconomic Performance IndicatorsPer Capita Income2010-20121st2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th$34,011$31,431 $30,880 $28,262 $26,412 $24,936 $20,874 $20,104 $18,889 $17,552Score: 100Score: 84 Score: 81 Score: 65 Score: 54 Score: 45 Score: 20 Score: 16 Score: 8 Score: 0Fort Lauderdale FLVirginia Beach, VAAustin, TX Tampa, FL Nashville, TN Orlando, FL Memphis, TN Miami, FL Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLLauderdale, FLVAppFLSource: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average per Capita Income = $27,385Unemployment Rate20131st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th4.9%5.3%5.6%6.5%6.7%7.7%8.0%8.9%9.3% 10.8%Score: 100 Score: 93Score: 88Score: 73 Score: 69 Score: 53 Score: 47 Score: 32 Score: 25 Score: 0Austin TXVirginia Beach, Fort Nashville TNOrlando FLTampa FLDaytona Beach, Savannah GAMiami FLMemphis TNAustin, TXVALauderdale, FLNashville, TNOrlando, FLTampa, FLFLSavannah, GAMiami, FLMemphis, TNSource: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. Unemployment Rate: 7.35%GRP Annual Growth2009-20121st2nd3rd Tied3rd Tied 5th6th7th8th9th10th7.0%5.6%3.1%3.14% 3.08% 2.8%2.7%2.6%2.5%1.2%Score: 100 Score: 76Score: 34Score: 34 Score: 33 Score: 28 Score: 27 Score: 25 Score: 23 Score: 0Austin, TXNashville, TNFort LddlFLMiami, FLSavannah, GATampa, FLOrlando, FLVirginia Beach, VAMemphis, TNDaytona Beach, FLust ,Nas v lle, NLauderdale, FLa,Sava a , Gapa,Ola do,VAeps,NFLMeasured at the Metro Level Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis U.S. GDP (metropolitan regions) Growth Rate = 3.9%Private Sector Job Annual Growth2009-20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th15.4% 14.2% 7.8%7.5%6.4%6.2%5.2%2.8%2.6%1.3%Score: 100 Score: 91 Score: 46 Score: 44Score: 36Score: 35 Score: 28 Score: 10 Score: 9 Score: 0Austin TXNashville TNMiami FLTampa FLFort Orlando FLSavannah GADaytona Beach, Virginia Beach, Memphis TNFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 24Austin, TXNashville, TNMiami, FLTampa, FLLauderdale, FLOrlando, FLSavannah, GAFLVAMemphis, TNMeasured at the Metro Level Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. Private Sector Jobs Annual Growth = 5.3% WORKFORCE“iiifWORKFORCEAmple supply of talented and skilled workforce to support the target industriesof advanced materials and high tech manufacturing; aerospace and aviation;cloud technology and mobile communications; corporate headquarters; lifesciences; marine; and international trade and logistics.“Happiest Cities for Young Professionals”–Forbes MagazinegWorkforce growthis an indicator that the number of eligible workers within a community is increasing. Theavailability of skilled workers is an important consideration for existing businesses looking to expand as wellas for new businesses looking to relocate to a community. The U.S. Federal reserve notes that "Growth in thelabor force is one of two key determinants of the nation’s maximum sustainable, or potential, rate ofeconomic expansion. For more than five decades, a growing labor force provided a sizeable boost to thettiltfiithUS"FRBSFEiLttNb22007potentialrateofexpansionintheU.S. economy."FRBSFEconomicLetter,November2,2007.Adults with Bachelor’s Degreesmeasures the percentage of adults (25 years and older) who have a collegedegree or higher. A college education prepares individuals for highly productive, human capital-intensiveoccupations, and also enhances their ability to adapt to new working environments. A high percentage ofadults with college degrees is an indicator of both thepresence of industries that demand such workers andameasureofaregion'sabilitytoeducateorattractskilledworkersameasureofaregionsabilitytoeducateorattractskilledworkers.Prime Workforceis defined as adults aged 25 to 54 years old. This subset of the population has a higherlabor participation rate and is less sensitive to economic downturns and cyclical changes in the economicenvironment.Prime Workforce Migrationmeasures the number of adults age 25 to 54 who relocated to a particular citywithin the last 12 months, as a percentage of total population.Agreaterrate indicates a potential increasein employment opportunities and a community's ability to attract people.The City of Fort Lauderdale should also consider further expanding existing Workforce One trainingprograms (and participate in annual workforce summits) with area employers, universities, and other entities.ATargetedIndustryGrowthStrategyisunderwayintheGreaterFortLauderdaleareaQualifiedtargetATargetedIndustryGrowthStrategyisunderwayintheGreaterFortLauderdalearea.Qualifiedtargetindustry growth companies are eligible for a wide variety of business incentives, workforce training grants,and other business assistance programs. The City of Fort Lauderdale should consider dedicating additionalresources to attract and monitor site selection leads by procuring business development software (SalesForceor other) and ensuring that ongoing lead capture tactics determine why (or why not) companies choose torelocate or expand in Fort Lauderdale.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN25 WORKFORCE QUALITY INDICATORSFortLauderdaleranks3rdinoverallworkforcequalityduetoahealthyworkforcegrowthrateof47%,the3rdhighestFortLauderdaleranks3inoverallworkforcequalityduetoahealthyworkforcegrowthrateof4.7%,the3highestshare of Adults with Bachelor’s Degrees (34.4%), the 5thhighest prime workforce population (44.8%), and the 3rdhighestprime workforce migration rate (11%).ndexe: 0 1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10thWorkforce InIndex Rangeto 1009777656463474728223Austin, TX Orlando, FLFort Lauderdale, FLNashville, TN Tampa, FL Miami, FLVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GA Memphis, TNDaytona Beach, FLWorkforce Quality IndicatorsWorkforce Growth2010-20131st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th7.1%5.6%4.7%4.3%3.9%3.4%3.0%2.8%0.1%-0.8%Score: 100 Score: 81Score: 70Score: 65 Score: 60 Score: 54 Score: 48 Score: 45 Score: 12 Score: 0Austin, TX Tampa, FLFort Lauderdale, FLNashville, TN Orlando, FL Miami, FLVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TNSource: U.S. Census BureauSource: U.S. Census Bureau Adults with Bachelor's Degrees2010-20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th44.9% 34.5%34.4%32.6%32.5%32.1%25.1%23.7%22.4%18.2%Score: 100 Score: 61Score: 61Score: 54 Score: 54 Score: 52 Score: 26 Score: 21 Score: 16 Score: 0Austin, TX Nashville, TNFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FLVirginia Beach, VAOrlando, FL Savannah, GA Memphis, TN Miami, FLDaytona Beach, FLSource: U S Census Bureau U S Average = 28 5%Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 28.5%Prime Workforce2010-20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th48.1% 47.7%45.9%45.6%44.8%44.1%43.7%41.1%39.4%35.4%Score: 100 Score: 97 Score: 83 Score: 80Score: 74Score: 69 Score: 65 Score: 45 Score: 31 Score: 0Austin, TX Orlando, FL Miami, FL Nashville, TNFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FLVirginia Beach, VAMemphis, TN Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLSource: U S Census Bureau U S Average 40 7%Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 40.7%Prime Workforce Migration2010-20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th14.7% 13.6%11.0%10.8%10.5%9.8%8.6%8.6%7.5%6.8%Score: 100 Score: 86Score: 54Score: 51 Score: 47 Score: 38 Score: 23 Score: 23 Score: 9 Score: 0Orlando, FL Austin, TXFort Lauderdale, FLNashville, TN Tampa, FL Miami, FL Memphis, TNVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GADaytona Beach, FLSource: U S Census Bureau U S Average = 6 8%FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 26Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 6.8%Sources: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/01/art3full.pdf INNOVATION“lliINNOVATIONAn environment of innovation through entrepreneurial business developmentand small business incubation linkages to a range of national, regional andlocal programs managed by a dedicated City of Fort Lauderdale staff resourcefocused on increasingthe number ofsustained high tech and information and“Top 10 Small American Cities of the Future”–Foreign Direct Investment Magazineggcommunication technology (ICT) start ups. A destination for new residents andworkers with advanced/high tech degrees with the capacity to increase thenumber of patents issued to Fort Lauderdale companies.Percentage of Workers in Science Industriesrepresents the share of the populationinvolvedinprofessionalscientificandtechnicalservicesindustriesginvolvedinprofessional,scientific,andtechnicalservicesindustries.Percentage of Adults with Advanced Degreesmeasures the percentage of adults (25 yearsand older) with advanced degrees (i.e., masters, professional, or PhDs.)Patents per 100,000 Residentsmeasure the volume of new patents in a jurisdiction asreported by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Technology Monitoring Teamavailable at http://www.uspto.gov.The High Tech and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Start Up Densityindex is a measure of startup density based on location quotients for new high-tech andICTfirmsThelocationquotientmeasurestheconcentrationofhightechorICTstartupsinICTfirms.Thelocationquotientmeasurestheconcentrationofhigh-techorICTstartupsina region relative to the average across the entire U.S.A value of one indicates that a region has the same density of startups as does the U.S. asa whole. Density measures that are greaterthan one indicate above average densities.The opposite is true for values less than one. Data is available only at the metropolitanlevel (MSA). More information about this data source is available from the KauffmanFoundation.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN27 INNOVATION INDICATORSFort Lauderdale ranks 2rdin Innovation due to 5thhighest share of workforce in science industries, the 2ndhighestltifdltithddid(128%)th3rdhi h tttiftt100000population ofadultswithadvancedsciencedegrees(12.8%),the3rdhighestconcentration ofpatentsper100,000residents, and 2ndhighest “high tech” and information and communications technology (ICT) density.tionex: 0 to 1001st2nd3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10thInnovaIndeIndex Range:1005352 45 40 37 20 18 17 13Austin, TXFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FL Orlando, FLVirginia Beach, VANashville, TNDaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TN Miami, FL Savannah, GAInnovation Indicators s% of workers in Science Industries2005-20091st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th10.4% 9.1%8.5% 8.2%7.5%6.6% 6.4% 4.4% 4.0% 2.9%Score: 100 Score: 82 Score: 74 Score: 70Score: 61Score: 49 Score: 46 Score: 21 Score: 16 Score: 0Austin, TX Tampa, FL Orlando, FLVirginia Beach, VAFort Lauderdale, FLDaytona Beach, FLNashville, TN Savannah, GA Memphis, TN Miami, FLSource: ESRI Business AnalystSource: ESRI Business Analyst of Adults with AdvancedDegrees2010-20121st2nd Tied2rd Tied 4th 5th 6th 7th Tied 7th Tied 9th 10th16.4%12.8%12.8% 12.4% 11.4% 11.0% 8.5% 8.5% 8.2% 6.2%Score: 100Score: 65Score: 65 Score: 61 Score: 51 Score: 47 Score: 23 Score: 23 Score: 20 Score: 0Austin, TXFort Lauderdale, FLNashville, TN Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VAOrlando, FL Memphis, TN Savannah, GA Miami, FLDaytona Beach, FL%FLVAFLSource: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average=10.7atents per 100,000 Residents2009-20111st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th204765539373130282315Score: 100 Score: 32Score: 21Score: 13 Score: 12 Score: 8 Score: 8 Score: 7 Score: 4 Score: 0Fort LauderdaleDaytona BeachVirginia BeachPa1R2Austin, TX Memphis, TNFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FL Nashville, TN Orlando, FL Miami, FLDaytona Beach, FLVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GAMeasured at the County Level Source: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 343Tech and Startup ensity20101st2nd3rd Tied 3rd Tied 5th 6th 7th Tied 7th Tied 9th 10th1.75 1.25 1.05 1.05 0.90 0.80 0.65 0.65 0.45 0.30 Score: 100Score: 66Score: 52 Score: 52 Score: 41 Score: 34 Score: 24 Score: 24 Score: 10 Score: 0FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 28High ICT DeAustin, TXFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Tampa, FL Miami, FLVirginia Beach, VADaytona Beach, FLNashville, TN Savannah, GA Memphis, TNMeasured at the Metro Level Source: Kauffman Foundation Research Series U.S. Average = 1.0 LIVABILITY“diAn economy committed to promoting a high quality of life through living wages; a mix ofhousing available to the full spectrum of incomes;public transit options connecting residents toemployment centers and visitors to uniqueretail/dining/entertainment offerings;walkable/bikeable infrastructure; public investment in cultural arts, parks, recreation and openspaces;safeandcleanurbanareas“Most Outstanding Green Government”–U.S. Green Building Council South Floridaspaces;safeandcleanurbanareas.Poverty levelis an indicator of the income equality of a community as determined by the U.S. CensusBureau. In 2013, the national average annual threshold income for a single person younger than 65years old in 2013 was approximately $12,000; for a family of four with two children under the age of18, it was $23,600.fd()fklldbhlfdCost ofLiving Index(COLI)is a measure ofkeyliving costs compiledbytheCouncilfor Community andEconomic Research related to the relative cost of goods and services weighted by different types ofconsumer expenditures in urban U.S. households. COLI data is recognized by the U.S. Census Bureau,U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the President's Council of Economic Advisors. The index comparesthe cost of living in more than 300 U.S. cities.Vi l tCi100000RidtitdbthFBIUifCiRti(UCR)PViolentCrimes per100,000ResidentsisreportedbytheFBIUniformCrimeReporting(UCR)Program.Violent crime is a measure of a jurisdictions relative safety and is considered a key indicator for siteselection and labor force recruitment targets.Housing Affordabilityis reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. Housing affordability is measured as thosehouseholds paying 30% or less of total gross income on housing expenses (including utilities and relatedhomeownersfeesandexpenses)homeownersfeesandexpenses).Walkability Indicatoris the walk score as computed by Walkscore.com. Walk score is as follows: 90–100 Walker’s Paradise - Daily errands do not require a car; 70–89 Very Walkable - Most errands can beaccomplished on foot; 50–69 Somewhat Walkable - Some errands can be accomplished on foot; 25–49Car-Dependent - Most errands require a car; 0–24 Car-Dependent - Almost all errands require a car.Average Commute(in minutes) from home to place of work and work to home as reported by the U.S.Census Bureau.Employment in the Artsis a proxy for access to cultural activities in the community. This indicatormeasures the number of people employed in arts-related industries for every100,000 residents. Arts-related industries include: Arts Schools and Services, Museum and Collections, Performing Arts, andVi lAt/Ph t hDtfthCtiRtddbthAifthAtVisualArts/Photography.DataarefromtheComparativeReportsproducedbytheAmericansfortheArtsusing data from Duns and Bradstreet (2012) at the MSA level (data are not available at the City level).FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN29 LIVABILITY INDICATORSFort Lauderdale ranks 8rdin overall livabilityrelative to the othercities benchmarked,primarilydue to the highrateofypygpoverty (5th/ 20.4% of the population) and a high cost of living (10th). Fort Lauderdale ranked 5thin terms of violentcrimes per 100,000 residents. These indictors highlight the economic pressures resulting from a diminished middleclass and the need to invest in entrepreneurial business incubation/business development programs to create highquality, high-value job creation activity.vability Indexex Range: 0 to 1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th61585451514140393827Virginia BeachFort LauderdaleDaytona BeachLivIndNashville, TNVirginia Beach, VASavannah, GA Tampa, FL Austin, TX Memphis, TN Orlando, FLFort Lauderdale, FLDaytona Beach, FLMiami, FLLivability Indicators Rate0121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th83%19 9%20 0%20 1%20 4%22 7%27 3%27 4%31 5%31 8%Poverty R2010-208.3%19.9%20.0%20.1%20.4%22.7%27.3%27.4%31.5%31.8%Score: 100 Score: 51 Score: 50 Score: 50Score: 49Score: 39 Score: 19 Score: 19 Score: 1 Score: 0Virginia Beach, VANashville, TN Orlando, FL Austin, TXFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FL Memphis, TN Savannah, GA Miami, FLDaytona Beach, FLSource: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 14.9%x1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10thCost of Living IndexQ1 201385.2 87.191.992.5 92.7 94.5 96.3 100.0 106.8110.1Score: 100 Score: 92 Score: 73 Score: 71 Score: 70 Score: 63 Score: 55 Score: 41 Score: 13Score: 0Memphis, TN Nashville, TN Savannah, GA Tampa, FL Austin, TXDaytona Beach, FLOrlando, FLVirginia Beach, VAMiami, FLFort Lauderdale, FLSource: Council for Community and Economic Research U.S. Average = 100Violent Crimesper 100,000 Residents20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th169 380409616903 1,017 1,156 1,172 1,216 1,750 Score: 100 Score: 87 Score: 85 Score: 72Score: 54Score: 46 Score: 38 Score: 37 Score: 34 Score: 0Virginia Beach, VASavannah, GA Austin, TX Tampa, FLFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FLDaytona Beach, FLMiami, FL Nashville, TN Memphis, TNFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 30Source: FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program U.S. Average = 3871/ According to a 2011 Pew Charitable Trust study, the middle class may be defined as a four-person household earning $32,900 to $64,000. LIVABILITY INDICATORS, CONTINUEDFortLauderdale’slivabilityperformanceischallengedbyhousingaffordability(50%ofresidentspaymorethan30%ofFortLauderdale slivabilityperformanceischallengedbyhousingaffordability(50%ofresidentspaymorethan30%ofincome on total housing costs), and average commute time(24.2 minutes). However, Fort Lauderdale ranks 2nd inwalkability and 4th in employment in the arts – two of the key livability indicators tracked by Livability.com, anorganization that explores what makes small to mid-sized cities great places to live, work and visit by examining issuesrelated to livability such as walkability, cultural amenities, transportation, urban planning and sustainability.HousingAffordability2010-20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th39%41%42%47%47% 48% 48%50%52%61%Score: 100 Score: 90 Score: 87 Score: 66 Score: 65 Score: 59 Score: 58Score: 50Score: 41 Score: 0Vi i i B hDt B hFtL ddlA2Nashville, TN Austin, TXVirginia Beach, VAMemphis, TN Tampa, FLDaytona Beach, FLSavannah, GAFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Miami, FLPercentage of Households spending 30% or more of their income on housing Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 37.2%abilityoreary 20131st2nd3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th Tied 7th Tied 9th 10th76 54 46 41 39 35 33 33 31 26 WalkaScoFebruaScore: 100Score: 56Score: 40 Score: 30 Score: 26 Score: 18 Score: 14 Score: 14 Score: 10 Score: 0Miami, FLFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FL Savannah, GA Orlando, FL Austin, TXDaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TNVirginia Beach, VANashville, TNSource: Walkscore.com U.S. Average = N/Amute s)1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10thAverage Comm(in minutes201219.119.821.522.422.723.224.2 24.526.427.9Score: 100 Score: 92 Score: 73 Score: 62 Score: 59 Score: 53Score: 42Score: 39 Score: 17 Score: 0Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TN Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VANashville, TNFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Miami, FL Austin, TXSource: U.S. Census U.S. Average = 25.4 minutesEmploymentin the Arts20121st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th1,524 875664657579556509469468376Score: 100 Score: 43 Score: 25Score: 24Score: 18 Score: 16 Score: 12 Score: 8 Score: 8 Score: 0Nashville, TN Austin, TX Orlando, FLFort Lauderdale, FLMiami, FL Memphis, TN Savannah, GAVirginia Beach, VATampa, FLDaytona Beach, FLdh lli fh dilblFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 31Measured at the County level Source: Americans for the Arts and U.S. Census U.S. Average = Not Available HEALTHY BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT“A healthy business environment is characterized by a highly competitive cost of doingbusiness related to land use regulatory controls (planning/zoning approvals andconstruction permitting), perceived investmentrisk, and sustainable business growth rates.In the case of Fort Lauderdale, the City is focused on fostering the market conditions thatwilleffectivelycreateandsustainnewsmall/mediumsizedbusinesses–inparticular“Top 10 Best Downtowns in 2014”–Livability.comwilleffectivelycreateandsustainnewsmall/mediumsizedbusinessesinparticularretail/dining/entertainment establishments.Establishment Growthmeasures the increase in the number of businesses in each countybetween 2010 and 2011. It is a proxy for the ability of each region to fosterentrepreneurship and attract new businesses to the area. Data are from the CountyBiPttfthUSCBBusinessPatternsfromtheU.S.CensusBureau.Concentration of Mid-Size Businessesmeasures the number of mid-size businesses per10,000 residents. Within the U.S. economy, small and medium size businesses account forthe vast majority of firms and approximately half the gross domestic product (GDP). Mid-size businesses are defined as establishments with 10 to 99 employees.City Credit Ratingmeasures the City’s ability to maintain a high quality credit rating isessential to ensure a City's ability to access the most cost-effective world capital marketswill continue as it needs to borrow funds for capital purposes. From a private sectorperspective, a city with a high credit quality credit rating is an indicator that the City maybe an attractivepartnerforpublic-privatepartnerships,orsimplybetterable to financeppppp,pyneeded infrastructure. Moody's rating scale relative to other U.S. municipal or tax-exemptissuers or issues for long-term debt is as follows: Aaa - Issuers or issues rated Aaademonstrate the strongest creditworthiness relative to other U.S. municipal or tax-exemptissuers or issues; Aa - demonstrates very strong creditworthiness; A - Presents above-average creditworthiness. For a description of Moody's rating scale please seedwww.moodys.com.Business Densitymeasures the number of businesses per 10,000 residents at the CountyLevel as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN32 HEALTHY BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT“The Cost of Doing Businessmeasures the cost of doing business as reported by Moody'sAnalytics. The reported cost is relative to the U.S. 2013 Edition North American BusinessCost Review, Moody's Analytics.To better gauge regional economic prospects, Moody’s Analytics has developed a cost of“Top 10 Best Downtowns in 2014”–Livability.comdoing business index foreach MSA. The relative business cost index is composed oflaborcosts, tax burdens, energy costs, and office costs. Labor costs are measured by unit laborcosts, or earnings per dollar of output.Unit labor costs are determined for each three-digit NAICS industry for each MSA andcompared with unit laborcosts forthe same industries nationally.pyEnergy costs are measured by average cents per kilowatt-hour (Kwh) charged tocommercial and industrial users. Tax burdens are measured by total taxes and fees as apercent of total personal income in each metro area.Business contributions to unemployment and workers’ compensation programs are alsoincluded in the tax measure because they represent costs forlaborhired.Office costs are measured as the average price paid per square foot for class A officespace. In the overall business cost index, a state-specific component weight system hasbeen adopted to more accurately account for an area’s business cost structure.Ollbdh7%h15%hOn average across allmetro areas, taxburdenshave a7%weight, energy a15%weight,office rents a 27% weight, and unit labor costs a 51% weight. The index is configured sothat the cost of doing business nationally equals 100.An MSA with a cost index of 110 has business costs 10% above the national average; anindex of 90 means an MSA has business costs 10% below the national average.Fort Lauderdale ‘s Cost of Doing Business Index is 96 (indicating it is relatively lessexpensive to do business than the rest of the United States). However, six of the ninecohort cities benchmarked reported a lower cost of doing business (with Memphis at 85the lowest). The breakdown of these figures indicate that Fort Lauderdale’s labor, energyandofficespacecostsarestillrelativelylowerthantherestoftheUnitedStates.andofficespacecostsarestillrelativelylowerthantherestoftheUnitedStates.