Page 1
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 0
Economic Profile
Section One
Economic Profile
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
DRAFT AUGUST 28, 2012
City Commissioners
Tom Jones, Chair, Seat #2
Michael Treubert, Vice-Chair, Seat #3
Jim Blucher, Seat #4
David J. Garofalo, Sr., Seat #1
Linda M. Yates, Seat #5
Page 2
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 2
Page 3
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 3
City of North Port Economic Development Strategic Plan Update
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................ 7
SECTION 1 ................................................................................................................. 9
The Process .................................................................................................. 11
Study Process ......................................................................................... 11
Accomplishments ......................................................................................... 15
2008 ........................................................................................................ 15
2009 ........................................................................................................ 15
2010 ........................................................................................................ 15
2011 ........................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 2 ............................................................................................................... 17
Community Assessment .............................................................................. 19
North Port History .................................................................................... 19
Geography/Location ................................................................................ 19
Population and Housing .......................................................................... 21
Regional Economic Overview ................................................................. 26
Location Quotient Analysis ...................................................................... 26
Employment Projections .......................................................................... 28
Major Employers ..................................................................................... 29
Regional Market/Economic Summary ..................................................... 31
Activity Centers ....................................................................................... 32
Quality of Life .......................................................................................... 35
Housing Market Data ............................................................................... 38
Economic Profile Summary ..................................................................... 40
Workforce Structure ..................................................................................... 43
Suncoast Workforce ................................................................................ 44
Workforce Summary ................................................................................ 46
Page 4
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 4
City of North Port Economic Development Strategic Plan Update
Competitive Market Analysis ....................................................................... 47
Retail ....................................................................................................... 47
Retail Metrics ........................................................................................... 49
Retail Rents ............................................................................................. 49
Office ....................................................................................................... 50
Industrial .................................................................................................. 53
North Port Competitive Position .............................................................. 54
Competitive Market Analysis Summary ................................................... 54
Benchmarks .................................................................................................. 57
Deltona .................................................................................................... 57
Port St. Lucie ........................................................................................... 59
Cape Coral .............................................................................................. 61
Benchmark Summary .............................................................................. 62
SECTION 3 ............................................................................................................... 63
Target Industries ........................................................................................... 65
State of Florida/Enterprise Florida ........................................................... 65
Tampa Bay Partnership ........................................................................... 65
Charlotte County Economic Development Office .................................... 70
Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County ....................... 70
Initial North Port Target Industry Screening ............................................ 72
North Port Recommended Target Industries ........................................... 74
Economic Development Incentives ............................................................ 77
Florida Economic Development Incentives Toolbox ................................ 77
E-Florida Incentives ................................................................................. 77
Targeted Industry Incentives ................................................................... 77
Workforce Training Incentives ................................................................. 78
Infrastructure Incentives .......................................................................... 79
Special Opportunity Incentives ................................................................ 79
Discussion of Florida Incentives .............................................................. 80
Sarasota County ...................................................................................... 80
Benchmarked City Incentives .................................................................. 82
Other Incentives Programs Used in Florida ............................................. 83
Conclusion ............................................................................................... 86
Page 5
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 5
City of North Port Economic Development Strategic Plan Update
Best Practices in Economic Development ................................................. 95
Florida’s Great Northwest ........................................................................ 96
Loudoun, Virginia .................................................................................... 97
City of North Port ..................................................................................... 98
Developing Your Own Data Base .......................................................... 100
SECTION 4 ............................................................................................................. 103
Community Engagement ........................................................................... 105
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT Analysis) 105
Strategic Plan Framework .......................................................................... 109
Goals, Objectives and Strategies .......................................................... 109
Organizational Responsibilities ............................................................. 109
Implementing the Strategic Plan ........................................................... 110
Strategic Action Plan ............................................................................. 111
The Mission Statement .......................................................................... 112
Action Plan for Change ......................................................................... 113
Overview of Goals ................................................................................. 113
EDSP Implementation Matrix ..................................................................... 115
SECTION 5 ............................................................................................................. 123
Appendix 1: Focus Group Meeting Attendees ......................................... 125
Appendix 2: Key Stakeholders Interviewed ............................................. 126
Appendix 3: Summary of All Focus Groups............................................. 127
Appendix 4: Rankings from Each Focus Group Meeting ........................ 129
Appendix 5: All Stakeholder Responses .................................................. 131
Page 6
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 6
Page 7
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 7
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
The Florida Institute of Government (FIOG) and the City of North Port’s Business and Economic
Development Advisory Board extend special thanks to the City of North Port Economic Development
Division for their assistance with this project and the North Port City Commission and the Sarasota
County Board of Commissioners for their financial support.