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN33 HEALTHY BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT INDICATORSFort Lauderdale’s healthy business environment ranks 4thdue to a relatively healthy business establishment growthrate (0.3% annually, or4th) coupled with a relatively lowerconcentration ofmid-sized businesses (55 businessesper 10,000 City of Fort Lauderdale residents, or 8th).ndexto 1001st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10thBusiness Environment InIndex Range: 0 t72716865655757434339Austin, TX Nashville, TN Savannah, GAFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TN Miami, FLBusiness Environment Indicators ent 1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th1.7%1.6%0.6%0.3%0.1%-0.5%-0.7%-0.9%-1.7%-2.7%EstablishmeGrowth2010-111.7%1.6%0.6%0.3%0.1%0.5%0.7%0.9%1.7%2.7%Score: 100 Score: 98 Score: 75Score: 68Score: 64 Score: 51 Score: 46 Score: 41 Score: 23 Score: 0Austin, TX Miami, FL Tampa, FLFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLVirginia Beach, VANashville, TN Memphis, TNMeasured at the County Level Source:Bureau CensusUS growth06%Measured at the County Level Source: Bureau Census U.S. growth = -0.6%entration of e Businesses20111st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th84777566666459555145Score: 100 Score: 81 Score: 76 Score: 53 Score: 53 Score: 47 Score: 35Score: 26Score: 15 Score: 0ConceMid-SizeNashville, TN Savannah, GA Austin, TX Memphis, TN Orlando, FLVirginia Beach, VATampa, FLFort Lauderdale, FLMiami, FLDaytona Beach, FLNumber of Mid-size businesses per 10,000 residents Measured at the County Level Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 58FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 34 HEALTHY BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVES, CONTINUEDFort Lauderdale’s healthy business environment further ranks 4thdue to the City’s credit rating (Aa1, or 3rdplace)and the highest business density rate (320 businesses per10,000 City ofFort Lauderdale residents). FortLauderdale’s overall business environment ranking is challenged by a relatively high cost of doing business (ranked7thdue to the relatively high cost of labor, energy and office space when compared to the cohort cities).Business Environment Indicators, Continueds Credit RatingFeb 20141st tied 1st tied3rd tied3rd tied 3rd tied 3 tied 7th tied 7th tied 7th tied 10thAaa AaaAa1Aa1 Aa1 Aa1 Aa2 Aa2 Aa2 A2Score: 100 Score: 100Score: 80Score: 80 Score: 80 Score: 80 Score: 60 Score: 60 Score: 60 Score: 0City'sFAustin, TXVirginia Beach, VAFort Lauderdale, FLOrlando, FL Tampa, FL Nashville, TNDaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TN Savannah, GA Miami, FLSource: Moody's (Seniormost Tax Backed Rating)y1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10thBusiness Density2011320301 287 287 279 270 263 244 236 211Score: 100Score: 83 Score: 70 Score: 70 Score: 62 Score: 55 Score: 48 Score: 31 Score: 23 Score: 0Fort Lauderdale, FLMiami, FL Nashville, TN Austin, TX Orlando, FL Savannah, GA Tampa, FLVirginia Beach, VADaytona Beach, FLMemphis, TNFLVAFLNumber of businesses per 10,000 residents Measured at the County Level Source: U.S. Census Bureau U.S. Average = 240Business1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th Tied7th Tied 9th10th85878889929396 96104107Cost of Doing B2011Score: 100 Score: 91 Score: 86 Score: 82 Score: 68 Score: 64Score: 50Score: 50 Score: 14 Score: 0Memphis, TN Savannah, GADaytona Beach, FLNashville, TNVirginia Beach, VAOrlando, FLFort Lauderdale, FLTampa, FL Austin, TX Miami, FLFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 35Measured at the MSA Level Source: Moody's Analytics U.S. Average = 100 IV. Proposed Economic Development Strategic ActionDevelopment Strategic Action Plan Initiatives FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN36 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVESIMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVESThe results of the economic benchmarking assessment form the basis of the Economic Development StrategicAction Plan’s implementation initiatives. In an effort to continuously improve the competitive position of the City ofFort Lauderdale as a place to live, work and play, the Department of Sustainable Development proposes to design,implementandmanagethefollowingeconomicdevelopmentinitiativesthataredesignedtoaddresslaggingEconomic Performance Initiativesimplementandmanagethefollowingeconomicdevelopmentinitiativesthataredesignedtoaddresslaggingperformance of key metrics when compared to other comparable cities. The EDSAP’s implementation will requireinvestment in personnel, capital andoperating expenditures. A detailed explanation of each initiative and theEDSAP’s estimated five-year cost and implementation recommendations are provided in the following discussion.Economic 1: Establish a Revolving Loan Fund Targeted for Retail/Entrepreneurial Development ActivityEconomic 2: Design, Implement & Manage an Expedited Planning Approvals Program for Qualified Sustainable Development ProjectsEconomic 3: Design, Implement & Manage a Qualified Target Industry Lead Capture Management SystemWorkforceInitiativesWorkforce InitiativesWorkforce 1: Sponsor Economic Gardening Pilot Program for 2nd Stage Entrepreneurial CompaniesWorkforce 2: Sponsor/Co-Sponsor a Soft Skills Training Program Targeting Qualified Target IndustriesInnovation InitiativesIti 1DiIl t& M Bi A l t PInnovation 1:Design,Implement& Manage a Business Accelerator ProgramInnovation 2: Sponsor the Kauffman Foundation FastTrac Program in Fort LauderdaleInnovation 3: Sponsor the Kauffman 1 Million Cups Pilot Program in Fort LauderdaleLivability InitiativesLi bilit 1Ad t f W E i t C t D t t th Ai t C ti C t S td th B hLivability 1:Advocate for Wave Expansion to Connect Downtown to the Airport, Convention Center, Seaportand the BeachLivability 2: Design, Implement & Manage an Urban Culture Curation ProgramHealthy Business Environment InitiativesBusiness 1: Design, Implement & Manage a Citywide Placemaking Marketing/Branding Campaign Bi 2DiI l t & M Cit id R t il R it tPFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 37Business 2:Design,Implement & Manage a Citywide Retail RecruitmentProgramBusiness 3: Conduct a Sub-Area Level Parking Assessment ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INITIATIVESTfthhFtLddl’tiftitithCithlditiTofurtherenhanceFortLauderdale’sstrong economicperformance competitiveness,theCityshouldinvestinadditional staffing and seed funding to support expansionof quality target industries, retail development, andentrepreneurial development activity.Key Staff/ PartnersProposed Initiatives Program Description Scale of ProgramFunding SourcesTime-frameEstablish a Revolving Loan Fund Targeted for A self-sustaining, low interest revolving loan for eligible capital improvements, machinery and equipment, and working capital for small businesses $500K in seed capital (matched by $1 million Local FinancialInstitutions, General Fund DDA, Chamber of Commerce, Uptown Development District, Economic 1:Fund Targeted for Retail/Entrepreneurial Development Activitywith less aggressive terms/venture capital start-upsto encourage job growth; local funding requires EDA Council vote and Economic Development Committee review(matched by $1 million from EDA) and private fundingGeneral Fund, CRA Districts, CDBG, and Airport FundMerchant Associations, Local Commercial Brokers, Property OwnersYear 1Hire an Expedited Planning dlCase worker with planning/zoning/economic development expertise to shepherd developer $$General Fund, ld dEconomic 2: and Development Case Workerdevelopment expertise to shepherd developer through the development approval process, connect to economic development tools1 FTE $60K-$80K Building Fund, CRADSD Year 1Economic 3:Design and Implement a Qualified Target Industry Ld Ct M t Hire two dedicated staff persons (Economic Development Program Manager and entry level Economic Development Program Coordinator) to d i d i l t b i d l t l d 1 FTE at $30K-$60; 1 FTE at $60K-80K + General Fund, CRA DSDYear 1 Lead Capture Management Systemdesign and implement a business development lead capture management system focused on Qualified Target Industry businesses.$software license costCRA FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 38 WORKFORCE QUALITY INITIATIVESTo furtherbolsterthe CityofFort Lauderdale’s workforcequalitycompetitiveness, the Cityshould sponsoranyqypypEconomic Gardening Pilot Program for 2ndstage entrepreneurial companies offered by the Edward LoweFoundation.ProposedInitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding Key Staff/ Time-Proposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramgSourcesyPartners frameEconomic Gardening is an economic development programfocusedonhelping“secondstage”companiesgrowThesefocusedonhelpingsecondstagecompaniesgrow.Theseemerging growth companies are defined as having $1 to $50million in sales and 10-99 employees. They have proof of product,proof of market and proof of management skills. They typically havethe potential for additional sustained growth but do not have accessto the sophisticated tools and concepts of larger companies.Approximately $5,000 for EconomicGardening Certifications:(General Track, Team Leader, andWeb/Social Media Training) in Year1l$4290iif5General Fund, Workforce 1:Sponsor Economic Gardening Pilot Program for 2nd Stage Entrepreneurial CompaniesThere is substantial research that indicates a substantial volume ofhigh quality/high value new jobs are generated by these types ofcompanies (up to 10% of all companies in most communities).Accelerating the growth potential of this highly productive group is avery efficient and effective economic development tactic forrebuilding the middle class.1plus$4,290xminimum of5Second Stage Companies covers: 36hours of direct technical assistance;fees for members committed toproviding the best service possiblefor your companies; the GreenhouseSoftwareSystem,asecureonline,CRA, CDBG, Airport Fund, Tourism Tax Allocation, DDA, Chamber, AlliGeneral Fund, CRA, Tourism Tax ReallocationYear 1-5The Pilot Program provides: research to help companies makedecisions in strategic areas (market research, industry trends,competitor intelligence, new product releases, GIS computer mapsof customers/competitors/potential markets/trade areas); searchengine optimization, web marketing, social media; and analysis infiveclassesofbusinessproblems(corestrategy;marketdynamics;SoftwareSystem,asecureonlineapplication and collaboration space;a virtual tutorial to help you navigatethe Greenhouse; and coordinationto schedule pilot project companiesupon acceptance.Alliancefiveclassesofbusinessproblems(corestrategy;marketdynamics;innovation; temperament; qualified sales leads).FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 39 WORKFORCE QUALITY INITIATIVES, CONTINUEDTo furtherbolsterthe City ofFort Lauderdale’s workforce quality competitiveness, the City should co-sponsortheBroward CareerSource Startup Workz entrepreneurial development/business acceleration program and sponsor asoft skills training program in partnership with area Qualified Target Industry (QTI) employers.Proposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding SourcesKey Staff/ PartnersTime-frame$5 000 iorce 2:Sponsor a Soft Skills Training Program According to CareerSource Broward and Collaborative Industry Forums, Fort Lauderdale companieshire for competence but fire for character. The prevailing labor pool has the qualifications and training, but lacks soft skills. The City of Fort Lauderdale should explore sponsoring a soft skills training pilot $5,000 per train-the-trainer certification (including travel) to $30,000 per year for custom on-site training; cost General Fund, CRA, CDBG, Airport Fund, Broward DSD, WorkforceOne, DDA, Chamber Year 2-5WorkfoTargeting Qualified Target IndustriesLauderdale should explore sponsoring a soft skills training pilot program to expand the character and competence of the area labor force (i.e., Smart Talent’s custom, on-site Discovering Emotional Intelligence and Team Emotional Intelligence Training Programs – www.emotionalintelligence.net.)training; cost varies with training level and participants (from 1/2 day to 3 days, with online support options)Broward County, DDA, Chamber, Alliance, Chamber, Alliance, South Florida Marine IndustryYear 25FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 40 INNOVATION INITIATIVESTlFtLddl’th i iitithCithlddidil tTh lAtToleverageFortLauderdale’sthrivinginnovation economy,theCityshoulddesign andimplementaTechnology,Arts,and Culinary Business Incubation Space/Accelerator Program, sponsor the Kaufman Foundation FastTrac Program,and sponsor the Kaufman 1 Million Cups Pilot Program in Fort Lauderdale.Proposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding SourcesKey Staff/ PartnersTime-frameA growing number of specialized, market-specific business accelerators are helping entrepreneurs around the country get their businesses off the ground :Di I l t & helping entrepreneurs around the country get their businesses off the ground through space subsidies, programming, and marketing/branding assistance. Accelerators offer a proven model for starting scalable companies by substantially lowering the risks associated with launching a new venture. They provide valuable resources that most startup founders cannot access on their own, including: Office Space, Internet Hosting and Tools; Lean Startup Methodologies; Startup Company Best Practices; Hands-on Mentoring by Successful Entrepreneurs; Professional Services (legal finance marketing Facility + Renovation Costs for Sistrunk Tech Business Incubation Space :(30 sq ft / $3 million annual lease value (opportunity costs) + $1 million capital + General Fund, Broward County/Career DSD, CDBG, Fort Lauderdale Alliance, Chamber of Innovation 1:Design, Implement & Manage a Business Incubation Space/Accelerator ProgramSuccessful Entrepreneurs; Professional Services (legal, finance, marketing, operations); Access to Seed Capital and Venture Capital. The Business Accelerator program will leverage existing technologies and recruit and train the teams capable of launching them into the market. The teams will be comprised of seasoned professionals who are in career transition or looking to leave corporate life to join a startup.costs) + $1 million capital + program operating cost contribution of $50K/year)$500K annually for program management labor contract labor and seed capital for initial launch to be self-funded through County/Career Source Broward; Philanthropic Sources, Kaufman Foundation FastTrac NewVenture Program Funding; other TBDChamber of Commerce,CareerSource Broward Collaborative Industry Forums, Kaufman FoundationYear 2-5 This program should be structured to serve as more than just physical space assistance – fully coordinating with the Economic Development Marketing/Branding, Retail Recruitment and Urban Culture Curation, Kaufmann Foundation and business training program functions to solidify the sense of place and workforce attraction to emerging technology/arts innovation district activity in targeted sub-areas.to be selffunded through member dues within five years.other TBD.FoundationFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 41 INNOVATION INITIATIVES, CONTINUEDTo leverage Fort Lauderdale’s thriving innovation economy, the City should design and implement a Technology,Arts,and Culinary Business Incubation Space/Accelerator Program, sponsor the Kaufman Foundation FastTrac Program, andsponsor the Kaufman 1 Million Cups Pilot Program in Fort Lauderdale.Proposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding SourcesKey Staff/ PartnersTime-frame:Kauffman FastTrac is a global provider of training that equips aspiring and established entrepreneurs with the business skills and insights, tools, resources, and network to start and grow successful businesses FastTrac 1 PT FTE (Proposed Economic l M DSD, FortLauderdale All Innovation 2Sponsor the Kaufman Foundation FastTrac Program in Fort Lauderdaleresources, and network to start and grow successful businesses. FastTrac programs are delivered by a variety of affiliate organizations – non-academic, academic, nonprofit and for-profit – including chambers of commerce, business development centers, local and regional economic development councils, colleges, universities, microenterprise organizations, and consulting firms. It is recommended that the City sponsor quarterly FastTrac events focused on a range of target industries/emerging technology innovation districts.Development Program Manager and/or Assistant); 3 FastTrac Annual Program License Fees and 3 facilitator training fees for NewVenture, GrowthVenture, TechVenture and ($4,850).General Fund, CRA,Broward CountyAlliance, Chamber, Workforce Development, South Florida Regulatory and PlanningYear 1-5innovation districts.n 3:Sponsor the 1 Million Cups is a program run by entrepreneurs for entrepreneurs. The program takes place every Wednesday morning from 9:00-10:00 AM in locations all around the country. City volunteers run the program semi-autonomously in coffee shops, co-working spaces, and TV stations. Developed by Kauffman Labs for Enterprise Creation, and refined by 1 PT FTE (Proposed Economic Development Program Manager and/or Assistant) to serve as a liaison with CareerSource DSD, CareerSource Broward, InnovatioKaufman 1 Million Cups Pilot Program in Fort Lauderdaleentrepreneurs around the world, I Million Cups is a way to activate a city’s community of entrepreneurs through online curriculum, coaching and experiential learning. The program is run by and for entrepreneurs--a dedicated group of startup community organizers in each active community volunteer their time to organize a promote 1 Million Cups each week. Teams of organizers license the 1 Million Cups toolset from Kauffman Labs for free, and events are run semi-autonomously.Broward and area entrepreneurs specifically geared to support Qualified Target Industries (cost is in kind staff space and marketing support and miscellaneous incidentals)General Fund, CRAGreater Fort Lauderdale Alliance, Chamber of CommerceYear 1-5FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 42 LIVABILITY INITIATIVESTtthi ibilitfFtLddl’ititifldid tthCitTopromotethevisibilityofFortLauderdale’seconomiccompetitivenessforarea employers andnew residents,theCityof Fort Lauderdale should advocate for the Wave expansion to expand connectivity to the Downtown and design,implement and manage a citywide Urban Culture Curation Program focused on placemaking opportunities.FundingKey Staff/TimeProposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding SourcesKey Staff/ PartnersTime-frameThe Wave is Fort Lauderdale’s streetcar system that seeks to createa livable community by integrating land use, transportation andeconomic development. The system is currently funded to: connectDowntown's many points of interest and link to the regional transitkfffhhddvability 1:Advocate for Wave Expansion to Connect Downtown Fort Lauderdale to hhdnetwork;increasefoot traffic throughimprovedpedestrianamenities; direct growth to the urban core and away fromsurrounding neighborhoods; and serve as a catalyst to advance theplanned, regional rail systems.According to the American Public Transportation Association, thepositive catalytic impact of public transit investment on localiibt tilEdlltbliInvestment in feasibility planning,engineering and construction, andannual operations and maintenance(i2ilti)Special Assessment, MPO, Federal, City of Fort Lauderdale General Fund, Broward Transportation & Mobility, DSD, DDA, Broward County Mass Tit B d Year 3-5Livthe Beach and to the Airporteconomicsissubstantial.Everydollar spenton publictransportation generates $4 in economic returns. Public transitdrives the local economy and directly generates business sales,revenues, and new private investment.The City of Fort Lauderdale’s Transportation & Mobility Departmentshould continue to advocate to extend the current planned systemttDtFtLddltthBhdth(assuming2mileextension).owa d County General Fund, Tourism Tax ReallocationTransit, Broward County MPOtoconnectDowntownFortLauderdaletotheBeachandtheAirport.D Il From the City of Santa Ana, CA to Providence, RI to theGuggenheimMuseuminNewYorkCity,theroleofUrbanGeneral Fund / FAU / Livability 2:Design, Implement & Manage a Citywide Urban Culture CurationProgramGuggenheimMuseuminNewYorkCity,theroleofUrbanCuratorisemergingasamechanismforcreatinganenhanced sense of place and destination driver in urbanenvironments. Programs range from self-funded artistcollectives to formal full-time positions.1 FTE $60K-$80K + marketing, event planning and other expenses (TBD)/ FAU / Broward College / NEA and AIA Grants / OtherDSD, Florida Atlantic University School of Architecture Year 3FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 43 HEALTHY BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVESTo support a healthy business environment, the City of Fort Lauderdale should implement a citywidemarketing/branding campaign, hire a dedicated retail recruitment manager, and conduct a sub-area level parkingassessment.Proposed InitiativesProgram DescriptionScale of ProgramFunding SourcesKey Staff/ PartnersTime-frameCities across the U.S. are implementing marketing/branding campaigns to elevate economic development investments and placemaking that serve to trump traditional site selection attraction tactics. These campaigns create a distinct brand for a city as a place to live work and play attracting targeted labor force Minimum 3-year investment requirement: 1 FTE to serve as Economic Development Chief General Fund, Broward County Tourism Tax Reallocation DSD, City of Fort Lauderdale Office Business 1:Design, Implement & Manage a Citywide Placemaking Marketing/Branding Campaign live, work and play --attracting targeted labor force through in-migration, private and philanthropic investment in revitalization, cultural and arts development, and other transformative events that put a place on the map with national recognition as a destination. The City of Fort Lauderdale should design and implement a citywide marketing/branding campaign Economic Development Chief Marketing/Branding Officer (CMO) at $60K to $80K; consulting fees for initial program design: $150K; ongoing marketing/ branding/ placemaking (signage, Reallocation, CRAs, Airport Fund, DDA, Chamber of Commerce, Greater Fort Lauderdale Lauderdale Office of Public Information, Transportation & Mobility, BIDS, DDA, Uptown Development Year 1-5py ggpgwith a long-term investment horizon and dedicated city resources (i.e., proposed Economic Development Manager) to liaise with each city department implementing cross-cutting Vision Plan objectives (and integrated with ongoing investments in marketing underway).pg(g g,wayfinding, print, web, social media, event planning); $75K annually.Alliance, NationalEndowment for the Arts Our Town grantpDistrict, Merchant AssociationsBusiness 2:Design, Implement & Manage a Retail Recruitment ProgramThe City of Fort Lauderdale should hire a dedicated Retail Recruitment Manger to implement the Retail Development Strategy and liaise with existing BID/CRA stakeholders$150,000 for dedicated contract staff management, strategy planning, marketing, and operations over 3-5 yearsDSD, Broward County DSDYear 2The City of Fort Lauderdale should conduct an in-depth Business 3:Conduct a Sub-Area Level Parking Assessment ypparking assessment at the sub-area level in tandem with implementation of the Retail Development Strategy to evaluate the financial feasibility of a municipal parking garage (in particular in Flagler Village, North Beach and Sistrunk Boulevard).$60K for consulting fees; up to $17K per space for municipally funded above grade parking structure.DSD, Broward County Parking FundDSD, Transportation & Mobility (Public Parking)Year 2FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 44 V. Retail Development Strategy & Targeted Sub-Area RecommendationsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN45 CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGYRETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAMA primary area of focus for the City of Fort Lauderdale’sEconomic Development StrategicAction Plan is related to retaildevelopment opportunities. To inform the Plan’s retaildevelopment recommendations, a detailed assessment of marketconditions andprojected trends was undertaken forresidential,The City ofFort Lauderdale offers extremely competitive retailshopping centers in some locations. Analysis indicates thathousehold and visitor spending is substantially higher thanavailable retail, with some retail centers clearly in need ofredevelopment and reuse.pj,office, hotel and industrial uses in the City of Fort Lauderdaleand specifically within the following sub-areas:Uptown Fort Lauderdale/FXE (surrounding the ExecutiveAirport)To better serve existing local, regional and national chainretail business – and to attract new ones – Fort Lauderdalerequires a Retail Recruitment Program to develop a sub-areabased retail tenanting strategy, initiate and track retail leasingleads,and to serve as a targetedliaisonwiththeCityofFortRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThe Galt-Ocean MileNorth BeachDowntown Regional Activity Center (D-RAC)SistrunkBoulevard,gyLauderdale.The following retail development strategy is proposed withthe following goals:increase retail activity within the CitySistrunkBoulevardSE 17th Street Corridor (Broward County Convention Centerto the Broward Health Medical Center)The assessment included a particular focus on retaildevelopment/redevelopment opportunities includingaretailimprove the existing retail mixincrease retail salesattract new retailers to the City without compromisingexistingviableretailbusinessesppppgleakage analysis, opportunities to recapture lost retail sales, andcompetitiveness of current retail recruitment strategies.To encourage the development of the Retail DevelopmentStrategy is comprised of the following components:existingviableretailbusinessesRetail Recruitment ProgramCitywide Placemaking Marketing/Branding ProgramUrban Culture Curation ProgramExpeditedPermittingApprovalsProgramFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 46ExpeditedPermittingApprovalsProgramSub-Area Level Parking Assessment RETAIL RECRUITMENTRETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAMRETAIL RECRUITMENT FUNCTIONSCreate & maintains a retail inventorydatabaseTo implement a successful retail recruitment program, it is important tobalance multiple stakeholder priorities that are not all the same:Property Owners:Work with property owners & brokers tofind retail prospectsTravel locally & regionally to identifyretailers who might expand &tththiKeep space filled and receive a return-on-investment; national‘credit’ tenants viewed as lower risk than local operators. Ownerinvestments are justified only by ‘investment-grade’ rents, which resultfrom ‘investment-grade’ sales.CommercialBrokers:strengthenthemixProvide overall coordination betweenall stakeholdersUse market information to implement atargetedretailmix&voluntaryCommercialBrokers:Only make money if a sale or lease transaction occurs; motivation isgenerally to “close the deal”, not manage the tenant mix.Retailers:targetedretailmix&voluntary-participation leasing strategyKnow properties in commercial districts:owner needs, expiring leases,businesses for sale, etc.Require sustained sales & complementary adjacent uses; sometimesview other businesses only as competition, not as part of ashopping/dining district. Financing more difficult to obtain forlocally-owned, “mom & pop” businesses.LocalGo ernmentProvide summary market information toprospective retailers: rent & propertyvalues; current sales; availablecustomer base; incentives; etc.LocalGovernment:Goal is to maintain & attract jobs;strengthen tax base; preventdisinvestment & decline; has limited control over uses or tenant mix ifwithin zoned categories.CilMtP(BID /CRA )CommercialManagementPrograms(BIDs/CRAs):Retail strategy is critical to commercial vitality & drawing allconsumer segments; can coordinate between other partners.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 47 RETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAMRETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAMRETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAM RESOURCE NEEDSFull-time or part time staff & multi-year fundingCurrentbaselinespaceinventory:squarefootagesUnlike a shopping center or site where one ownercontrols retail use-mix and locations, the sub-areaRETAIL RECRUITMENT PROGRAMCurrentbaselinespaceinventory:squarefootagesby location; ownership; incentives packages;parkingTraffic counts on adjacent roadways (often used byretail property committees in approving locations)commercial districts include multiple property owners.Since stakeholders have multiple, distinct objectives, nosingle entity is responsible for long-range decisions, orfor an integrated retail strategy.Zoning & land use controls for commercial districtAvailable spending by residents, workers &tourists/visitorsCompeting areas & competitive positioning withinImplementing a retail strategy in Fort Lauderdale will bevoluntary and require a key point of contact within theretail recruitment program.Retail recruitmentprogram manager(s)will work side bythe marketLocal employment trends (for potential workermarkets spending patterns)Local tourism data (for potential visitor marketd)pgg()yside with each of these stakeholder perspectives on adaily basis – connecting retail spaces with high qualitytenants within the context of market realities and publicpolicy objectives.spending patterns)FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 48 HOW CAN AN URBAN CULTURE CURATOR URBAN CULTURE CURATION &SUPPORT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT?URBAN CULTURE CURATION & PLACEMAKING MARKETING/ BRANDING PROGRAMSFrom coast to coast, cultural and educational institutions, artist collectives,and cities are investing time and resources in urban culture curationprograms. The role ofa dedicated Urban Culture Curatoris to manageIn addition to dedicatingresources to a Retailpggoverall strategic and operational responsibility for staff, programs, andexecution of the City’s mission to enhance the cultural vibrancy of thecommunity through the development of public art and placemaking inpartnership with the community’s institutional/educational anchors.Addi tdUbCltCtillit dtitifgRecruitment Program, the City of Fort Lauderdaleshould explore supporting targeted placemakinginvestments such as funding an “Urban CultureCurator” in partnership with the Florida AtlanticUniversity’s School of Architecture’s MetroLabCllbAdedicatedUrbanCultureCuratorwillintroduce opportunitiesforpartnerships and joint projects. In Fort Lauderdale, the faculty and staff fromFlorida Atlantic University’s School of Architecture are actively leveraging thecity’s Arts and Technology hub activities.The mission ofthe MetroLAB Collaborative is to engagefaculty,students,andCollaboration.This role should be funded by a combination ofGeneral Fund, CRA, and CDBG funds and serve as aliaison with area retail merchant associations, BeachCommunityRedevelopmentArea,Downtownggy,,the community in collaborative activities that advance scholarship andimprove the well-being of the community within a metropolitan sub-tropicalsetting.The MetroLAB Collaborative endeavors to discover knowledge throughiiid dbthdi i litthiittddlldlblCommunityRedevelopmentArea,DowntownDevelopment Authority, business improvement districts,and the City’s Public Information Office marketingand branding campaign manager.inquiry, guidedbythedisciplines attheuniversity,toaddresslocalandglobalchallenges; and to explore, exchange, and apply knowledge and informationfor the mutual benefit, resilience, vitality and health of our communities andthe regional physical environment. The position would report directly toEconomic & Community ReinvestmentDirector with programmatic supportfromFAUandoverseeplacemaking/publicrealmimprovementsadvisefromFAUandoverseeplacemaking/publicrealmimprovements,adviseplanning and zoning initiatives to ensure a focused protection of the City’svital tourism industry assets.A dedicated Urban Culture Curator funded by the City of Fort Lauderdale willserve to create a distinct sense of place in targeted redevelopment areas inFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 49tandem with ongoing marketing, branding and placemaking investmentsunderway. UPTOWN FORT LAUDERDALE/FXE (SURROUNDING THE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT)RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESRetailrecruitershouldtargetFood&Beverage()RetailrecruitershouldtargetFood&Beverageofferings for hotel guests and employees – sub-area is currently undersuppliedLong-term, consider redevelopment of selectedparcelsabuttingFXESTRENGTHS/ASSETSPresence of Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport providesactivation and represents a large assembled parcel (estimatedat1050acres)forredevelopmentopportunitiesparcelsabuttingFXEExplore opportunities for restaurant/diningclusters and market toward employee andhotel guest marketsDlfbat1,050acres)forredevelopmentopportunitiesLocation on Route 441/7 provides high visibility to supportstrip-type shopping center anchored by a Publix grocery storeand a number of in-line retail stores with opportunity for futureinfill developmentRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYDocument existing retailsquarefootagebycategory as baseline for future recruitmenteffortsPotential retail infill sites in/around Cypress Creek Station,particularly if older parking ratio requirements are reconsideredImprovements to the physical characteristics of the Uptown/FXEtransportation corridor wouldserve to create major retaildestinations in the sub-area and redevelopment/infill activityI95bdthEtiAi titnearI-95beyondtheExecutiveAirportsiteOPPORTUNITIES•Transportation focus of the Uptown/FXE corridor requiressubstantial infrastructure investment to transition to pedestrian-friendlyenvironment supportive ofgreater diversityof retailyppgy•Offers the largest employment base of all of the sub-areas withmore than 31,400 office workers and 12,200 non-officeemployees ($96.4 million in food and beverage salesopportunity)•ThoughUptown/FXEhasover2100hotelroomsserving•ThoughUptown/FXEhasover2,100hotelroomsservingbusiness and leisure travelers, these markets appear to beunderserved in all categories of food and beverage, appareland entertainment offerings•Infrastructure investment and visitor traffic by Schlitterbahn, anationalchainofwaterparksthatplanstobuildon64acresFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 50nationalchainofwaterparksthatplanstobuildon64acreswithin the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESTHE GALT OCEAN MILEImplement Master Plan to improve public realmspaces, enhance building/storefront appearance,sustain walkable characterProtectpresenceofgrocerystoreasconsumerSTRENGTHS/ASSETSEstablished retail/dining district provides baselinefor future marketsProtectpresenceofgrocerystoreasconsumerdestinationSustain documentation of business mix for futurerecruitment assistance443,000 Square Feet ofretail, estimated $330million per year in salesLow (4%) retail vacancy rate reinforces marketsupportContinue to market toward/capture overnightguest expenditures to balance 40% seasonalvacancy ratesBuild on base of locally owned apparel and giftdfflffRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYPhysical layout and character is pedestrian-friendly, walkableGood mix of retail/specialty, F&B and consumerservicesin200+businessesstores todifferentiate retailofferingsRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYservicesin200+businessesOPPORTUNITIES•Limited amount ofavailable retail/commercial/space indicates need to achieve critical mass ofnew development and redevelopment•Some buildings need rehabilitation/reinvestment•Seasonalitofresidentialbaseaffectsoerall•Seasonalityofresidentialbaseaffectsoverallsales patterns•Occupancy rates and concentration of localbusinesses could be displaced by higher rent-payingnationalretailtenantsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 51payingnationalretailtenants RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESNORTH BEACH VILLAGESTRENGTHS/ASSETSExplore potential to recruit a smaller(up to 20-25,000 SF) specialty/gourmet grocery store tosupplement services for hotel and other visitors inthe areahlbldhlbkhSTRENGTHS/ASSETSMajor opportunity for planned pedestrian-friendlyretail ‘district’ on Breakers AvenueUnderserved in retail, food & beverage offersWhilebuilding onhotelguestbase, market thefuture retail/dining cluster toward area marketDevelop an overall sub-area redevelopmentmaster plan to concentrate a ‘double-loaded’lk blllBkrecruitment opportunitiesStrong concentration of hotels (2,450 rooms),beach accessAvailabledevelopmentparcelscanaddwalkableretailenvironment alongBreakersAvenue, and add appropriate density on adjoiningblocksFocus public realm improvements/capitalittBkAdBi hRdRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYAvailabledevelopmentparcelscanaddsignificant density to North BeachPotential beach access to the Bonnet HousegardensOPPORTUNITIESinvestmentsonBreakersAvenue andBirchRoadas an activated, pedestrian-oriented district –consistent with Beach CRA improvement programand the City’s overall connectivity planCidhtdi t / d titOPPORTUNITIESScale and mix of older and new buildings mayrequire design controlsDominance ofhotelguest marketprimarilyConsiderhowtocoordinate/mandate appropriatemix, placement and urban design of BreakersAvenue to realize full development potentialsgpyfocuses on one consumer groupLimited retail offerings today to serve hotelguestsFewexistingretailofferingsintargetareaFewexistingretailofferingsintargetareaShopping/dining district will require carefulplanning and development to workFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 52 RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESCfllihWtdbfitDOWNTOWN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER (D-RAC)CarefullyweighWave costsandbenefits,incorporate proven increase in property values tobalance decisions over long runProtect the concentration of specialty retail,galleriesanddiningalongEastLasOlasoverCENTER (DRAC)STRENGTHS/ASSETSStrong, evolving retail and dining cluster along LasOlas AvenuegalleriesanddiningalongEastLasOlasoverpast ten years – successful districtSeek additional ways to strengthen connectivitybetween employment centers, retail sub-areas,residentialneighborhoodsandculturalcentersMuseums and Cultural attractions have reinforceddestination identityOffice concentration adds daytime consumers,reinforces walkable retailresidentialneighborhoodsandculturalcentersRedevelop Riverfront Project to represent site turn-round and redevelopment, eliminate outmodedproject conceptContinuetoreinforceTODdevelopmentpoliciesRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGY8,300 downtown residents provide a sustained,‘built-in’ marketEstimated $482 million in annual retail spendingby residents, workers, visitorsAl30000dlContinuetoreinforceTODdevelopmentpoliciesafter WAVE is constructed potentialsFocus retail recruitment efforts to attract new, highquality, urban format ‘big box’ and grocerychainsintegratedwithsmaller/localretaildistrictsAlmost30,000downtown employees5,000 housing units planned/under constructionOPPORTUNITIESRfPhldbdd dchainsintegratedwithsmaller/localretaildistrictsand pedestrian friendly/walkable environments tosupport current/planned downtown residentialdensity (retailers target 8,000-10,000households within 1/4 mile of location).RiverfrontProject issues shouldbeaddressedtoturn-around locationWide streets, many not as pedestrian-friendly forfuture growthMltipleacti itnodesbttoofarapartforaMultipleactivitynodes,buttoofarapartforacoherent unified walkable districtNeed to strengthen connections between activitycenters, nodes, destinationsLocallyownedbusinessesmorevulnerabletoFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 53Locallyownedbusinessesmorevulnerabletoproperty values/rent increases RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESSISTRUNK BOULEVARDSTRENGTHS/ASSETSLength ofSistrunk Boulevard suggests creation ofmultiple small retail nodes rather than one centralcommercial coreDuring redevelopment, need to plan a relocationflhdlbdfSTRENGTHS/ASSETSStrong tradition and symbolic values as African-American neighborhoodMajor public investment in streetscapestrategyforlightindustrialbusinesses to provideforinfill projects (longer term strategy)Neighborhoods west of Andrews Avenue arefunctionally underserved; focus for businessdlldimprovements upgraded appearanceVacant/underutilized land can serve interim usessuch as public gardens, open space, pop-upretail or art in public spacesdevelopment assistance, retailretention andrecruitmentMore aggressive incentive programming andpublic investments are needed to recruit and assisthlthtilktRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYSome locally owned businesses, but may needreinvestment in buildingsHigher vehicle counts will attract retail andbusinessestoareaahealthyretailmarketProvide below market rate financing forconstruction and/or fit up/inventory (i.e., DC'sGrocery Store inducement subsidy programbus essesoaeaOPPORTUNITIESLower population density challenges ability toadd retail and servicesUnderwrite job training costs for area workers toencourage local employmentAbate