Special recognition is given to the following participants for their valuable insight and the time donated to
assisting in the development of this Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) Update:
City Commissioners Tom Jones, Chair, Seat #2 Michael R. Treubert, Vice-Chair, Seat #3 Jim Blucher, Seat #4 David J. Garofalo, Sr., Seat #1 Linda M. Yates, Seat #5
Business and Economic Development Advisory Board Members
At-Large Members Steve Sachkar, Chair, North Port Sun
Fred Tower, III, Vice-Chair, Community Resident
Darlene Wedler-Johnson, State College Of Florida
Bill Woeltjen, Sarasota Memorial Health Care
System
Denise Courtney, Regions Bank
Bill Diekman, Coldwell Banker Sunstar Realty
Eric Anderson, Fourth Quarter Properties
Rae Dowling, Florida Power & Light
Zia Butt, North Port Pines
David Langhout, Koter Land Partners
Kaley R. Miller, Mosaic Company
Organization Members Bill Werdell, Chamber of Commerce
Jill Luke, Chamber Of Commerce
Anne Merrill, EDC Board Member
Teri Hansen, Gulf Coast Community Foundation
Education Members Caroline Zucker, Sarasota County School Board
Jane Goodwin (Alternate – Caroline Zucker)
Lora Kosten, Ph.D., University Of South Florida -
Sarasota-Manatee
Designated Members
Commissioner Jim Blucher, North Port
Commission
Commissioner Tom Jones, North Port Commission
Jonathan Lewis, North Port City Manager
Mark Huey, President/CEO EDC Sarasota County
Commissioner Christine Robinson, Sarasota
County
Robert J. Berntsson, Berntsson, Ittersagen,
Gunderson, Waksler & Wideikis, LLP
Steve Boone, Boone, Boone, Boone, Koda &
Frook, P.A.
Page 8
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 8
Acknowledgements
Business & Economic Development Advisory Board –Strategic Plan Task Force:
Anne Merrill, Chair, Collaborative Community
Design, LLC
Darlene Wedler-Johnson, State College Of Florida
Bill Werdell, Chamber Of Commerce
Wendy Namack, Namack Portfolio Investment
Professionals, LLC
Allan Lane, Economic Development Manager
Ted Blanchard, Davidson Insulation
Linda L. Stone, Ph.D., Sarasota County Health
Department
Other noted participants included:
Ruth Buchanan, Economic Development
Coordinator
Scott Williams, Neighborhood Development
Services Director
Michele Norton, Planning Director
Cindi Mick, Utilities Director
Page 9
Section 1
Process
Accomplishments
SECTION
1
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
Page 10
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 10
Page 11
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 11
Process
The Process
The City of North Port contracted with the John Scott Dailey Florida Institute of Government (FIOG) at the
University of South Florida to develop an Economic Development Strategic Plan Update. In September
2007, the City adopted its first Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP). Since that time, much has
changed in the local economy as well as the national and global economy. It became necessary to take a
fresh look at how the City should adjust and adapt to the economic forces that impact and shape its
economic development vision, mission and goals.
Study Process
The City of North Port contracted with the John Scott Dailey Florida Institute of Government (FIOG) at the
University of South Florida to develop a future-oriented, reality-based Economic Development Strategic
Plan (EDSP), supported by sound analysis of the city's assets, strengths, and opportunities and guided by
the community's aspirations.
Phase 1 and 2: Community Outreach
The first two phases of this project consisted of a series of initial discussions with the City staff to define
expectations and mission; data collection and review of previous reports; and identification of key
stakeholders and potential “partners” to be interviewed.
The FIOG team coordinated with the City’s economic development staff to develop a viral marketing
approach. Traditional means of media and public relations outreach avenues were used along with social
media. A web page was developed and dedicated to the economic development strategic planning
process.
Phase 3: Community Assessment
A comprehensive community assessment was conducted. The purpose of the assessment was to provide
an agreed-upon “baseline” from which to identify the City’s future economic development opportunities.
The community assessment included the following components:
Socioeconomic Analysis
Using a variety of statistical, economic, and demographic sources, FIOG conducted an in-depth analysis
of the local and regional economic base.
Competitive Market Analysis
Because of the City’s southern location (with respect to the economic centroid of the North Port-
Bradenton-Sarasota Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and its linkage with the new and growing North
Port/Port Charlotte sub-region), FIOG developed competitive metrics to determine what the positive and
negative market characteristics are and determined specific gaps that exist between the City and its
competitors. This analysis focuses on the office, retail and manufacturing sectors.
Workforce Analysis & Education
FIOG provided recommendations related to supporting workforce development and education programs
that will build a workforce capable of meeting future industry demands. The objective was to determine
what actions the City, County, economic development agencies, educational institutions, and other
stakeholders should take to ensure a high quality workforce that can support future development in the
City.