property taxes for first five-ten years toreduce initial financial risksImbalance between incomes and supportablenational retail chain economics required for newconstructionLength of Sistrunk Boulevard makes it difficult toConsider low cost ground lease of City-ownedproperty to reduce capital investment requirementsProvide site improvements and infrastructure atlow/nocosttodeveloperconcentrate a ‘center’Limited near-term retailexpansion potentials dueto limited market sizeFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 54low/nocosttodeveloper RETAIL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIESConsiderhowtomodifyandenhancepedestrianSE 17TH STREET CORRIDORSTRENGTHS/ASSETSConsiderhowtomodifyandenhancepedestrianconnectivity between hotels, retail offerings andFLL Convention CenterBetter utilize waterfront connections and visibilityWt f ttiithth17thSt tProximity of FLL Convention Center focusesmeeting-oriented marketsDevelopment pattern has provided multiple bigboxandotherretailstoresWaterfrontconnections withthe17thStreetCorridor area not fully developed, can be furtherenhancedConvention Center proximity suggests need formoreentertainmentandnightlifeoptionsboxandotherretailstoresRedevelopment potentials for light industrial usescan increase density, salesHotel concentration near Convention Center addsttilddmoreentertainmentandnightlifeoptionsConsider retail development opportunities aroundWAVE streetcar stations for local consumersRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYguestretaildemandHotel guest spending estimated at $500 millionper year, largest of all sub-areas; retail spendingalone estimated at $175 million per yearHospital District facility and related employmentgenerates daytime retail demandOPPORTUNITIESStripmalltyperetailofferingslessattractivetoStrip-malltyperetailofferingslessattractivetoconvention attendeesLowest resident population challenges longer-termretail growth opportunitiesArea is auto-oriented, less pedestrian-friendly,challenges visitor experienceFew entertainment options within sub-area forConvention Center visitorsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 55Limited number of redevelopment sites ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVES WITH RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LINKAGESTaken together the majority of the Strategic Plan’s key initiatives are structured to support retail development in the CityofFort Lauderdale Specifically these Taken together, the majority of the Strategic Plan s key initiatives are structured to support retail development in the CityofFort Lauderdale. Specifically, these include:Design and implement an Expedited Planning Approvals Program forQualified Sustainable Development Projects.Create Revolving Loan Fund to provide much needed below-marketcapitalfornewandexpandingretailbusinessesintheCityofFortCity-Wide Placemaking Marketing& Branding Program -- promoteplacemaking events in each sub-area and create a system of urbanvillages.UrbanCultureCurationProgramPartnerwithareauniversitiesandcapitalfornewandexpandingretailbusinessesintheCityofFortLauderdale.Sponsor the Economic Gardening Pilot Program to assist second statecompanies achieve the optimal scalability of their business (transitioning afood truck to a bricks and mortar restaurant).EtblihBiIbtthildildthltdUrbanCultureCurationProgram–Partnerwithareauniversitiesandother philanthropic and educational institutions to implement acutting-edge urban culture curation program that will feed into theplacemaking marketing and branding campaign.Conduct a sub-area level parking assessment to test the demandand financial feasibility of municipally-owned parking garages toRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYEstablishaBusinessIncubator –thiscouldincludetechnology, artsandculinary businesses in Fort Lauderdale – all companies that would serve tocreate a sense of place and support more foot traffic for area retailers.Establish a Retail Recruitment Program – a dedicated retail recruitmentmanager will conduct a detailed retail inventory by sub-area and focus onretention/expansionefforts.support targeted redevelopment opportunities.Expedited Planning Approvals for Sustainable Development Projects Economc PerformanceCreate a Revolving Loan Fund Economc PerformanceEstablish a Business IncubatorWorkforceee o /epa soeosEstablish a Business Incubator WorkforceKauffman Foundation - FastTrac ProgramInnovationKauffman Foundation - 1 Million Cups ProgramInnovationAdvocacy for Expansion of Wave StreetcarLivabilityUrban Culture Curation ProgramLivabilityCitywide Marketing/Branding Campaign Healthy Business EnvironmentTargeted Sub-Area Retail Recruitment ProgramHealthy Business EnvironmentSub-Area Level Parking Assessment Healthy Business EnvironmentFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 56lgly VI. Targeted Industry & Entrepreneurial Development StrategyFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN57 TARGETED INDUSTRY AND ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY“For each newDEVELOPMENT STRATEGYThe results of the Economic Benchmarking assessment indicate that critical aspects of the City’s economiclandscape are lagging behind peer cities. These include livability (primarily due to the city’s high povertyrate, relative cost of living and housing affordability) and business environment (resulting from the relativecost of doing business in the City when compared toother locations in the western and southeasternUnited States).For each new high-tech job in a metropolitan fi)The Economic Development Strategic Action Plan (EDSAP) is purposefully structured to address theseparticular challenges to Fort Lauderdale’s healthy economy with recommendations for expanding the City’sworkforce development and small business development assistance offerings.The basis of the EDSAP’s Targeted Industry and Entrepreneurial Development Strategy is founded uponinvestment in cutting edge business accelerator and innovation district programs that will requireil ibbliiiilldildiii lkhldThildarea, five additional local jobs are createdimplementationbypublic, private, civic, cultural,educationalandinstitutionalstakeholders.Theseinclude:Establish a Business Incubation/Accelerator Program (Supported By Economic Development Marketingand Branding Functions and focused on promoting the further development of Technology InnovationDistricts in Fort Lauderdale)Sponsor an Economic Gardening Pilot ProgramSthKffFdtiFtT&1MilliCPjobs are created outside of high tech in the long ”SponsortheKauffmanFoundationFastTrac&1MillionCupsProgramsCo-sponsor a Soft Skills Training ProgramThe rationale and examples of models from other communities is provided in the following discussion andin the case studies in Appendix B of this strategy.TechnologyInnovationDistrictModelsrun”–Economist Enrico Morettiin The TechnologyInnovationDistrictModelsAccording to the Brookings Institution, the geography of innovation is shifting from the large scalemanufacturing districts of the 19th century. Twenty years ago, workers needed to drive to a secluded officepark, work in isolation, and keep ideas secret. Today proximity is everything.Workers want to be in urban places that are walkable and bikeable where they can bump into otherkdhidFilttbltthfihlbdiitith tNew Geography of Jobsworkers andshareideas.Firms also wanttobeclosetootherfirms, researchlabsanduniversities sothatin collaborative spaces smart ideas can be turned into smart products for the market.Innovation Districts are this century’s productive geography – creating competitive places and cool spaceswhere firms want to be closer to other firms.An Innovation District is a geographic area where anchor institutions and companies cluster and connectFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 58with small firms, start-ups, business incubators and accelerators. Physically compact, transit-accessible,and technically wired, they offer mixed-use housing, office and retail. Key demographic trends are profoundlyalteringhowfirmsandpeopleinteracthowTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION DISTRICT MODELSalteringhowfirmsandpeopleinteract,howideas flow, and how places are designed andbuilt.Fort Lauderdale has the opportunity toleverage the distinct economic strengths withinzonesdistrictsorneighborhoodstosupportAccording to the Brookings Institution, the emergence of “Technology Innovation Districts”1reflectsprofound changes within traditional market dynamicsthat are radically altering where businesses want tolocate and people want to live. Open, innovative economy craves proximity and integration so ideas andknowledge can be transferred quickly and effectively.Globalcompaniesandfinancialinstitutionstendtoco-locateinthemInnovationDistrictsarezones,districtsorneighborhoodstosupportkey target industries:Advanced Materials & Hi-TechManufacturingAlternative Energy & Renewable ResourcesGlobalcompaniesandfinancialinstitutionstendtocolocateinthem.InnovationDistrictsareentrepreneurial, inclusive and sustainable – once an Innovation District takes root in a community, theytend to contribute to a much stronger and resilient economy going forward.In the United States, districts are emerging near anchor institutions in the downtowns and midtowns ofcities like Atlanta, Baltimore, Buffalo, Cambridge, Cleveland, Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh,St. Louis and San Diego.Aviation/AerospaceGlobal Business ServicesCorporate HeadquartersHuman Resources Development & HigherEducationSuccessful examples of Innovation Districts that are leveraging existing educational and institutionalinfrastructure are the University of Virginia, Research Triangle Park, and the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology. They are developing in Boston, Brooklyn, Chicago, Portland, Providence, San Francisco andSeattle where underutilized areas (particularly older industrial areas) are being re-imagined and remade.Others are locatingin the transformation of traditional exurban scienceparks like Research Triangle ParkEducationInternational Media & ProductionInternational Trade & LogisticsLife SciencesMarine Industrygpgin Raleigh-Durham, which are fighting to compete with the preference of their workers and firms for moreurbanized, vibrant environments.Workers are demanding urban, walkable neighborhoods because household dynamics are changing –less than 20% of households are baby boomers, seeking smaller homes with easier access to job sites,health and amenities. The Millennial generation (essentially 18 to 34 year olds) is choosing cities atbt tiltdtthltihlfl tibdlifitiiFor example recent expansion by FortLauderdale-based companies such as Citrix,Prolexic Technologies and Anthem Educationin the Uptown/Cypress Creek area signals theemergence of a local Technology Innovationsubstantialrates comparedtothepopulation as a whole–reflecting abroadrevaluing ofcities as anin-migration destination.In Fort Lauderdale, technology innovation districts are emerging in:DowntownFlaglerArts&Technology(FAT)VillageDistrict with substantial investment underwayoutside of the traditional downtown location.The City of Fort Lauderdale is dedicatingresources to nurture an environment thatincrease the number of sustainable high techFlaglerArts&Technology(FAT)VillageUptown/Cypress CreekThese emerging tech ecosystems will benefit from Fort Lauderdale’s investment in business acceleratorassistance, low cost space, training programs, entrepreneurial development networking activities, andsustained economic development marketing and branding dedicated to solidifying each distinct zone’sfldttiland information and communicationtechnology start-ups.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 59sense ofplace andpotential.1Brookings Institute, The Rise of Innovation Districts – A New Geography of Innovation in America, Bruce Katz and Julie Wagner, 2014. The City of Fort Lauderdale is focused on supportingtilbidl tti itfBUSINESS INCUBATION/ECONOMIC GARDENING entrepreneurialbusinessdevelopmentactivityforsmall- to medium-sized businesses in a range ofsectors – Technology, Arts, Marine, Retail, Dining andEntertainment.It is recommended that the City of Fort LauderdaleMentors/Speakers/MODELestablish new business accelerator program designedto implement a proven model for supporting scalablesecond stage companies by substantially lowering therisks associated with launching a company. Thisprogram would be implemented by a contractmanager. Key resources include:Entrepreneurs/Teams(admissionsSpeakers(real-worldperspective)ProfessionalServicesPartners(legal/finance/Office space, internet hosting and toolsHands-on MentoringAccess to seed and venture capitalThe differentiator from traditional corporate officehotelingspaceisfocusedonacceleratingexistingTechnologyscreening)(legal/finance/IT/HR)hotelingspaceisfocusedonacceleratingexistingtechnologies by recruiting and training teams ofexperienced professionals.Beyond being an accelerator, the Fort LauderdaleBusiness Accelerator plans to be a workforce trainingprogram and a talent recruitment program for localTechnology Commercialization and Career Accelerator(self sustaining)Staff, Facility &ManagementPlatform(hub/tools)Access toCapital(pitch day)industries, drawing largely from Florida’s WorkforceSystem as a source for candidates.Other metros that invest in such economic gardeningprograms see sizable increases in tax revenue,employment, multiplier effects within the economy,innovationandoveralleconomicdiversityCollaborativeCommunity/PartnersTechnologies/Ideas(corporate/innovation,andoveralleconomicdiversity.Connections with strategic partners, both professionaland academic, are critical to the success of such aprogram, which is firmly established here throughFlorida’s Workforce System and other industrypartnerships.Training/Launch Methodologies(best practices)(growingecosystem)(copoae/university)FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 60pp SMART GROWTH SUSTAINABLEEXPEDITED PLANNING APPROVALS SMART GROWTH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLESIncrease utilization efficiency of water and energy resourcesPreserveandcreateopenspacePROGRAM To further identify Fort Lauderdale as a healthy businessenvironment for retailers targeting unique urban villagesin theirsite selection criteria,it is recommended that thePreserveandcreateopenspaceCreate distinctive buildings in neighborhood villages with astrong sense of placePromote mixed land uses serviced by a variety oftransportation modes,City design and implement an expedited planningapprovals program for development applicationsintegrating best practices in ‘Smart Growth’ principles.This program will require the hire of a dedicatedEddPl&DlCWkpMake development decisions more predictable, quicker andcost effectiveCreate walkable sites, neighborhoods and communitydesignsExpeditedPlanning&DevelopmentCaseWorker.The City of Fort Lauderdale is promoting Smart Growthprinciples in all aspects of community planning andeconomic development.Encourage community and stakeholder collaborationPromote regional collaborationStrengthen and direct development towards existingcommunitiescommunitiesTake advantage of compact building designFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 61 VII. Alternative Incentives RecommendationsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN62 ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVESBUSINESS & DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVESIEDC Economic Development Research Partners released a white paper “More than Money – Alternative Incentives that Benefit Companies and Communities” in March 2014 evaluating different types of alternative incentives used by Economic Development INCENTIVES RECOMMENDATIONSThe City of Fort Lauderdale offers an array of business incentives to attract and retain Qualified Target Industry businesses such as ypypOrganizations (EDOs) and advocates for their increased use either alone or in conjunction with financial incentives. This research shows that alternative incentives can be an effective strategy for business attraction. The study concludes:Most of commonly used alternative incentives are considered businesses such as. Advanced Materials & Hi-Tech ManufacturingAlternative Energy & Renewable ResourcesAviation/AerospaceGlobal Business ServicesMost of commonly used alternative incentives are considered “typical economic development practice”Alternative incentives can be effectively used, though they are more commonly used in conjunction with other financial incentivesOrganizational type and structure don’t impact the types of vcCorporate HeadquartersHuman Resources Development & Higher EducationInternational Media & ProductionInternational Trade & LogisticsOrganizational type and structure don t impact the types of alternative incentives usedIncentives is a “local” game – with relative value determined by market conditionsThe EDSAP’s implementation tactics are consistent with the IEDC’s k d f l ldLife SciencesMarine IndustryAccording to the International Economic Development Council (IEDC), these incentives are competitive – and typical. These incentives include tax refunds and direct key recommendations for alternative incentives, including:Research and dataReal estate site selection and expedited permitting assistanceTalent/workforce developmentNetworking/promotiontypical. These incentives include tax refunds and direct cash benefits . For qualified businesses located in an Enterprise Zone, expanded tax incentives are offered (credits, refunds and energy exemptions).The EDSAP expands the incentives to provide benefits attractive to broader Citywide new business development Networking/promotionInfrastructure investmentThe following overview of alternative incentives recommended by IEDC supports the rationale for the EDSAP’s key recommended implementation tactics. a ac ve o b oade C yw de ew bus ess deve op e for entrepreneurs, retailers and other high-value targets in the form of “alternative incentives” that are structured to go beyond tax refunds and other cash benefits. These incentives are detailed in the following section.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 63 EXAMPLES OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN’SALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVESThe Economic Development Strategic Action Plan implementation tactics represent cutting edge business and development incentives. These recommended “alternative Research and DataBuilt on economic gardening principles, communities can offer specialized data incentives”1programs are intended to complement Fort Lauderdale’s existing financial and tax incentives while also enabling the city to take economic growth and prosperity to the next level of competitiveness on a national scale.Talent / Workforce DevelopmentAccess to skilled and talented workers is considered the number one criteria for site ggpp,panalysis services to businesses. Such services are especially valuable to those that lack the in-house capacity to conduct sophisticated analysis or otherwise cannot access specialized datasets. Also included in this category is access to community-level information, both through an economic development agency website as well as connections to current employers who can offer insights into the quality of the business environment.Access to skilled and talented workers is considered the number one criteria for site selection decisions today, irrespective of the industry. Businesses also need to make sure that they have access to training programs so that their workers can keep up with the pace of innovation and technological change. Labor market analysis, ability to offer customized job training, and connections to local training programs are some alternative incentives that communities can offer that also meet important business needs.Key Tactics:Retail Recruitment Management*Networking and PromotionHelping incoming businesses make connections in the community is as much about customer service as it is about developing and strengthening existing lt d l l l hi th h bitbi ti Thi eedsKey Tactics:Business AcceleratorSoft Skills Training ProgramEconomic Gardening Pilot ProgramReal Estate and Permittingclusters and local supply chains through business-to-business connections. This category also includes services such as assistance with spouse relocation, access to cluster partnerships and peer mentoring.Key Tactics:Economic Development Marketing & BrandingUrban Culture Curation*Kauffman Foundation 1 000 Cups & Fast TracProgramsReal Estate and PermittingStreamlining a community’s planning and permitting processes is more than a question of convenience for the businesses. Prolonged processing increases the cost of development and decreases businesses’ ability to respond to rapidly changing market realities. Communities can also offer other types of real estate services, such as lists and data on available buildings, assistance with feasibility studies and more.The City of Fort Lauderdale is installing the latest technology in building plan review software Kauffman Foundation 1,000 Cups & Fast TracProgramsInfrastructure ImprovementsAs the price of energy increases and a product’s speed to market becomes more important, a community’s ability to connect efficiently with global transportation and logistics systems determines its competitiveness. This Lauderdale is installing the latest technology in building plan review software (OneSolution Electronic Plan Review Software) and is expected to be operational by FY2015.Key Tactics:Dedicated Planning & Building Case Workercategory also includes less expensive infrastructure improvements such as signage and streetscape upgrades, among others.Key Tactics:Advocate for Wave ExpansionEconomic Development Marketing & Branding (Wayfinding/Signage)FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 641IEDC Economic Development Research Partners released a white paper “More than Money – Alternative Incentives that Benefit Companies and Communities” in March 2014* Proposed as Contract Services VIII. Implementation Plan RecommendationsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN65 ORGANIZATIONAL & INSTITUTIONALIMPLEMENTATION COSTSORGANIZATIONAL & INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENTThe International Economic Development Council hasestablished industry standards for managing economicdevelopmentorganizationsthatincludeinstitutionalandThe City of Fort Lauderdale’s current Economic& Community Reinvestment Departmentcurrently includes 8 full-time equivalent (‘FTE’)staff.developmentorganizationsthatincludeinstitutionalandorganizational benchmarks for cities and counties based onpopulation size.As part of the Economic Development Strategic Action Plan(ESDAP)process,theCityofFortLauderdale’scurrentThe proposed EDSAP Implementation Planrecommends that the City of Fort Lauderdalehire an additional 2 FTEs and fund contractlabor positions and total capital and operatingexpenses of $7.2 million over a five-year period(ESDAP)process,theCityofFortLauderdale scurrentorganizational and institutional structure was evaluated tounderstand current staff structures, roles, responsibilities andfinancial resources.Based on this review, the City of Fort Lauderdale’s currentincluding:Personnel: $922,000Capital Costs: $3.37 millionOperating Costs: $2.88 millionEconomic Development Division’s staffing ratio per1,000residents is 0.006 (including residents, daytime employmentinflow and tourists); the average across the four cohort citiesranking higher than Fort Lauderdale in the economic dashboardbenchmarking is 0.010 – indicating a potential shortfall in staffth thldbltdtti lOperating Costs: $2.88 millionresourcesthatshouldbeevaluatedtoensureoptimalcompetitiveness.It is recommended that the City of Fort Lauderdale investadditional resources to hire key staff or fund the contract laborfunctions required to fullyimplement the EDSAP. The additionalqypstaffing may be achieved through a combination of reallocationof existing open positions and the creation of new staff positions.Following is an overview of the Economic Development Division’scurrent and proposed organizational structure anddtiftffdttlbtrecommendationsfornew staffandcontractlaborsupportrequired to implement the Plan.