Page 12
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 12
Process
Public Input
The FIOG team conducted personal interviews, focus groups, and surveys with representatives from the
community. This series of public input activities served several purposes. The purpose of the interviews
was to gain a sense of community self-perception and marketing strengths, along with the critical
community “buy-in” to the project and its resulting economic development initiatives. Second, it provided
qualitative and quantitative information used to sculpt the Community Assessment, Strengths-
Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT), and Final Action Plan.
SWOT Analysis
Unlike traditional SWOT assessments that focus on issues so general they could apply to almost any
community, FIOG paid special attention to those critical issues that will clearly differentiate the City from
other communities. The SWOT process used is unique because it ensures that the city considers not only
internal issues, but also issues that impact national and international competitiveness.
During the public input process, FIOG conducted a series of 26 stakeholder interviews and three (3) focus
group meetings with a total of 71 attendees to assess the public’s perception of strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats. Leaders from government, business, education, civic institutions, the media,
and general public participated.
Survey
The FIOG team worked with the City and the Business and Economic Development Advisory Board
(BEDAB) EDSP Task Force to develop an on-line survey that was transmitted via non-traditional media
through the City’s web page and through community partners social media outlets. Over 6,000 surveys
were distributed in the period from April 30-May 15, 2012. A total of 920 responses were received with
400 of them providing additional input.
The information gathered during Phase Three also included a benchmark of 3 selected/similar cities or
MSA’s, as selected by the City, those being Cape Coral, Deltona, and Port St. Lucie. At the conclusion of
Phase Three, FIOG compiled the survey responses and provided a brief summary report of the findings
to a joint meeting of the BEDAB EDSP Task Force and the BEDAB Executive Committee.
Phase 4: Draft Economic Development Action Plan
Based on the preceding work efforts, FIOG, the City and its stakeholders had a good frame of reference
in which to develop a successful strategic economic development program. The process included:
Target Industry Analysis
FIOG gathered and synthesized a wide variety of analytical inputs for specific industry clusters. The goal
was to arrive at a final list of recommended target sectors that are future-oriented (in terms of strategic
opportunities and growth potential) and reality-based (in terms of being unique assets/advantages that
the region already possesses or can feasibly nurture) and specifically tailored for the city, and not just
based on broad, backward looking industry data.
Best Practices
FIOG provided examples, from the immediate area as well as nationally, of what other similar sized
communities located within larger MSA’s are doing to re-position their economic base within the context
of both the current recession and what most economists believe to be a new economic paradigm based
on higher transportation costs and slower growth.
Page 13
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 13
Process
Incentives
FIOG provided incentives being used by the State of Florida and other economic development agencies
throughout Florida for consideration by the City.
Implementation Strategies
FIOG prepared a detailed listing of proposed strategies including responsibilities, metrics, and timing
(short term, midterm and long term). To truly achieve the City’s goals, the City needs to achieve a “live,
work, buy, and play brand” especially if transportation costs increase.
The information gathered during Phase Four includes a list of recommended target sectors, best
practices for tracking available sites and buildings, examples of State and local incentives, and proposed
strategies.
Phase 5: Final Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) and Summit
This final phase included:
Activities aimed at involving educational and workforce development providers in Economic
Development
FIOG provided recommendations for involving educational leaders and workforce development providers
in the City’s economic development efforts. These recommendations will determine what actions should
be taken to ensure a high quality workforce that can support future development in the City and how to
promote educational and workforce development programs in the community and to external target
audiences.
Presentation—City Commission
At the conclusion of Phase Five, FIOG conducted a community planning workshop with the Economic
Development Advisory Board (BEDAB) EDSP Task Force and community leaders to review the findings
and to present the strategic plan which included the goals, objectives and strategies.
The Final Action Plan was then presented to the City Commission and the community at large at a City
Commission meeting.
Page 14
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 14
Page 15
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 15
Accomplishments
Accomplishments
The City of North Port has accomplished a great deal since the release of the City’s first Economic Development Strategic Plan in 2007. The following section discusses some of the more relevant accomplishments.