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 66 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ORGANIZATIONAL & INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENTCURRENT STAFFING & MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE (FY2014)ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT MANAGEMENT/DIRECTORClerk IIIMANAGEMENT/DIRECTOREconomic & Business Development Administrator/Beach CRA MBusiness Assistance CoordinatorEngineering Design Manager (Beach CRA)ManagerPlanner IIICRA Project Coordinator/ Economic Business Development AssistantLegend –FY2014 Staffing: 11 FTEsExisting Positions9 FTEsEngineering DesignEconomic Development RepresentativeVACANTVacant/Hiring in ProcessNote: Assumes Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions working 2,080 Hours annuallyClerk II2 FTEsSecretary IIIEngineering Design Manager (NPF CRA)VACANTFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 67 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANSUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANCITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ORGANIZATIONAL & INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENTFUTURE STAFFING & MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE (FY 2015)ECONOMIC & COMMUNITYCLERK IIIECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT MANAGEMENT/DIRECTOREconomic & Business Development Administrator/Beach CRA ManagerEconomic & Small Business Development Administrator(RECLASSIFIED)Business Assistance CoordinatorCRA Project Coordinator/ Economic Business Development AssistantEconomic Development Aide(RECLASSIFIED)Financial Analyst(NEW POSITION)Planner IIISecretary IIIClerk IILegend – CURRENT (FY2015) Staffing: 11 FTEs9 FTEs2 FTEsExisting PositionsReclassified PositionsNew PositionsNote: Assumes Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions working 2,080 8 FTEs1 FTE2 FTEsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 68Hours annually) SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANORGANIZATIONAL & INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENTFUTURE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT STAFFING & MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE: PLAN YEAR 5CLERK IIIECONOMIC & COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT MANAGEMENT/DIRECTOREconomic & BusinessEconomic & SmallMANAGEMENT/DIRECTORRetail Recruitment Manager(Contract)Rd l tEconomic & Business Development AdministratorEconomic & Small Business Development Administrator (Reclassified)Marketing Manager(Contract)Planning &RedevelopmentAdministrator(New Position)Planning & Building Case Worker(Contract)Urban CultureCRA Project Coordinator/ Economic Business Development AssistantEconomic and Business Development Assistant (New Position)Economic Development Aide (Reclassified)Planner IIIFinancial Analyst(Reclassified)Business Assistance CoordinatorUrban Culture Curator(Contract)Legend – FUTURE (5-Year) Staffing: 15 FTEsExisting Positions11 FTEsSecretary IIIClerk IIgNew PositionsContract PositionsNote: Assumes Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions working 2,080 Hours annually) including 4 contract positions4 FTEs2 FTEsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 69 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANSUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANTo fully execute the Economic Development Strategic Action Plan tactics, the City ofFort Lauderdale must invest in new personnel, capital and operating expenses.Based on order-of-magnitude estimates for the proposed new resources, the totalcost of the plan is approximately $7.2 million over five years.Fort Lauderdale Economic Development Strategic Action Plan 2014-2019TOTAL 5-YEAR COSTTOTAL ESTIMATED COSTFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5COSTTOTAL ESTIMATED COSTFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5PersonnelRedevelopment Administrator1$ 135,000 $ 136,350 $137,714 $139,091 $ 548,154 Economic & Business Development Assistant1$ 92,000 $ 92,920 $ 93,849 $ 94,788 $ 373,557 CilLicense fees, facility costs, seed capital, $ 590 000 $2 600 000 $ 60 000 $ 60 000 $ 60 000 $3 370 000 CapitalLicense fees, facility costs, seed capital, placemaking improvements$ 590,000 $2,600,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $3,370,000 OperatingOperating expenses (print, web, social media, event planning, initiative managers/coordinators - contract labor)$ 12,000 $ 810,950 $ 800,450 $635,450 $625,450 $2,884,300 Total2$ 602,000 $3,637,950 $1,089,720 $927,013 $919,328 $7,176,011 FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 70 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANSUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANEconomic Performance InitiativesEstimated Annual CostTOTAL 5-Economic 1:Establish a Revolving Loan Fund Targeted for Retail/Entrepreneurial TOTAL 5-YEAR COSTg/pDevelopment ActivityFTEs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5PersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0CapitalSeed Funding /Fund Administrator Fee$500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 OperatingN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Implement an Expedited Planning Economic 2:Approvals Program for Qualified Sustainable Development ProjectsPersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OperatingContract labor (Planning & Building C Wk M )$0$0$0$0$95,000 $95,000 OperatingCase Worker Manager)$0$0$0$0$95,000 $95,000 Economic 3:Design and Implement a QTI Lead Capture Management SystemPersonnelN/A (Economic Development Program Manager reclassified position)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Sales Force or Other Software License CapitalSales Force or Other Software License Fee$0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $40,000OperatingN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTPersonnel0Capital$500 000 $1 510 000 $10 000 $10 000 $10 000 $2 040 000 Capital$500,000 $1,510,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $2,040,000 Operating$95,000 $95,000 Total$500,000 $1,510,000 $10,000 $10,000 $105,000 $2,135,000 FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 71 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANSUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANWorkforce InitiativesEstimated Annual CostTOTAL 5-YEAR COSTWorkforce 1:Sponsor an Economic Gardening Pilot ProgramFTEs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5PersonnelN/A (Coordinated by DSD Staff)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CitlN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingEdward Lowe Foundation Econ Gardening Certification & Pilot Project Fees$0 $26,950 $21,450 $21,450 $21,450 $91,300 Workforce 2:Sponsor Soft skills Training Program Targeting Qualified Workforce 2:Program Targeting Qualified Target IndustriesPersonnelN/A (Coordinated by DSD Staff)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingTraining Fees ($30K/quarter x 4)$0 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $480,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTPersonnel0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Operating$0 $146,950 $141,450 $141,450 $141,450 $571,300 Total$0 $146,950 $141,450 $141,450 $141,450 $571,300 FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 72 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANInnovation InitiativesEstimated Annual CostTOTAL 5-YEAR COSTInnovation 1:Design, Implement & Sponsor a Business Accelerator ProgramFTEsYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5PersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 /CapitalFacility renovation costs (Sistrunk Sub Area)$1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 OperatingOperating expenses (contract labor, office space, equipment, supplies, marketing, etc.) /3$465,000 $360,000 $255,000 $150,000 $1,230,000 Innovation 2:Sponsor the Kauffman Foundation FastTrac Program in Fort LauderdalePersonnelN/A (Coordinated by DSD Staff)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalKauffman Foundation License Fees$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 Kff F dti P OperatingKauffman Foundation Program Materials$0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $48,000 Innovation 3:Sponsor the Kauffman 1 Million Cups Pilot Program in Fort LauderdalePersonnelN/A (Trained Staff Facilitators)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PersonnelN/A (Trained Staff Facilitators)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingEducation materials, AV equipment, Meeting Venue Rental, F&B ($1k/Mo x 12 mo's)$12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $60,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTPersonnel0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital$50,000 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,050,000 Operating$12,000 $489,000 $384,000 $279,000 $174,000 $1,338,000 Total$62,000 $1,489,000 $384,000 $279,000 $174,000 $2,388,000 FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 73 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANLivability InitiativesEstimated Annual CostTOTAL 5-YEAR COSTLivability 1:Advocate for Wave Expansion to Connect Downtown Fort Lauderdale to the Beach and to the AirportFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5YEAR COSTe eac a d o e poFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5PersonnelN/A (Coordinated by DSD Staff)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalFeasibility studies (Department of Transportation & Mobility)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Livability 2:Design, Implement & Manage an Urban Culture Curation ProgramPersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingUrban Culture Curation contracts services (Note: Marketing, Branding, Programming Funded by Economic Development Communications )$0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $300,000 Program)TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTPersonnel0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Operating$0 $0 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 pgTotal$0 $0 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 74 SUMMARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANIMPLEMENTATION TACTICS & FINANCING PLANHealthy Business Environment InitiativesEstimated Annual CostTOTAL 5-YEAR COSTBusiness 1:Design, Implement & Manage a Citywide Placemaking Marketing/Branding CampaignFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5COSTMarketing/Branding CampaignFTEsYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5PersonnelN/A (Coordinated by DSD Staff)0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalPlacemaking Improvements (communications strategy, web design, signage, wayfinding )$0 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $200,000 Operating expenses (consulting fees, OperatingOperating expenses (consulting fees, print, web, social media, event planning)$0 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $300,000 Business 2:Design, Implement & Manage a Retail Recruitment Program PersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 OperatingOperating expenses (ESRI, Moody's Economy.Com, COSTAR Data, retail consultant fees, Buxton, CBRE, etc.)$0 $100,000 $100,000 $40,000 $40,000 $280,000 Business 3:Conduct a Sub-Area Level Parking A Business 3:Assessment PersonnelN/A0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CapitalParking Study Consulting Fees$40,000 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $80,000 OperatingN/A$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTPl0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Personnel0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital$40,000 $90,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $280,000 Operating$0 $175,000 $175,000 $115,000 $115,000 $580,000 Total$40,000 $265,000 $225,000 $165,000 $165,000 $860,000 1/ City of Fort Lauderdale personnel costs assume base wage plus fringe benefits factor =35%FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 751/ City of Fort Lauderdale personnel costs assume base wage plus fringe benefits factor 35%2/ Annual average merit-based personnel wage adjustments =1% IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – FUNDING SOURCES & ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTSWhatpublicprivatecivicandinstitutionalWhatpublic,private,civicandinstitutionalfunding resource are available to implementthe plan?Proposed funding sources include General Fund, CRA, CDBG, BusinessImprovement Districts, Federalgrants, and Broward County.ABroward Countydfbkpgypreliminary assessment of funding requirements and availabilityprovides a high-level test of the feasibility of securing the financialresources required to fully implement the plan within the next five years.City of Fort Lauderdale General FundGeneral Fund resources are constrained and implementation of theBrowardCounty government returns a portion oftax revenuesbacktothe City of Fort Lauderdale for programs such as the BeachRenourishment Program. The City of Fort Lauderdale should exploreidentifying supplemental sources of funding for strategic enhancementsthat will benefit the regional economy.BusinessImprovementDistrict(BID)plan will require a long-term, focused advocacy effort by theDepartment of Sustainable Development and other stakeholders.However, the opportunity for a positive return on public investment isclearly there – with effective civic leadership, accountability measuresand a strong economy to build upon.CommunityRedevelopmentArea(CRA)BusinessImprovementDistrict(BID)The Beach Business Improvement District (BID) is the only such specialassessment district operating in the City of Fort Lauderdale. Anadditional BID is proposed for the Uptown sub-area. Such districtswould benefit directly from initiatives related to retail recruitment,placemakingurbanculturecurationandeconomicCommunityRedevelopmentArea(CRA)Community Redevelopment Area funding is earmarked for a number ofspecific initiatives recommended by the plan (i.e., placemakinginvestments like wayfinding signage, streetscape improvements, retailincentives and other small business initiatives.CommunityDevelopmentBlockGrant(CDBG)placemaking,urbanculturecuration,andeconomicdevelopment/marketing and branding. It is also recommended thatthe City explore expanding the existing Beach BID and/or creatingadditional BIDs to generate funding for implementation of targetedESDAP initiatives as determined by the BID(s)’ Board of Directors.LocalFinancialInstitutionsCommunityDevelopmentBlockGrant(CDBG)The City of Fort Lauderdale currently is administering $1.5 million inCDBG programs within the City. This program could be expanded fivetimes by utilizing the HUD 108 Loan Guarantee Program to create low-to moderate-income jobs and finance construction.FederalGrantsLocalFinancialInstitutionsThe City of Fort Lauderdale benefits from a strong partnership withlocal financial institutions actively engaged as EDSAP stakeholders.The implementation of a revolving loan fund program will requireparticipation by local banks to meet the $500,000 EconomicDevelopmentAdministration(EDA)seedfundingrequirementtobeFederalGrantsThe City of Fort Lauderdale is currently implementing a $28 millionfederal TIGER Grant indicating a high capacity for federal grant writingand advocacy. Other federal resources to consider are: U.S.Endowment for the Arts Our Town grant program for urban culturecuration, Wells Fargo/National Fish & Wildlife AdministrationDevelopmentAdministration(EDA)seedfundingrequirementtobeleveraged by public funds upon approval by a City Council vote toestablish the fund. Once approved, DSD will be responsible fordeveloping program guidelines and managing outreach throughoutthe life of the program.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 76conservation grants, and the Small Business Administration’s seedcapital program for revolving loan funding. IX. Next StepsFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN77 IMPLEMENTATION PLANNEXT STEPSMessage from the Mayor1. Department of Sustainable Development willpropose the EDSAP to be adopted as a PolicyIMPLEMENTATION PLAN –NEXT STEPSMessage from the MayorThe outstanding recognition and economicperformance indicated by the trends highlightedResolution by the City Commission (consistent withits designation as a priority in the AnnualPress PlayAction Plan).2. Funding sources will be subject to annual budgetin this strategic action plan affirms that ourstrategic planning, infrastructure enhancementsand community investments are paying off.Italsoremindsusthatourgreatestaccomplishmentsareachievedcollectivelyasaappropriation each year.3. City Commission will serve as the stewards of theplan citywide.4.DepartmentofSustainableDevelopmentwillserveaccomplishmentsareachievedcollectivelyasaunified City.Again, we are proud of the successes of ourpast, enthusiastic about our present andenergizedbythepossibilitiesofourfuture4.DepartmentofSustainableDevelopmentwillserveas the implementers of the plan – hiring requiredstaff and contractors to manage the proposedeconomic development programs and associatedcity resources.energizedbythepossibilitiesofourfuture.This Economic Strategic Action Plan is a truereflection of the great things our City has to offer.I am committed to continuing the work that hasbeenstartedthatwillonlymaketheCityofFort5. Accountability for implementation initiatives will bemonitored by updating the economic benchmarkingdashboard annually by DSD staff and consultants(FY2015-FY2018).beenstartedthatwillonlymaketheCityofFortLauderdale a better place to live, work and play.Mayor John P. “Jack” SeilerC f F Lddl6. The EDSAP implementation initiatives will bemodified to respond to market conditions andavailability of public resources.City of Fort LauderdaleOctober 2014FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 78 Appendix A – Detailed Sub-Area Demographic & EconomicArea Demographic & Economic AnalysisFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN79 UPTOWN FORT LAUDERDALE/FXE (SURROUNDING THE EXECUTIVE (AIRPORT)DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThe Uptown Fort Lauderdale/Executive Airport sub area isppcharacterized by a strong population growth of 25% between1990 and 2000. It is projected to be one of the fastestgrowing areas through 2017.The sub-area contains a diverse area with a strong HispanicpresenceHispanicsaccountfor24%ofthepopulationRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYpresence.Hispanicsaccountfor24%ofthepopulationcompared to 14.6% in the City overall.The area boasts a large prime workforce cohort and morechildren under 14 years old indicating a strong presence offamilies and relatively larger households (62% of thehouseholdsarefamilyrelatedversus47%Citywide)Therehouseholdsarefamily-relatedversus47%Citywide).Thereare an average of 2.69 persons per household versus 2.15persons for the City.There is a high rate of owner-occupied homes (60.5% versus41.8% for the City).Approximately 62.3% of the homes are valued in themoderate price range of $100,000 to $199,999 versus37.5% of homes in the City.Uptown is considered a middle income area (medianhhldif$45799$41180Cit id )RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYhouseholdincomes of$45,799versus$41,180Citywide).The area is challenged by relatively lower educationalattainment. While approximately 36.4% of adults have onlya high school degree compared to 27.6% of City adults, only20% of adults have a college degree or higher compared tofFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 8031.1% ofadults in the City. THE GALT OCEAN MILEDEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThe Galt Ocean Mile’s population peaked in 2000. Population decreasedalmost 5% between 2000 and 2010 and is expected to remain relativelyconstant through 2017.It is the least racially diverse sub-area: 95.7% of residents are Caucasian622%fCdAfAdf09%versus62.2%ofCity residents.AfricanAmerican residents accountfor0.9%of the area’s population versus 30.9% Citywide.It is also the area with the oldest population. The median age of Galt OceanMile’s residents is 67 years old versus 42.5 years for the City. Approximately74.5% of the sub-area is 55 years or older versus 30.3% for the City.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThe sub-area represents a relatively lower percentage of family households(38% versus 47% for the City). This area also has one of the smallest averagehousehold sizes (1.55 persons per household versus 2.15 for the City).Theareaboastsrelativelyhighhomepriceswith49.6%ofhomesvaluedabove$200,000comparedtolessthan38%fortheCityaswhole.above$200,000comparedtolessthan38%fortheCityaswhole.The residential market is robust with the lowest vacancy rate in the City: 2%versus 7.6% Citywide (excluding seasonal use homes). However, support forarea retail may be challenged by a high percentage of seasonal homes:37.8% are homes for seasonal use versus 9.9% of all City homes.hllhhhhd$TheGaltOceanMileishome to thehighest median income:$54,590 versus$41,180 for the City. Approximately 28.5% of households earn above$100,000 per year compared to 19.5% of City households.The sub-area is characterized by high educational attainment: 39.9% of adultshold a Bachelor’s degree or higher versus 31.1% adults in the City, and ahi hifdlihddd(17%113%fRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYhighconcentration ofadults withadvanceddegrees(17%versus11.3%ofCity adults).Residents of the Galt Ocean Mile are faced with relatively long commutes(22.4% of residents commute 45 minutes or longer versus 12.4% of Cityresidents).FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 81 NORTH BEACH VILLAGEDEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThNthBhVillbiiidliiltiTheNorthBeachVillage sub-areaisexperiencingdeclining population(nearly 9% between 2000 and 2010 with no growth is expectedthrough 2017).The neighborhood is considered less diverse than the City (90.3% ofresidents are Caucasian versus 62.2% of City residents). All other racialfand ethnic groups are under-represented, exceptforAsians, whichcomprise a small portion of the population (2.4% of North BeachVillage residents versus 1.6% of the City).The area is characterized by an older population. Nearly half (49.2%)ofthe residents are 55 years orolderversus 30.3% forthe City.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYNorth Beach Village contains the lowest proportion of familyhouseholds of all the sub-areas (27% of households versus 47% Cityhouseholds) and the smallest average household size (1.51 persons perhousehold versus 2.15 for the City).Thbbtlti lhi hdihlththThesub-areaboastsrelativelyhighermedianhome valuesthantheCity: median home value of $166,056 versus $156,501 for the City.There is a low percentage of owner-occupied homes (32.0%) due to alarge share of homes being for seasonal use (33.7%).Middle and upper income area: the median household income isRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGY$43,961 versus $41,180 forthe City. There is a slightly higherconcentration of middle income households.: 42.2% of householdsversus 37.5% of City households. There is also a slightly higherproportion of upper income households: 22.1% versus 19.5% of Cityhouseholds.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThe area contains the highest proportion of adults with a bachelor’sdegree or higher: 47.6% versus 31.1% of City adults. More than aquarter (27.3%) of working adults are engaged in managementoccupations versus 12% of City working adults. There is also thehighest percentage of adults working outside the State: 7.1% versus16%fCitdltFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 821.6%ofCityadults. DOWNTOWN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER (D-RAC)DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThe Downtown Regional Activity Center sub-area’s population grew nearly 80% between 2000 and 2010, yet population growth of less than 0.2% per year is expected between 2010 and 2017. The area is racially and ethnically diverse and there is a low proportion of family households (27% of households versus 47% Citywide). The area boasts a young population. The median age is 33.9 years versus 42.5 years for the City and 32.4% of population is 25-34 years of age versus 14 7% Citywide RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYof age versus 14.7% Citywide. The Downtown Regional Activity Center is characterized by the highest median home value in the City ($255,245 versus $156,501 for the City) yet relatively lower incomes. The area has a high concentration (63.1%) of households earning less than $35,000 per year compared 43 0% f h h ld h C A l 9 7% f to 43.0% of households in the City. Approximately 9.7% of area households are living below the poverty level versus 14.1% of households Citywide. The Downtown Regional Activity Center boasts relatively high educational attainment rates; 41.3% of area adults have bachelor’s degree or higher versus 31.1% of adults Citywide There is a high concentration of adults with advanced degrees (16.9% versus 11.3% of adults in the City.) There is a large immigrant population. The area is home to the highest proportion of residents who speak English ‘not well’ or ‘not at RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYhighest proportion of residents who speak English not well or not at all’ (11.1% of all sub-area residents). Downtown residents are faced with relatively long commutes. The area has the highest proportion of residents with commutes over one hour (12.1% versus 6.9% of City residents).FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 83 SISTRUNK BOULEVARDDEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThSi t kBl dbihtidblti lfl tTheSistrunkBoulevardsub-areaischaracterizedbyrelativelyflatpopulation growth (decreasing by 10% between 1990 and 2000 andregaining population the following decade). This area is not expected togrow significantly between 2010 and 2017.It is primarily an African American neighborhood (92.1% of residentsffare ofAfrican American origin and all otherracial and ethical groupsare under-represented).Thesub-areaishometoayoungpopulationwiththelowestmedianage (30.2 years versus 42.5 years Citywide). 42.4% of the residents areyoungerthan 25 years old versus 25.5% forthe City.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYConcurrently, Sistrunk Boulevard is characterized by the highestpercentage of family households (62% versus 47% for the City) and thelargest average household size: 2.72 persons per household versus2.15 for the City.Thbildlti lldihlf$79786Thesub-areaincludes relativelylowermedianhome values of$79,786,which is approximately half of the City’s median home value of$156,501,. It also has the highest vacancy rate (20% versus 7.6%Citywide). The Sistrunk Boulevardsub-area includes a relatively lowpercentage of owner-occupied housing (18.8% versus 41.8% for theCityasawhole)andthelowestmedianhouseholdincomeof$194751Cityasawhole)andthelowestmedianhouseholdincomeof$19,475versus $41,180 Citywide.There is a very high concentration of households earning less than$15,000 per year (41.6% of households versus 17.2% of Cityhouseholds) and the highest reported poverty rate (39.9% ofhouseholdsbelowpovertylineversus141%fortheCity)Povertyis1householdsbelowpovertylineversus14.1%fortheCity).Povertyisdefined by the U.S. Census as those households in the lowest incomequintile (those with weighted average household incomes of $20,599or less in 2012.)Residents are reported to have relatively low educational achievement;363%fdltdthhi hhldRidttlFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 8436.3%ofadultsdonothave ahighschooldegree.Residentsaremostlyengaged in low-wage occupations. SE 17THSTREET CORRIDORDEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILEThe SE 17thStreet Corridor sub-area (Broward County ConventionCenter to the Broward Health Medical Center) is experiencingpopulation growth shifts. Whilethere was an 8% decline between1990 and 2000, the area is expected to grow the fastest between2010 and 2017(currentlygrowingalmost 12% annually).(yggy)This sub-area is home to the highest percentage of Hispanics (29.9%of the population versus 14.6% for the City as a whole). Theproportion of Asians and “Other Race” is also higher than the rest ofthe City (10.7% versus 5.3% for the City as a whole).ThSE17thSCd’dhlRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYTheSE17thStreetCorridor’sresidents represent thelargest prime-age workforce cohort with a low proportion of people over 65 yearsold and under 15 years old (52.5% of residents are 25 to 54 yearsold cohort versus 44.3% of the City’s population).There is a relatively low percentage of family households (36%versus 47% forthe City) and households tend to be smaller(1.99residents per household versus 2.15 for the City). The sub-area isalso characterized by the lowest rate of owner-occupied homes(15.7% versus 41.8% for the City) as well as a relatively highvacancy rate (12.5% versus 7.6% Citywide).RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYResidents are characterized as earning relatively low incomes (52.1%of the households have incomes in the lower income brackets – lessthan $34,999 annually - compared to 43% of households Citywide).Two thirds of the workers are employed in low-level wageoccupations.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYResidents have achieved moderate educational attainment; a highproportion of adults hold an Associate Degrees or some college(43.6% versus 26.2% of adults Citywide).Residents of the SE 17thStreet Corridor sub-area enjoy relativelyshortcommutes(753%ofresidentshavecommutesunder30FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 85shortcommutes(75.3%ofresidentshavecommutesunder30minutes compared to 67.2% of all City workers). Appendix B – Economic Dl tCStdiDevelopment Case StudiesFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN86 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSWhat is the difference between Business Incubation and Business Acceleration Programs?Small and medium-sized business retention and attraction is an impactful economic development tactic for directly addressing Fort Lauderdale’s Vision Plan objective of fostering job creation and A business incubator’s main goal is to produce successful firms that will leave the program financially viable and freestanding. These incubator graduates have the potential to create jobs, revitalize neighborhoods, commercialize new technologies, and strengthen local and national economies. Critical to the definition of an incubator is the provision of management guidance Lauderdale s Vision Plan objective of fostering job creation and reducing the City’s current poverty rate.According to the Small Business Entrepreneurship Council and 2011U.S. Census Bureau data, there were 5.68 million employer firms in theUnited States. Firms with fewer than 500 workers accounted for 99.7percent of those businesses, and businesses with less than 20 workersCritical to the definition of an incubator is the provision of management guidance, technical assistance and consulting tailored to young growing companies. Incubators are distinct from accelerators in that they typically provide clients direct subsidized access to:appropriate rental space and flexible leaseshd bi bi i d iRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYmade up 89.8 percent. Adding in 22.7 million nonemployer firms in2012, the share of U.S. businesses with less than 500 workers increasesto 99.9 percent, and firms with less than 20 workers increases to 98percentThe International Economic Development Council (IEDC)’s bestpracticesinsmallandmediumsizedbusinessretentionandattractionshared basic business services and equipmenttechnology support services, and assistance in obtaining the financing necessary for company growth (including guidance on how to incorporate a business and generate professional financial statements). practicesinsmallandmedium-sizedbusinessretentionandattractionrecommend that municipal economic development departments directlysponsor or manage business incubation and acceleration programs tofoster the development of “entrepreneurial ecosystems” at the locallevel.The key differentiators between business incubation and businessIncubators vary in the way they deliver their services, in their organizational structure and in the types of clients they serve. Highly adaptable, incubators have differing goals, including diversifying rural economies, providing employment for and increasing wealth of depressed inner cities, and transferring technology from universities and major corporations. Incubator clients are at the forefront of developing new and innovative technologies creating new products and services acceleration program functions stems from the life-cycle stage of thecompanies participating and the degree of support or resourcesrequired to advance the company to the next stage of development.Business Incubators Provide Working Space and Technical Assistancedeveloping new and innovative technologies –creating new products and services for market locally, nationally, and even globally.The earliest incubation programs focused on a variety of technology companies or on a combination of light industrial, technology and service firms – today referred to as mixed-use incubators. However, in more recent years, new incubators have emerged targeting industries of interest to the City of Fort Lauderdale such as:According to the National Business Incubation Association (www.nbia.org), business incubation is a business support process that accelerates the successful development of start-up and fledgling companies by providing entrepreneurs with an array of targeted resources and services. These services are usually developed or h d b b d ff d b h h b gggyfood processingmedical technologiesspace and ceramics technologiesarts/arts technology and crafts and FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 87orchestrated by incubator management and offered both in the business incubator and through its network of contacts.arts/arts technology and crafts, and software development BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSWh t i th diff b t B i I b ti d What is the difference between Business Incubation and Business Acceleration Programs?Incubators may be funded by public or private/non-profit entities. Depending on the eligibility criteria of a range of funding sources (e.g., a foundation grant), incubator sponsors may target programs to support microenterprise creation, the fMentors benefit from giving back to the community. They get to assist in creating novel products and companies. They expand their network by being infused into many of the programs the business accelerator offers. Mentoring also provides high value investment opportunities as discussed in the next section.Business Accelerators Serve as a VC Funding Conduitneeds of women and minorities, environment/ sustainability/ resiliency, or a specific low-income geographic area. Business Accelerators Provide Mentorship and Team-Based Collaboration HubsTh l t d f b i l t i ll th t hi th t th Business Accelerators Serve as a VC Funding ConduitMost entrepreneurs need fundraising and accelerators therefore tend to attract a wide variety of potential funders and partners to the table. The program can offer a “no strings attached” model or require some level of payback (share of future profit). Business acceleration programs should be open to the regional community at large to provide a great opportunity for networking and relationship b ilding with others in the ind strRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThe largest draw of a business accelerator is usually the mentorship that the accelerator program provides. Accelerators have dedicated program managers to assist innovators and entrepreneurs with creating scalable business models, compelling go-to-market strategies and financials that are attractive to investors. A recent study published by the U.S. Small Business Administration indicates that entrepreneurs function best when they are part of a support network. Working networking and relationship building with others in the industry.Business Accelerator Case Study: TechStars, Boulder, COFounded in 2007, the firm is Boulder, Colorado-based, but has expanded nationally, in a kind of franchise model to New York, Seattle, Boston and San Antonio, Texas. A total of 114 companies have gone through the entrepreneurs function best when they are part of a support network. Working alongside other startups provides an opportunity to interact with other entrepreneurs. Accelerators do not usually provide a long-term space for companies to work from, but this can vary.Programs are frequently supported by CEO-level business advisors who understand the challenges a new entrepreneur faces in moving a technology fff hkl dhlk,pggprogram, and 98 are still active. Of those, 73 are receiving funding and have raised $134 million total in venture capital, generating 715 total new employees. TechStars is also very popular, with only 1% of 4,000 applications each year to all locations being accepted. About 80% of TechStars companies go from proof of concept into the market place. Depending on the regional market, business advisors can come across life sciences, technology, clean-tech, sports innovation and consumer products. They are supported by domain experts in marketing, finance and technology development. In Fort Lauderdale, EDSAP advisors have indicated interest from the following sectors:ygppgon to raise venture capital or a significant angel funding round. Companies have raised an average of $1.1 million upon finishing the program, across all the TechStars locations. About 40% of startups come from areas near the city of each program. TechStars founder David Cohen has hired directors at each of the other locations to run the programs.sectors:Technology / ICTMarineTourism (Culinary Arts, etc.)According to Cohen, the venture capital community views high quality accelerators as a filtering mechanism. In effect, TechStars is functioning as a new form of college education for entrepreneurs due to their highly selective front-end application process.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 88Healthcare / BiotechProfessional Technical Services Import/Export BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSTechStars’ model is to bring expert mentors to help its startups, and has a 10-to-1 mentor to startup ratio to make sure each company gets focused, deep attention from several mentors. TechStars has also tried to disseminate information about its model to others, by creating a “Global Accelerator Network” in partnership with Startup America. By Business Accelerator Case Study: Y Combinator –Mountain View, CAY Combinator is a business accelerator located in Silicon Valley known for creating a new model for funding early stage startups. Twice a year, Y Combinatorinvests a small amount of money ($120k) in a large number of gpppyopen-sourcing its model, TechStars has helped launch other accelerators. TechStars differs from other accelerator programs in that it keeps its incubator batches small and tries to give ample amount of attention to each of its startups. In its last batch in summer 2011, TechStars Boulder had 12 companies. It generally only holds one session per year, whereas others have two sessions. Combinatorinvests a small amount of money ($120k) in a large number of startups (85 companies in the first round of 2014). The startups move to Silicon Valley for three months, during which Y Combinator works intensively with them to get the company into the best possible shape and refine their pitch to investors. Each cycle culminates in “Demo Day”, when the startups present their RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYgenerally only holds one session per year, whereas others have two sessions. TechStars also differs from some others in that its founder is also a startup investor, having recently closed a $28 million second fund. Companies that have gone through the program include SendGrid, Occipital, Orbotix, CrowdTwistand OnSwipe.C t t I f ticompanies to a carefully selected, invite-only audience. After “Demo Day,” the Y Combinator staff and alumni network continue to help founders for the life of their company, and beyond.When taking into account the 172 companies that have raised funding, been acquired, or closed since its founding in 2007, Y Combinator has generated a total business accelerator company value of $7 78 billion for Contact Information:KJ Singh, Managing DirectorTechstars1407 BroadwayNew York, NY 100181 (303) 720 6559generated a total business accelerator company value of $7.78 billion, for an average of $45.2 million per company. (Note: the data is skewed by certain large companies such as Dropbox and Airbnb). Other big exits include: 280 North, Heroku, OMGPOP, Loopt, Cloudkick, Zecter, Wufoo and Reddit. For comparison, Y Combinatorreported in June 2014 that its top 21 companies were worth $4.7 billion.()kj.singh@techstars.comContact Information:Y Combinator335 Pioneer Way Mountain View, CA 94041info@ycombinator cominfo@ycombinator.comFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 89 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSEconomic Gardening Pilot Program Littleton COEconomic Gardening Pilot Program, Littleton, COProgram OverviewLittleton’s decision to focus on “economicgardening” instead of “economic hunting”wasprimarilybasedonresearchconductedbyDavidBirchatMIT thatindicatedthatLessons Learned:By leveraging the government agency’s expertise, small and localbusinessescantakeadvantageofthebusinessintelligenceneededtowasprimarilybasedonresearchconductedbyDavidBirchatMITthatindicatedthat“the majority of all new jobs in any local economy were produced by the small, localbusinesses in the community” and that in terms of job creation, the size of thecompany did not matter as much as the company’s rate of growth did. Littletondeveloped a vital aspect of its economic gardening program, assistance tocompanies with high growth potential, especially second stage companies.ThlfhdLlfbusinessescantakeadvantageofthebusinessintelligenceneededtohelp them understand the marketplace and grow.