2008
City hired an Economic Development Manager and established a Business Advisory Board with
an executive committee and taskforces
City identified incentives to offer business and development prospects
City developed an Entrepreneurial Academy and a Lunch and Learn Program to assist in the
retention and expansion of small, local companies
2009
City adopted five target industries as a focus for business recruitment: Education, Healthcare,
Hospitality, Light Manufacturing and Retail Trade
2010
Developed a comprehensive branding and community identity campaign to define the City’s
image and to shape its future development
Implemented a Small Business Assistance Program
Developed new marketing opportunities (Inside Business video; collaborated with Sarasota EDC
in establishing the SW Florida Economic Development Partnership; placed ads in Florida airports
and economic development trade magazines; initiated an e-newsletter to highlight businesses)
Attracted the University of South Florida to the City
Attracted health care, retail and commercial uses, creating new job opportunities for local
residents
Developed incentives for local vendor preference and reduced impact fees to attract new
business and development opportunities
Participated in the development of Sarasota County’s 5-year Economic Development Strategic
Plan to diversify the local economy
Provided support for local events that promote existing North Port businesses
Developed projects to recognize local existing businesses
Supported Vision North Port in the development of a Citizens Master Plan
Expanded the 3-pronged marketing approach for online, print and face-to-face communications
Created the Small Business Revolving Loan Guarantee Fund to provide alternative financing to
new and existing micro businesses
Supported a voter referendum establishing ad valorem property tax exemption for new and
existing businesses
Completed a hotel feasibility study
Page 16
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 16
Accomplishments
2011
Completed the Strategic Marketing Plan
Launched the City Ambassador Program
Secured $30,000 from Sarasota County to fund the Economic Development Strategic Plan
Update
Business and Economic Development Advisory Board (BEDAB) provided recommendations to
the City Commission on the City’s sign ordinance and Unified Land Development Code (ULDC)
Back to Table of Contents
Page 17
Section 2
Community
Assessment:
Economic Profile
Workforce
Analysis
Competitive
Market Analysis
Benchmarks
SECTION
2
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
Page 18
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 18
Page 19
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 19
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Community Assessment
North Port History
The area that is now known as the City of North Port (North Port) and Port Charlotte were originally
developed by General Development Corporation (GDC), one of the largest lot sales/community
developers in the United States. GDC was founded in the early 1950’s and developed several
communities around Florida, the largest being the combined Port Charlotte/North Port Charlotte
development. North Port was conceived as the northern part of its Port Charlotte development. North
Port was incorporated in 1959 as the City of North Port Charlotte but changed its name to the City of
North Port in 1974. It is reported that the change in name was made in order to establish its own identity,
apart from Port Charlotte. At its incorporation, the City had roughly 140,000 acres and has since grown to
become one of Florida’s top 10 largest cities in land area.
Geography/Location
The City of North Port lies at the southern edge of Sarasota County within the southwest part of Florida.
Figure 1: North Port Location within Florida
Source: City of North Port
The City of North Port is the largest city in the three county Combined Statistical Area (CSA) of Sarasota,
Bradenton, Punta Gorda CSA; which includes two Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA’s): the North
Port/Bradenton/Sarasota MSA1 (where it is located) and the Punta Gorda MSA which lies immediately to
the south. The US Department of Commerce in defining this region as a CSA acknowledges the
economic linkage between the two MSA’s. To a large degree the economic linkage of North Port and Port
Charlotte is responsible for combining these two MSA’s into the new economic region designated as a
Combined Statistical Area.
1 The North Port, Sarasota, Bradenton MSA represent the two counties of Sarasota and Manatee.
Page 20
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 20
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Figure 2: Florida’s Combined Statistical Areas
Source: POLICOM from OMB January 2011 definitions
Due to its southern Sarasota County location and its proximity to the Punta Gorda MSA, the City of North
Port and the urbanized areas of Murdock and Port Charlotte (neither is incorporated) form a singular
urban/economic area, as shown below.
Figure 3: The North Port/Port Charlotte Urban Area
Source: City of North Port
Page 21
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 21
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
The North Port/Port Charlotte/Murdock community lies roughly equal distant between Sarasota and Ft.
Myers as shown below. Both Sarasota and Ft. Myers are within 40 miles of North Port. Venice and
Punta Gorda are within a 15 mile radius of the center of North Port.
Figure 4: 40 and 15 Mile radii of North Port
Source: Claritas, Inc, 2010; FIOG 2012
Population and Housing
North Port
North Port was one of the fastest growing cities in the United States during the early 2000’s. The City
accounted for a majority of Sarasota County’s population growth during the 2000-2008 timeframe. It has
grown from only 6,205 residents in 1980 to approximately 57,400 as of April 1, 2010. According to the
United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the City of North Port is now the largest city in
the old Bradenton/Sarasota/Venice Metropolitan Statistical Area. As a result of its growth, the
Department of Commerce has just changed the MSA’s name to North Port/Bradenton/Sarasota MSA.