“Intellectual subsidies” are another way that the government canincentivize and support local businesses by using resources they alreadyhave – great for cash strapped metros that still want to support localbusiness.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThree elements ofthe economic gardening program inLittleton are information,infrastructure, and connections.The information component provides market research, geographic information system(GIS) services, and Web marketing support to businesses within city limits.Infrastructure refers to both physical infrastructure such as roads, transportationOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: UnknownOperating Costs: $5,500 for initial program license fees and $4,290perpilotprogramprojectperyear.networks, utilities, and broadband access and quality-of-life amenities such as artsand culture, libraries, high-quality education, and green spaces.The connections component of the program links entrepreneurs with the regionalworkforce, training, innovation, technical assistance, and other resources andprovides strategic networking opportunities for business owners within similar orcomplementaryindustrysectorspppgpjpyFunding Sources: N/A (participating municipalities/authorities provideprogram fees).Contact information:Rebecca Larsoncomplementaryindustrysectors.The program was launched in 1989 and over the next 20 years, the program grew toits present size of 4.5 full-time staff and an annual operating budget of approximately$500,000. Thousands of local businesses have been assisted, and economic growthstatistics at the macro level have been significant. Between 1990 and 2008, thenumber ofjobs in the cityincreased by71percent—from 14,907 to 25,483jobs—Rebecca LarsonEconomic Intelligence SpecialistEconomic Development Department, Littleton, CO2255 W. Berry Ave., Littleton, CO 80120edrl@littletongov.org303-795-3758jyyp,,jand sales tax revenues increased from $6.8 million to $23.9 million (not adjusted forinflation).During that period, no tax breaks, incentives, or subsidies were offered to potentialnew businesses, and the city’s population grew by only 23.5 percent. Severaldevelopment projects came online during that time despite the lack of city incentives.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 90 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSEconomic Gardening Pilot Program Littleton COEconomic Gardening Pilot Program, Littleton, COProgram OverviewLittleton’s decision to focus on “economicgardening” instead of “economic hunting”wasprimarilybasedonresearchconductedbyDavidBirchatMIT thatindicatedthatLessons Learned:By leveraging the government agency’s expertise, small and localbusinessescantakeadvantageofthebusinessintelligenceneededtowasprimarilybasedonresearchconductedbyDavidBirchatMITthatindicatedthat“the majority of all new jobs in any local economy were produced by the small, localbusinesses in the community” and that in terms of job creation, the size of thecompany did not matter as much as the company’s rate of growth did. Littletondeveloped a vital aspect of its economic gardening program, assistance tocompanies with high growth potential, especially second stage companies.ThlfhdLlfbusinessescantakeadvantageofthebusinessintelligenceneededtohelp them understand the marketplace and grow.“Intellectual subsidies” are another way that the government canincentivize and support local businesses by using resources they alreadyhave – great for cash strapped metros that still want to support localbusiness.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYThree elements ofthe economic gardening program inLittleton are information,infrastructure, and connections.The information component provides market research, geographic information system(GIS) services, and Web marketing support to businesses within city limits.Infrastructure refers to both physical infrastructure such as roads, transportationOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: UnknownOperating Costs: $5,500 for initial program license fees and $4,290perpilotprogramprojectperyear.networks, utilities, and broadband access and quality-of-life amenities such as artsand culture, libraries, high-quality education, and green spaces.The connections component of the program links entrepreneurs with the regionalworkforce, training, innovation, technical assistance, and other resources andprovides strategic networking opportunities for business owners within similar orcomplementaryindustrysectorspppgpjpyFunding Sources: N/A (participating municipalities/authorities provideprogram fees).Contact information:Rebecca Larsoncomplementaryindustrysectors.The program was launched in 1989 and over the next 20 years, the program grew toits present size of 4.5 full-time staff and an annual operating budget of approximately$500,000. Thousands of local businesses have been assisted, and economic growthstatistics at the macro level have been significant. Between 1990 and 2008, thenumber ofjobs in the cityincreased by71percent—from 14,907 to 25,483jobs—Rebecca LarsonEconomic Intelligence SpecialistEconomic Development Department, Littleton, CO2255 W. Berry Ave., Littleton, CO 80120edrl@littletongov.org303-795-3758jyyp,,jand sales tax revenues increased from $6.8 million to $23.9 million (not adjusted forinflation).During that period, no tax breaks, incentives, or subsidies were offered to potentialnew businesses, and the city’s population grew by only 23.5 percent. Severaldevelopment projects came online during that time despite the lack of city incentives.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 91 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSGrow FloridaGrow FloridaProgram OverviewGrowFL provides strategies, resources and support to second-stagecompaniesfornext levelgrowth.BysupportingcompanieswithLessons Learned:Support of local businesses through mentorship and networking by the government helps foster employment growthcompaniesfornextlevelgrowth.BysupportingcompanieswithStrategic Research and peer-to-peer CEO mentoring, GrowFL helpscompanies overcome obstacles to growth and leads them towardsprosperity.Between fiscal years 2009 and 2012, GrowFL helped more than 400companies create more than 4,187 direct and indirect local jobs andbh$581llFl d ’government helps foster employment growth.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: Unknown Operating Costs: UnknownRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYcontribute more than$581million toFlorida’seconomy.Today, GrowFL has assisted more than 700 companies through theirStrategic Research and CEO Roundtable programs and recognized150 successful entrepreneurs through their annual awards program,Florida Companies to Watch.Funding Sources: UnknownContact information:Tamiee NemecekDirector, Grow Florida12201 R h P k S i #200 12201 Research Parkway Suite #200 Orlando, FL 32826|(407) 823-6384FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 92 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSLessons Learned:Entrepreneurship can be supported by strategic education and outreach efforts.Program OverviewKauffman FastTrac is a global provider of training that equips aspiring andestablished entrepreneurs with the business skills and insights, tools, resources,dtktttdflbiOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: NoneOperating Costs: Variesandnetworktostartandgrow successfulbusinesses.FastTrac programs are delivered by a variety of affiliate organizations – non-academic, academic, nonprofit andfor-profit – including chambers ofcommerce, business development centers, local and regional economicdevelopment councils, colleges, universities, microenterprise organizations,consultingfirms,andmanyothersacrossthefiftyUnitedStatesandselectRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYFunding Sources: Program ParticipantsContact information:Kim McGrewBusiness Manager and Customer Relations Specialist(816) 4544380consultingfirms,andmanyothersacrossthefiftyUnitedStatesandselectcountries around the world. Organizational & Institutional RequirementsKauffman Foundation– One Million Cups (816) 454-4380Lessons Learned:Established networking events can help unite the community and spark Program/NetworkProgram Overview1 Million Cups is a program run by entrepreneurs for entrepreneurs. TheprogramtakesplaceeveryWednesdaymorningfrom9:0010:00AMininnovation and job creation.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: NoneOperating Costs: VariesprogramtakesplaceeveryWednesdaymorningfrom9:00-10:00AMinlocations all around the country. Volunteers in each city run the program semi-autonomously, and gather in coffee shops, co-working spaces, and even TVstations.Developed by Kauffman Labs for Enterprise Creation, and refined byentrepreneurs around the world, I Million Cupsisawayto activate a city’spgFunding Sources: Program ParticipantsContact information:Kim McGrewBusiness Manager and Customer Relations Specialistppyycommunity of entrepreneurs through online curriculum, coaching andexperiential learning. The program is run of, by and for entrepreneurs--adedicated group of startup communityorganizers in each active communityvolunteer their time to organize a promote 1 Million Cups each week. Teamsof organizers license the 1 Million Cups toolset from Kauffman Labs for free,and events are run semi-autonomously.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 93Business Manager and Customer Relations Specialist(816) 454-4380 BUSINESS INCUBATION & ACCELERATION PROGRAMSUnion Kitchen Washington DCUnion Kitchen –Washington, DCProgram OverviewUnion Kitchen gives food entrepreneurs communal space to incubate theirconceptsbyprovidingalow-cost,low-risk,full-servicekitchenforlocalLessons Learned:Business incubation programs can extend beyond technology (i.e., “Eds and Meds”) to foster entrepreneurial development of the creative class;conceptsbyprovidingalowcost,lowrisk,fullservicekitchenforlocalbusinesses to grow and establish their operations. This concept eliminates theneed for small businesses to take on debt, purchase expensive equipment, signa long-term lease, or take many of the other risks that business owners mustundertake when starting a business.Union Kitchen provides approximately 4,500 square feet of food prep andkdfdldUKhMeds ) to foster entrepreneurial development of the creative class;By removing the start-up risk associated with opening a restaurant, more cultural diversity can be fostered by removing the typical barriers to entry. Once a concept has proven successful in the marketplace, restaurateurs can take on the risk with more confidence and capital;Th b fit t th it i l di ti di l ll RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYcooking areas,dry storage,frozen storage, andcoldstorage.UnionKitchenoffers parking, a full slate of business services, and covers all costs for itsmembers, including utilities, taxes, cleaning, trash collection, and pest controlservices. As an independent operator, these services are not only costly(thousands of dollars each month) but are also a highly labor intensivechallenge to business owners, distracting them from focusing on what matterstith ibtdtdfi ditThe benefits to the community are numerous, including creating diverse, locally owned and operated entertainment amenities, potential uptick in leasing activity, and the multiplier effect associated with successful restaurant activity.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: catering kitchen fit-out approximately $75,000; business most: preparingtheirbestproductandfinding more customers.pgpp y , ;licenses, insurance, marketing (web design, etc.) approximately $25,000.Operating Costs: Monthly lease costs of $6,000 plus approximately $2,000 in operating costs.Funding Sources: Union Kitchen membership dues (variable, depending on size of business operation and space needs)size of business operation and space needs).Contact information:1110 Congress St NEWashington, DC 20002info@unionkitchendc.comFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 94 RETAIL RECRUITMENT AND RETENTIONRetail Coordinator Lower Merion Township Montgomer Co nt PARetail Coordinator, Lower Merion Township, Montgomery County, PAProgram OverviewThe Township of Lower Merion has a dedicated retail recruiter position housed in the Economic and Community Development Department. The township Lessons Learned:A dedicated staff member whose sole focus is to support and recruit retailers helps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in a metroin the Economic and Community Development Department. The township provides the services of its retail coordinator to assist businesses with finding locations and to guide them through the process of opening in the Township. Lower Merion Township’s recruiter is a part time (30 hour/week) position with a limited budget for local travel and conferences (one local ISCS conference and one retail recruiter conference each year). The township does not have an l b d f l b k l H h h f d d helps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in a metroOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: Unknown Operating Costs: UnknownRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYannual budget for retail brokers or consultants. However, the township funded the initial retail mix plan for the four target areas (towns) and would fund strategic updates to this plan apart from the annual budget as needed.There is one bid in the Township that organizes events, and handles plantings and clean and safe functions and uses social media to announce new businesses and events -which is good support to the retail recruitment effort Funding Sources: UnknownContact information:Heidi TirjanRetail CoordinatorB ildi & Pl i E i D lbusinesses and events which is good support to the retail recruitment effort. Other BIDs outside the township have recruiters which are competing for the best local retailers in the greater Philadelphia area.Building & Planning, Economic DevelopmentEconomic & Community Development Divisionhtirjan@lowermerion.org(610)645-6295FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 95 RETAIL RECRUITMENT AND RETENTIONRetail Recr iter Pioneer Sq are Seattle WashingtonRetail Recruiter, Pioneer Square, Seattle, WashingtonProgram OverviewThe Alliance for Pioneer Square was launched in June 2010 to lead theimplementationofthemostrecent neighborhoodplan,PioneerSquare2015.Lessons Learned:A non-profit organization whose sole focus is to support and recruit retailers helps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in a metroimplementationofthemostrecentneighborhoodplan,PioneerSquare2015.The alliance works holistically in the area. Issues include retail mix plan and asupports a mix of business issues in the business improvement area.The oldest BIA within the City of Seattle, the Pioneer Square BIA was formed asa local business community effort to remain competitive in the marketplace.BIA’sincludeprogramsandservicessuchasparkingmarketingbeautificationhelps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in a metroOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: none (retail recruitment activity houses in existing Business Improvement District)Operating Costs: One fulltime equivalent employee (minimum of three years)RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYBIA sincludeprogramsandservicessuchasparking,marketing,beautification,security, and public area maintenance.Pioneer Square remains, however, home to enviable assets, including an ever-growing office population, a multitude of transit options, and beautiful, historicbuildings unrivaled elsewhere in the City. Along with key developments nowunderway—notably Stadium Place, with its 11 blocks of housing, retail andOperating Costs: One full-time equivalent employee (minimum of three years)Funding Sources: The Pioneer Square BIA is a self-help mechanism whereby Pioneer Square business owners choose to assess themselves. Where activities support the entire neighborhood the Alliance garners additional revenue from corporate underwriting, grants, mitigation and fund raising.foffice space, and demolition of the Alaskan Way Viaduct that will open up thedistrict to the waterfront—the Alliance for Pioneer Square seized theopportunity to focus on improving retail.The detailed strategy for Seattle’s historic Pioneer Square district was carriedout in 2012 by Downtown Works. A recruiter was hired by the Alliance, tostewardthestrategyByfirsthalfof2013morethanonedozennewContact information:Karen True, Community & Business Development SpecialistAlliance for Pioneer Square 310 1st Ave S, Suite 20, Seattle, WATel: (206) 667-0687lli f istewardthestrategy.Byfirsthalfof2013,morethanonedozennewoperations that fit the merchandise mix plan opened or were slated to do so inPioneer Square.www.allianceforpioneersquare.orgkaren@pioneersquare.orgFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 96 RETAIL RECRUITMENT AND RETENTIONDowntown A stin Retail De elopment Strateg A stin Te asDowntown Austin Retail Development Strategy, Austin, TexasProgram OverviewThe lead organization for the downtown retail strategy is the DowntownAustin Alliance,apublicimprovementdistrict(PID).Lessons Learned:A public improvement district whose sole focus is to support and recruit retailers helps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in targeted AustinAlliance,apublicimprovementdistrict(PID).The DAA’s primary funding source comes from a special assessment onprivately owned, large properties (over $500,000) within this PID. Therevenue is used to provide direct services supporting downtown’s safetyand cleanliness.TheDAAalsoworksasafull-timeadvocatefordowntownthroughdozensretailers helps to foster a desired tenant mix in key properties in targeted redevelopment areas.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: None.Operating Costs: $150 000 for retail development strategy and one fullRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYTheDAAalsoworksasafull-timeadvocatefordowntownthroughdozensof programs and initiatives that increase downtown’s appeal and economichealth. The DAA has an overall budget of $ 2.9 M and is involved in a fullrange of BID activities.The retail initiative started in 2003. The DAA undertook various retailstudies and found the most helpful a retail mix plan that included detailedOperating Costs: $150,000 for retail development strategy and one full-time equivalent retail recruitment staff person (minimum of three years).Funding Sources: City of Austin Public Improvement District revenues.Contact information:Mll Al d A i Diinformation about the lease terms on the ground floor and helped theorganizing to create a hierarchy of streets to better focus the organization’sresources.The DAA maintains an annual budget of approximately $150,000 for theretail initiative to cover staff and expenses include consulting servicementionedandretainerforanationalretailbrokertoassistinrecruitingMolly Alexander, Associate DirectorDowntown Austin AllianceTel: 512-469-1766 x7203malexander@downtownaustin.commentionedandretainerforanationalretailbrokertoassistinrecruitingkey national tenants.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 97 CROWDFUNDING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTOneSparkin Jacksonville FloridaOneSparkin Jacksonville, FloridaProgram OverviewIn April 2013, 130,000 people attended the first OneSpark festival indowntownJacksonville,Florida,tohearindierockbands,watchfireLessons Learned:Crowdfunding can be an innovative way to raise money for alternative-type projectsdowntownJacksonville,Florida,tohearindierockbands,watchfiredancers, admire multimedia art installations, and, most important, listen toentrepreneurs’ pitches for more than 400 projects in search of seedmoney. The ventures ranged from art and theater projects to robotics andvideo games.The Jacksonville One Spark festival was intended, in part, to link the realddlhbfhdhlprojectsMetros outside of the typical tech markets can attract capital to fund art and technology projectsOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: $1 MillionRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYestate anddevelopment sector withmembers oftheartsandtechnologycreative class.One Spark raised $107,000—a little more than 10 percent of its $1million budget—from more than 400 backers, some of whom contributedas little as $10, using the popular crowdfunding website Kickstarter.JacksonvilleresidentPeterSRummellimmediatepastchairmanofULICapital Costs: $1 MillionOperating Costs: None.Funding Sources: Various; Peter S. Rummell, immediate past chairman of ULIContact information:JacksonvilleresidentPeterS.Rummell,immediatepastchairmanofULI,provided the remainder, plus another $250,000 for prize money.Contact information:Heidi TirjanRetail CoordinatorBuilding & Planning, Economic DevelopmentEconomic & Community Development Divisionhtirjan@lowermerion.org(610)645-6295FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 98 CROWDFUNDING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTNeighborl Crowd So rced F nding for Local P blic/Ci ic Initiati es and Infrastr ct re Neighbor.ly –Crowd Sourced Funding for Local Public/Civic Initiatives and Infrastructure Betterments (National)Program OverviewLessons Learned:Neighbor.ly is a fund-raising platform focused on civic improvements. Thesite works with organization (neighborhood organizations, public officials,private investors, etc.) to develop fund raising campaigns for civicimprovements and interface with donors.The platform has been used to raise matching funds for Federal, state orthtAftjttt dbNihblthtCapital improvements can be funded by alternative sourcesFederal and state funding can extended by social media driven funding and awarenessCommunity involvement can be supported by social mediaRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYother grants.After projectsarevettedbyNeighbor.ly,there are run atnocost.The fee is five percent of funds raised. The program works with projectsponsors to drive traffic to the fundraising site. The most successful projectshave sponsors who are fully engaged with their audience, with strong on-and off-linepresence,use social media(Twitter/Facebook),and conductOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: $1 MillionOperating Costs: variable; depending on city staff resources required to execute any particular fundraising campaign.p,(/),outreach events to constituency to raise awareness about the project.The platform has been operating since 2012 and has raised $1.5 millionfor over 24 projects valued from $2,000 to $400,000.The Platform is a startup funded by the Knight Foundation and Points ofLightFoundationsFunding Sources: Knight Foundation and Points of Light FoundationsContact information:Jase Wilson, CEO, Founderwww.Neighbor.ly.comLightFoundations.