Table 1: North Port Historic Population Estimates
Year Population
Population
Per Year
Households
Per Year
1980 6,205
1990 11,973 577 266
2000 22,797 1,082 436
2002 27,652 2,428 979
2006 50,523 5,718 2,306
2010 57,357 1,709 689
Source: US Department of Commerce; FIOG 2012
Page 22
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 22
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
During the decade of 2000-2010 the City of North Port was the 8th fastest growing city in Florida in
absolute growth. It is interesting to note that the City is only about 20-25% developed as of 2010. The
City is projected to have a built-out population of approximately 268,000.
As of 2010, the United States Department of Commerce estimates that North Port residents represent
approximately 26% of the entire County’s working age population (20-39) as shown below.
Table 2: North Port Work Age Population Estimates: 2010
Sarasota City of North County Percent
64,084 16,458 25.68%99,483 15,267 15.35%
163,567 31,725 19.40%
Subject
TOTAL WORKING AGE POPULATION20-3940-59Sub Total 20-59
Source: American Community Survey 3 year estimates; FIOG 2012
The City of North Port has 43,226 residents aged 16 and over of which 26,372 or 61% are in the labor
force. The Department of Commerce estimated that the unemployment rate was 8.1% as of 2010, as
compared to ACS estimate of 13.3%.
Table 3: North Port Employment Status: 2010
Percent
43,22661.0%61.0%52.9%8.1%0.0%
39.0%26,36013.3%23,13757.1%57.1%50.0%3,918
68.0%8,907
75.3%
Population 16 years and over 43,226 In labor force 26,372
Subject City of North Port
EstimateEMPLOYMENT STATUS
Civilian labor force 26,360 Employed 22,853 Unemployed 3,507 Armed Forces 12 Not in labor force 16,854 Civilian labor force 26,360 Percent Unemployed (X) Females 16 years and over 23,137 In labor force 13,201 Civilian labor force 13,201 Employed 11,557 Own children under 6 years 3,918 All parents in family in labor force 2,663 Own children 6 to 17 years 8,907 All parents in family in labor force 6,703
Source: American Community Survey 3 year estimates; FIOG 2012
Page 23
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 23
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
The occupation of North Port residents is fairly evenly distributed between Sales/Office,
Management/Business and Services. The top five industrial sectors for which residents are employed
are: Education, Retail Trade, Professional Services, Arts and Entertainment, and Construction.
Table 4: North Port Resident Employment Status: 2010
Percent
22,85325.9%
21.4%30.4%12.5%
9.8%
22,8530.2%
10.4%3.9%2.5%
15.3%2.7%1.7%7.7%
12.1%
21.4%11.3%6.5%4.2%
22,85382.4%11.8%5.8%0.0%
OCCUPATION Civilian employed population 16 years and over 22,853 Management, business, science, and arts occupations 5,926
Service occupations 4,885 Sales and office occupations 6,955 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 2,852
Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 2,235
INDUSTRY Civilian employed population 16 years and over 22,853 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 49 Construction 2,375 Manufacturing 883 Wholesale trade 563 Retail trade 3,502 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 627 Information 399 Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 1,756 Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and
waste management services
2,768
Educational services, and health care and social assistance 4,884 Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food 2,593 Other services, except public administration 1,486 Public administration 968CLASS OF WORKER Civilian employed population 16 years and over 22,853 Private wage and salary workers 18,832 Government workers 2,699 Self-employed in own not incorporated business workers 1,322 Unpaid family workers 0
Subject City of North Port Estimate
Source: American Community Survey 3 year estimates; FIOG 2012
Page 24
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 24
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
According to Census estimates, North Port residents had a median household income of $46,795 in 2010
and a mean household income of $55,908.
Table 5: North Port Resident Employment Status: 2010
Percent
20,479
3.7%
5.8%
10.5%
15.5%
18.6%
21.7%
13.3%
6.9%
2.5%
1.5%
(X)
(X)
INCOME AND BENEFITS (IN 2010
Total households 20,479
Estimate
Less than $10,000 761
$10,000 to $14,999 1,181
$15,000 to $24,999 2,160
$25,000 to $34,999 3,178
$35,000 to $49,999 3,816
$50,000 to $74,999 4,443
$75,000 to $99,999 2,715
$100,000 to $149,999 1,408
$150,000 to $199,999 510
$200,000 or more 307
Median household income (dollars) $46,795
Mean household income (dollars) $55,908
Subject City of North Port
Source: American Community Survey 3 year estimates; FIOG 2012
North Port currently serves as a bedroom community of the surrounding region by providing affordable
workforce housing. According to Census estimates, only 22% of North Port residents actually work within
the City. Slightly over 41% work in other areas of Sarasota County and 35% work outside the County. It
is assumed that Charlotte County captures the majority of the out of Sarasota County employment.
Table 6: North Port Resident Employment Commuting Patterns: 2010
Estimate Percent22,3754,994 22.32%
14,254 63.71%7,864 35.15%
Subject City of North Port
TOTAL WORKERSWorked In CityWorked in County of ResidenceWorked Outside County of Residence
Source: American Community Survey 3 year estimates; FIOG 2012
Sarasota County
As stated earlier, North Port lies within Sarasota County. A majority of its estimated growth over the last
10 years occurred within the City of North Port which was a major source of the County’s affordable
housing. The County has experienced modest growth over the last two decades (compared to the State
as a whole) with the level of growth due to the County’s Growth Management Plan. As mentioned earlier,
the County is part of a two County MSA (Manatee County to the north and Sarasota County). With the
exception of North Port, most of the MSA’s growth has occurred in northern Sarasota County and
Manatee County. Sarasota County had a population of 325,961 in 2000 and grew to 379,448 in 2010; a
net gain of 53,487. North Port accounted for 65% of the County’s growth during this period.
Page 25
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 25
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Port Charlotte/Charlotte County
Charlotte County has experienced moderate growth since 2000; with a 2010 population estimate of
159,978, a gain of 18,351 residents since 2000. Port Charlotte is not incorporated but is defined by the
US Census as a Designated Census Area and had an estimated population of 54,392 as of 2010, and an
increase of 7,941 residents since 2000. Port Charlotte historically has been the retail/service employment
hub for the immediate sub region which includes North Port.
North Port Service/Market Area
Within a 10 mile radius of the City center, the North Port Service Area is estimated to contain 169,000 full
time residents and almost 73,000 households. By 2015, the Service Area is projected to contain almost
185,000 full time residents and 79,000+ households as shown in Table 7.
Table 7: North Port 10 mile radius Market Statistics
Source: Claritas, Inc, 2010; FIOG 2012
The City’s 15 mile radius Service Area is estimated to contain approximately 294,000 full time residents in
134,000+ households. Total housing units are estimated at 171,500 units in 2010. By 2015, the 15 mile
Service Area is projected to increase to 318,500 with a household count of over 100,000 and almost
186,600 housing units.
Table 8: North Port 15 mile Radius Market Statistics
Source: Claritas, Inc, 2010; FIOG 2012
2000 2010 %Change 2015 %Change
Description Census Estimate 2000-2010 Projection 2010-2015
Population 119,702 169,019 41.20% 184,791 9.33%
Households 53,009 72,650 37.05% 79,325 9.19%
Families 36,989 51,816 40.08% 56,813 9.64%
Housing Units 62,803 88,162 40.38% 96,130 9.04%
Group Quarters Population 817 877 7.34% 900 2.62%
Average Household Size 2.24 2.31 2.32
Aggregate($MM) Household Income $2,406 $4,298 78.64% $5,180 20.52%
Per Capita($) $20,232 $25,531 26.19% $28,126 10.16%
2000 2010 %Change 2015 %Change
Description Census Estimate 2000-2010 Projection 2010-2015
Population 229,389 293,569 27.98% 318,556 8.51%
Households 106,045 134,463 26.80% 146,469 8.93%
Families 71,911 91,864 27.75% 100,371 9.26%
Housing Units 130,237 171,504 31.69% 186,590 8.80%
Group Quarters Population 2,788 3,014 8.11% 3,086 2.39%
Average Household Size 2.14 2.16 2.15
Aggregate($MM) Household Income $5,079 $8,238 62.20% $9,826 19.28%
Per Capita($) $22,371 $28,266 26.35% $31,039 9.81%
Page 26
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 26
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Regional Economic Overview
As previously mentioned, the North Port/Port Charlotte community was originally developed by General
Development Corporation as a retirement center. The area around Murdock developed into the area’s
urban center containing a major mall (Town Center Mall), regional banking, and major services including
hospitals, the Charlotte County Administration Center, Charlotte Sports Park, etc. and overshadowed the
historic employment center of Punta Gorda. Punta Gorda and Port Charlotte have recently recovered
from the impact of Hurricane Charley which hit in August 2004 inflicting major damage.
Venice, located to the northwest of North Port also serves as a secondary retail/service hub to North Port
residents. As reported in the City’s Comprehensive Growth Management Plan (EAR), Sarasota County
(areas other than North Port) serves as the main source of resident employment,(46%), followed by the
City itself (27%) and finally Charlotte County (24%).