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 99 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSEconomic De elopment Marketing NOLA Downtown District New Orleans Lo isianaEconomic Development Marketing, NOLA Downtown District, New Orleans, LouisianaProgram OverviewSeeking to attract Industries of the Mind, the Downtown Development District(DDD) needed to change the collective subject, focusing instead on progress,innovation,opportunityandsuccessLessons Learned:Through partnership with the City, private sector firms with marketing expertise can help the city market itself, and in some cases, raise awareness of ke programs and initiati esinnovation,opportunityandsuccess.North Star research found that New Orleans is at once a place with aninternationally renowned, authentic and inspiring framework that is also a cleanslate. The city has become a productive, prolific laboratory for ideas and reformacross many sectors, public and private. Headlines have been earned withadvances in education practices, improved housing and even alternative energy.awareness of key programs and initiatives.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: $1 MillionOperating Costs: : initial campaign design $250,000 (consultant fees) plus i l $350 000 ll f k i d b di RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYBut that story is not coordinated or frequent enough. Research regularly revealed adeficit in marketing and promotion.Brand Strategy: North Star recommendedtargeting Industries of the Mind with astrategy that positions Downtown New Orleans as a collage of distinctcommunities and opportunities whose absolute cultural authenticity makes it amuse(sourceofintelligenceandinspirationforcreativity)thatfirestheimaginationapproximately $350,000 annually for marketing and branding costs (minimum three to five years).Funding Sources: City of New Orleans, LA.Contact information:Ed B l w Vi P id t & Di t f Cli t S imuse(sourceofintelligenceandinspirationforcreativity)thatfirestheimaginationand energizes you to shape a prosperous future – yours and the city.Creativity focused on the idea of the citybeingbothamuseandablankcanvas,inviting innovators to “raise your own bar.” Complementary logos were developedfor the DDD and Downtown New Orleans using a fresh, modern color palette thatdoes not rely on stereotypical New Orleans’ colors. The DDD logo was designedEd Barlow, Vice President & Director of Client ServicesNorth Star Ideas209 Danyacrest Drive Nashville, TN 37214Tel: 615.232.2103 x 34615.523.1146 faxinfo@northstarideas comwith an almost three-dimensional effect. The Downtown logo is available inhorizontal and vertical orientations and uses a simple, bold, contemporary styledesigned to make a big impact in large and small spaces. Ads feature NewOrleans entrepreneurs positioned in frontof larger-than-life canvases that speaktheir mind about the city. Brand narrative sparks a connection between this city ofsharp contrasts and the people who might make it their own.info@northstarideas.comFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 100 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSDestination Promotion thro gh Special E ents Napa Downtown Association CADestination Promotion through Special Events, Napa Downtown Association, CAProgram OverviewTo promote downtown Napa as a destination, the Napa Downtown Associationti dThPl kiGtlhiltiNLessons Learned:Over 7,500 people attended the event, an outstanding turnout for the inaugural year. The day before the event the Cajun Country Web page on the Napa Downtown website had 529 hits The da after the e ent the retainedThePlacemakingGrouptolaunchaspecialevents campaign.NapaDowntown hosted the first Wine Country Cajun Festival in October 2007 toincrease traffic for downtown merchants and restaurants, and also to highlightNapa’s many exceptional chefs and wine-tasting bars.One challenge was how to set this event apart from other concerts and festivalstakingplaceinwinecountry.ThePlacemakingGroupcalleduponNapa’sthe Napa Downtown website had 529 hits. The day after the event, the Web hits went down to 120 per day, demonstrating that event PR and promotion drive Web traffic (www.donapa.com).Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: None.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYtakingplaceinwinecountry.ThePlacemakingGroupcalleduponNapa ssignature chefs to offer a different take on the concert-centered event. Whilepromoting what they would be serving at the event – from seafood gumbo andduck jambalaya to pizza with a Cajun twist - the chefs were also reinforcing ourbrand message: Napa Downtown as a dining destination. The Zydeco musiciansand the innovative event organizer Louisiana Sue were also used to promote thefestival.pOperating Costs: Variable, depending on civic support/in-kind donations.Funding Sources: Various (City and private donors).Contact information:Th Pl ki GThe Placemaking Group supplemented the chef and personality placements withcalendar announcements and news releases with event details. Every online festivalnotice was crosslinked with the Napa Downtown website to drive more visitorsthere.TheeventpublicityransimultaneouslywithadvertisinginlocalnewspapersinThe Placemaking Group505 14th Street, 5th FloorOakland, CA 94612Phone: 510.835.7900Fax: 510.768.0044Theeventpublicityransimultaneouslywithadvertisinginlocalnewspapers,inSFGate.com and with Google ad words. All communications drove people to theevent-specific website on the Napa Downtown site.Chefs appeared on Good Morning Sacramento, KGO-TV’s View From the Bay,and KISS-FM’s Renel in the Morning program, and were also featured in a front-page spread in the Napa Register the week prior to the festival.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 101 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSDestination Promotion thro gh Special E ents Napa Downtown Association CADestination Promotion through Special Events, Napa Downtown Association, CAProgram OverviewTo promote downtown Napa as a destination, the Napa Downtown Associationti dThPl kiGtlhiltiNLessons Learned:Over 7,500 people attended the event, an outstanding turnout for the inaugural year. The day before the event the Cajun Country Web page on the Napa Downtown website had 529 hits The da after the e ent the retainedThePlacemakingGrouptolaunchaspecialevents campaign.NapaDowntown hosted the first Wine Country Cajun Festival in October 2007 toincrease traffic for downtown merchants and restaurants, and also to highlightNapa’s many exceptional chefs and wine-tasting bars.One challenge was how to set this event apart from other concerts and festivalstakingplaceinwinecountry.ThePlacemakingGroupcalleduponNapa’sthe Napa Downtown website had 529 hits. The day after the event, the Web hits went down to 120 per day, demonstrating that event PR and promotion drive Web traffic (www.donapa.com).Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: None.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYtakingplaceinwinecountry.ThePlacemakingGroupcalleduponNapa ssignature chefs to offer a different take on the concert-centered event. Whilepromoting what they would be serving at the event – from seafood gumbo andduck jambalaya to pizza with a Cajun twist - the chefs were also reinforcing ourbrand message: Napa Downtown as a dining destination. The Zydeco musiciansand the innovative event organizer Louisiana Sue were also used to promote thefestival.pOperating Costs: Variable, depending on civic support/in-kind donations.Funding Sources: Various (City and private donors).Contact information:Th Pl ki GThe Placemaking Group supplemented the chef and personality placements withcalendar announcements and news releases with event details. Every online festivalnotice was crosslinked with the Napa Downtown website to drive more visitorsthere.TheeventpublicityransimultaneouslywithadvertisinginlocalnewspapersinThe Placemaking Group505 14th Street, 5th FloorOakland, CA 94612Phone: 510.835.7900Fax: 510.768.0044Theeventpublicityransimultaneouslywithadvertisinginlocalnewspapers,inSFGate.com and with Google ad words. All communications drove people to theevent-specific website on the Napa Downtown site.Chefs appeared on Good Morning Sacramento, KGO-TV’s View From the Bay,and KISS-FM’s Renel in the Morning program, and were also featured in a front-page spread in the Napa Register the week prior to the festival.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 102 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSArt in P blic Places Program Cit of A stin Department of Economic De elopment A stin TXArt in Public Places Program, City of Austin Department of Economic Development, Austin, TXProgram OverviewEstablished by the City in 1985, the Art in Public Places (AIPP) programll b tithlldti llidti tttthhi tdLessons Learned:Municipalities can take a leadership role in funding placemaking programs and activities.collaborates withlocalandnationallyrecognizedartiststocuratethehistory andvalues of Austin’s community into cultural landmarks that have becomecornerstones of the City’s identity.The City of Austin was the first municipality in Texas to make a commitment toinclude works of art in construction projects. By ordinance, 2% of eligible capitalimprovementprojectbudgetsareallocatedtocommissionorpurchaseartforthatOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: Varies – based on municipal construction costs.Operating Costs: N/A – operated by City of Austin Economic Development Department.RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYimprovementprojectbudgetsareallocatedtocommissionorpurchaseartforthatsite. Austin’s Public Art Collection has been incorporated as an importantplacemaking tool into the City’s airport, convention center, libraries, parks, policestations, recreation centers, and streetscapes, enhancing public spaces forresidents and visitors.Funding Sources: General Fund (tax on municipal construction projects).Contact information:City of Austin Department of Economic Development201 E. Second Street Ati TX 78701Austin , TX 78701512-974-7700www.austintexas.govFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 103 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSCharlotte Street Fo ndation Urban C lt re C ratorial Residenc Program Kansas Cit MOCharlotte Street Foundation Urban Culture Curatorial Residency Program, Kansas City, MOProgram OverviewThe Charlotte Street Foundation’s program’s mission is to be a primary catalystitifliKCitib ttitliIn 2012, the foundation launched the new Curatorial Residency Program to increatingasenseofplaceinKansasCityasavibrant,creative metropolis,alive with artistic collaboration and ideas. The organization provides programmanagement and support to artists in residence as well as marketing andbranding assistance through social media and other communication tools suchas:Providesannualcashawardstovisualandgenerativeperformingartistsfoster opportunities for outstanding emerging curators from around the country to immerse themselves in the “arts ecosystem” of the Kansas City region. The program provides support for an annually selected curator-in-residence to develop and present original contemporary arts programming responsive to and inclusive of the work of Kansas City-area artists. The Charlotte Street Foundation is funded by the City of Kansas City and other RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYProvidesannualcashawardstovisualandgenerativeperformingartistsProvides free studios and performance and exhibition spaces to theater,dance, music, film/video and visual artists for the creation andpresentation of new workCoordinates public exposure to these exhibitions and performances,andfacilitateartisticcollaborationandexchangeprivate and philanthropic donorsLessons Learned:Municipalities can take a leadership role in funding placemaking activities by supporting Urban Culture Curatorial Residency programs.andfacilitateartisticcollaborationandexchangeProvides educational and professional development opportunities foryoung, emerging, and mid-career artists of all disciplines and help tobuild a market for their workAdvocates and plans on behalf of Kansas City artists and the artsitithhil th ibidiildOrganizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: N/AOperating Costs: N/AFunding Sources: grants and philanthropic donationscommunitywithphilanthropic,business andcivicleadersEngages national philanthropic and cultural leaders with Kansas Cityartists and the arts community.The foundation’s Urban Culture Projectinitiative has been operational since2003 and has supported and presented the work of thousands of artists in thefflhbflldlud g Souces: ga s a d p a opc do ao sContact information:1000 West 25th Street, Kansas City Missouri 64108816.221.5115www charlottestreet orgform oforiginalexhibitions, performances, installations, cross-disciplinaryprojects and public programs of widevariety. This programming has earnedpopular recognition, establishing the Urban Culture Project venues as hubs forartists and unconventional, challenging new work. Programming proactivelyintegrates multiple artistic disciplines, promoting collaboration and exchangeamong artists in the fields of visual art, film and video, theater, performance,idhiddiwww.charlottestreet.orgFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 104music,dance, architecture anddesign. PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSSo th Main Mosaic Artwalk Memphis TNSouth Main Mosaic Artwalk, Memphis, TNProgram OverviewThe City of Memphis Downtown Memphis Commission contracted with theUbCltItitt(bltititt)ttifihtLessons Learned:Municipalities can take a leadership role in funding placemaking activities UrbanCultureInstitute(www.urbancultureinstitute.org)tocurateaseries ofeightpublic art installations by local artists installed in Fall 2014. Christina Lanzl wasone of the curators of this Downtown Memphis Commission initiative. Theinstallations include:A kinetic wave sculpture by Jonathan Auger based on Ned Kahn'sinstallationsppgpgby establishing special assessment districts with urban culture and arts programs.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: N/ARETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYinstallationsA lenticular mural by Stephanie Cosby and Eszter SzikszA baby grand piano installation by Nick Pena on the Huling Avenueloading dock provides a hands-on opportunity for pedestrians to play atuneOperating Costs: N/AFunding Sources: Special Assessment District RevenuesContact information:Downtown Memphis CommissionA food can mural collaboration in the windows of the Adler Hotelvisualizes cartoon-like charactersColorful painted murals by Marcellus Lovelace and Brandon Marshallwith Kenny Hayes celebrate historic Memphis moments.LanceTurner'smural"Jay"featuresarasterizedpaintingtechniquep114 North Main StreetMemphis, TN 38103(901) 575-0540www.downtownmemphiscommission.comwww.gosouthmain.comLanceTurnersmuralJayfeaturesarasterizedpaintingtechniquesimilar to newsprint (as popularized by Chuck Close)A portrait of punk rock icon Jay Reatard by TurnerThe "Larger Than" flower bouquet installed by the Metal Museum in thepocket park at the corner of TalbotThe Urban Culture Institute forms partnerships with public, private and non-profitorganizationsaswellasartiststopursue a broad range of artistic and culturalendeavors, placemaking and community building projects.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 105 PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSThe Boston Arts Commission & HarborArtsInternational O tdoor Arts E hibition Boston MAThe Boston Arts Commission & HarborArtsInternational Outdoor Arts Exhibition, Boston, MAProgram OverviewHarborArts is supported by the Boston Art Commission, the entity with the legalauthority to approve and site new public art on property owned by the City ofBoston. Site-specific artworks in an urban landscape identify Boston as a place withRooftop installations offer commanding viewpoints within the shipyard andserved as new artistic landmarks for the waterfront communities.HarborArts was conceived as aglobal communitybringingpeople togetherlong history and a great capacity for innovation. These artworks, both permanentand temporary, range from traditional and new media public art pieces tomunicipal design elements, such as wayfinding systems and artistic lighting.In addition, the Art Commission has care and custody of all paintings, murals,statues, bas-reliefs, sculptures, monuments, fountains, arches and other permanentstructuresintendedforornamentorcommemorationonCitypropertyTheBostongyggppgto champion the vital role that oceans, waterways and harbors play in thefuture of our planet. An environmentally conscious approach including theuse of recycled materials was a central component of the HarborArtsexhibition concept.Lessons Learned:RETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYstructuresintendedforornamentorcommemorationonCityproperty.TheBostonArt Commission supports a thriving artistic consciousness within the city byextending community involvement beyond everyday appreciation to meaningfulengagement in the creation, evolving interpretation and ongoing care of artworksthroughout Boston’s neighborhoods.HarborArtsisanon-profitpublicartinstitution is dedicated to fostering culturalMunicipalities can take a leadership role in funding placemaking activities by supporting non-profit urban arts programs.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: N/Aengagement through visual, literary, and performing arts. HarborArts spearheadedthe unique challenge of transforming Boston's historic, working shipyard into ameaningful space for creativity, discovery, inspiration, and education within EastBoston's economically and ethnically diverse community through accessiblecollaboration and environmental stewardship.TheHarborArtsenvironmentalexhibitionoflargescaleworksby50artistsfromCap a Cos s: N/Operating Costs: N/AFunding Sources: Public grants, private and philanthropic donationsContact information:HbAt ITheHarborArtsenvironmentalexhibitionoflarge-scaleworksby50artistsfromthree continents was curated for a working shipyard in Boston. Set within the 14-acre grounds and docks of the historic Boston Harbor Shipyard & Marina, theexhibition was curated in two installments with a balanced selection ofinternationally established and emerging artists for foster cross-cultural dialog andexchange.HarborArts, Inc.Boston Harbor Shipyard256 Marginal StEast Boston, MA 02128617.982.3244www.harborarts.orgbli tb tWorks in a wide range of media and materials were on view for a period of sixmonths to several years. HarborArts was juried by Institute of ContemporaryArt/Boston curator Randi Hopkins. Some ofthe installed works directly interactedwith the water, such as the 1,000-foot long tidal installation along the main pierand tall, bobbing bamboo poles at the waterfront, and colorful LED-lit Lighthousesset accents dayand night, visible from the opposite side of the harbor in downtownwww.publicartboston.comFORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 106ygppBoston. PLACEMAKING / URBAN CULTURE CURATION PROGRAMSDistrict of Col mbia Art Place Grant ProjectDistrict of Columbia Art Place Grant ProjectProgram OverviewThe DC Office of Planning(OP)received agrant of $250,000 from aprivate-Lessons Learned:Municipalities can take a leadership role in funding placemaking activities g()g,ppublic collaboration with ArtPlace. Its aim is to drive revitalization across thecountry by putting the arts at the centerof economic development. Each projectsupported by ArtPlace has been selected for developing a new model of helpingtowns and cities thrive by strategically integrating artists and arts organizations intokey local efforts in transportation, housing, community development, job creationandplacemaking.ppgpgby supporting non-profit urban arts programs.Organizational & Institutional Requirements:Capital Costs: N/AOperating Costs: N/ARETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYpgThe DC Office of Planning created Arts and Culture “Temporiums” in fouremerging creative neighborhoods where vacant and/or underutilized storefrontsand empty lots were transformed into an artist showcase/village for three to sixmonth periods. The DC Office of Planning contracted with qualified projectmanagers/curators to create the Arts and Culture Temporiums in two emergingtiihb h d(BklddtDd)htd/Operating Costs: N/AFunding Sources: Public grants, private and philanthropic donationsContact information:Kimberly DrigginsAssociate Director for Citywide PlanningRETAIL RECRUITMENT STRATEGYcreative neighborhoods(BrooklandandgreaterDeanwood),where vacantand/orunderutilized storefronts and empty lots were transformed into an artist showcase ineach neighborhood for three to six months (total contract value of $150,000).Artists transformed spaces in these neighborhoods into multi-dimensional andmultipurpose uses (i.e., gallery for visual artists, performing arts space, productionspace,etc.).Thegoal is to find two to four blocks with both vacant buildingsandygDistrict of Columbia Office of theDeputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development1100 4th Street, SW, Suite 650 East, Washington, DC 20024 kimberly.driggins@dc.gov202-442-7624p,)ggempty lots in proximity that could be completely transformed and promote artistentrepreneurship and community building in the process. This effort leveraged theOffice of Planning’s completed Creative DC Action Agenda and Small Area Plans,Studies for those neighborhoods.FORT LAUDERDALE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN / 107