Table 9: Employment Sectors – Sarasota and Charlotte Counties 2010
Industry
Sarasota
County
Charlotte
County
Base Industry: Total, all industries 118,390 33,706
Natural resources and mining 391 546
Construction 8,574 2,381
Manufacturing 4,959 511
Trade, transportation, and utilities 24,185 9,196
Information 2,284 440
Financial activities 8,812 1,739
Professional and business services 17,176 3,175
Education and health services 27,434 8,508
Leisure and hospitality 19,358 5,790
Other services 5,211 1,419
Unclassified 7 NC
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010
Location Quotient Analysis
Location Quotients (LQ’s) are ratios that allow an area's distribution of employment by industry to be
compared to a reference or base area's distribution. The reference area is usually the U.S., but it can also
be a state or a metropolitan area. The reference or base industry is usually the all industry total. The
discussion below assumes the defaults are used. LQ’s also allow areas to be easily compared to each
other.
If a LQ is equal to 1, then the industry has the same share of its area employment as it does in the
reference area. An LQ greater than 1 indicates an industry with a greater share of the local area
employment than is the case in the reference area.
Sarasota and Charlotte County employment is highly concentrated in construction, leisure and hospitality,
and education and health services as compared to the national economy. Charlotte’s high location
quotient in arts and entertainment and retail trade suggest that the County attracts sales revenues from
the North Port area and from tourism expenditures. Both areas’ large retirement sectors can be seen in
the high LQ in health care and real estate
Page 27
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 27
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Table 10: Location Quotient (Cluster) for Sarasota and Charlotte Counties, 2010
IndustryFlorida --
Statewide
Sarasota
County
Charlotte
County
Base Industry: Total, all industries 1 1 1
Natural resources and mining 0.84 0.2 0.96
Construction 1.11 1.4 1.37
Manufacturing 0.47 0.39 0.14
Trade, transportation, and utilities 1.05 0.89 1.19
Information 0.88 0.76 0.51
Financial activities 1.11 1.07 0.74
Professional and business services 1.1 0.92 0.6
Education and health services 0.99 1.32 1.44
Leisure and hospitality 1.24 1.34 1.4
Other services 0.93 1.07 1.03
Unclassified 0.05 0.04 NC
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010
Table 11: Location Quotient by Sector (Cluster) for Sarasota and Charlotte Counties, 2010
Industry
Florida --
Statewide
Sarasota
County
Charlotte
County
NAICS 71 Arts, entertainment, and recreation 1.69 2.21 1.9
NAICS 53 Real estate and rental and leasing 1.38 1.46 1.18
NAICS 62 Health care and social assistance 1 1.41 1.61
NAICS 23 Construction 1.11 1.4 1.37
NAICS 72 Accommodation and food services 1.17 1.19 1.32
NAICS 44-45 Retail trade 1.13 1.18 1.78
NAICS 81 Other services, except public administration 0.93 1.07 1.03
NAICS 54 Professional and technical services 1.02 1.01 0.54
NAICS 56 Administrative and waste services 1.27 0.99 0.77
NAICS 52 Finance and insurance 1.02 0.93 0.59
NAICS 51 Information 0.88 0.76 0.51
NAICS 61 Educational services 0.88 0.73 0.29
NAICS 22 Utilities 0.72 0.72 0.29
NAICS 42 Wholesale trade 0.99 0.56 0.32
NAICS 31-33 Manufacturing 0.47 0.39 0.14
NAICS 55 Management of companies and enterprises 0.74 0.29 0.12
NAICS 48-49 Transportation and warehousing 0.88 0.28 0.34
NAICS 11 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 1.26 0.27 ND
NAICS 21 Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction 0.1 0.06 ND
NAICS 99 Unclassified 0.05 0.04 NC
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010
Page 28
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 28
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Employment Projections
The United States Department of Labor Statistics is projecting that, between 2009 and 2017, Sarasota
County will experience an annual increase of 3,600 jobs. Most of the new jobs are projected to take
place in Professional and Business Services, and Accommodation and Food Services sectors to be
followed by Leisure and Hospitality, and Education and Health Services sectors.
Table 12: Sarasota County Employment Projections
Source: US Department of Labor Statistics, 2010
Charlotte County
Due to the employment size of Charlotte County, neither the State of Florida nor the US Department of
Labor publishes employment projections for the County.
North Port/Venice/Port Charlotte
The economic base of the Venice/North Port/Port Charlotte/Punta Gorda sub region is predominately
retirement/second home oriented with North Port becoming a center for workforce housing for the
Sarasota market. The local employment base is primarily non basic jobs supporting the local resident
and tourism markets.
Industry Sarasota County Employment Annual Change
Code Title 2009 2017 Total Percent
Total, All Industries 161,942 190,792 3,606 2.23
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 249 241 -1 -0.40
21 Mining 55 71 2 3.64
23 Construction 10,499 12,699 275 2.62
Manufacturing 5,711 6,316 76 1.32
Durable Goods Manufacturing 4,333 4,854 65 1.50
Non-Durable Goods Manufacturing 1,378 1,462 10 0.76
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 26,154 30,006 482 1.84
22 Utilities 399 437 5 1.19
42 Wholesale Trade 4,285 5,224 117 2.74
44 Retail Trade 20,110 22,704 324 1.61
48 Transportation and Warehousing 1,360 1,641 35 2.58
51 Information 2,374 2,224 -19 -0.79
Financial Activities 10,138 11,695 195 1.92
Professional and Business Services 20,830 25,858 628 3.02
Education and Health Services 27,785 33,939 769 2.77
Leisure and Hospitality 19,634 24,259 578 2.94
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 5,078 5,872 99 1.95
72 Accommodation and Food Services 14,556 18,387 479 3.29
721 Accommodation 2,489 3,190 88 3.52
722 Food Services and Drinking Places 12,067 15,197 391 3.24
81 Other Services (Except Government) 8,508 9,816 164 1.92
Government 15,175 16,944 221 1.46
Federal Government 987 981 -1 -0.08
State Government 2,132 2,409 35 1.62
Local Government 12,056 13,554 187 1.55
Self-Employed and Unpaid Family Workers 14,830 16,724 237 1.60
Page 29
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 29
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Major Employers
The following is a list of the areas’ largest employers. Sarasota County includes both public and private
employers while Charlotte County lists only the largest private employers. As can be seen, most of the
private employment is related to medical centers and grocers. The area is highly dependent on the public
sector which is representative of a retiree and tourist economy.
Table 13: Largest Employers, 2009
Sarasota # Employees Charlotte # Employees
School Board of Sarasota County 5,297 Charlotte County Government 3,404
Sarasota Memorial Health Care 3,092 Wal-Mart Associates 1,500
Sarasota County Government 2,033 St. Joseph Healthcare 1,400
Publix 1,601 School Board of Charlotte County 1,028
PGT Industries 913 Publix 977
Venice Regional Medical Center 830 Fawcett Memorial Hospital 716
SunTrust Bank 819 Port Charlotte HMA 700
City of Sarasota 740 Punta Gorda HMA 680
Sun Hydraulics 640 Home Depot USA 450
Comcast Cablevision 595 Palm Chrysler Plymouth Dodge 300
City of North Port 549 Winn Dixie 267
Sunset Automotive Group 500 Palm Chevrolet-Oldsmobile 230
Ritz Carlton 473 Punta Gorda Associates 230
Goodwill Industries 473 Sam’s West 200
Longboat Key Club & Resort 417 Douglas Jacobson Veterans Hosp. 200
Doctors Hospital of Sarasota 400
Source: Sarasota County Chamber and Charlotte County Economic Development Dept. 2011/12
North Port
The City of North Port has been highly dependent on the construction sector during the early to mid-
2000’s. The City experienced a housing (construction) boom from the mid 1990’s through 2007; therefore
its economic base was highly oriented to the building/construction and associated trades. This led to the
construction of both a Home Depot and Lowes megastores. Non-residential construction has been
modest but when compared to the County as a whole is small. The City’s non-residential permits per
square foot ratio compared to Sarasota County are 1:10 during the 1995-2005 time periods (or only 10%
of the County)2.
2 North Port EAR Housing Element (2007)
Page 30
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 30
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
US Economic Census 2007- North Port
The US Economic Census 2007 results were partially available at the time of this report. The City
contained six (6) establishments within NAICS 51 industry group (Information) with a total of 16
employees; four (4) firms within educational services (NAICS 61) employing 4, and 29 establishments
within NAICS code 72 (accommodations and food) employing 524.
US Economic Census 2007 – Port Charlotte
Port Charlotte is mainly a retirement center with non-basic industry support including medical, automobile
dealers, furniture etc. The largest economic sector has been the building trades and related industries.
Port Charlotte had 10 Information (NAICS 51) establishments employing 445, five (5) educational service
establishments employing 26 and 72 accommodation and food service establishment employing 1,671+.
Port Charlotte has been named one of the Best Places to Retire by Money Magazine3. It was also named
one of the top three places to live & play golf by Golf Magazine and one of Sail Magazine’s top ten places
to sail. It is home to Major League Baseball’s Tampa Bay Rays’ spring training center (Port Charlotte
Sports Park) and the Florida State League’s Charlotte Stone Crabs. The Sports Park is located about 5
miles from the center of North Port.
Figure 5: Port Charlotte Sports Park
Source: North Port Hotel Feasibility Study, September 2010
Located just south of Port Charlotte, the City of Punta Gorda has recently opened the Charlotte Harbor
Event & Conference Center. The 43,500 sq.ft. conference center offers state-of-the-art facilities
consisting of professional and flexible multi-purpose spaces. The center's largest meeting space
measures nearly 20,000 sq. ft., enough for 112 booths or 1,517 delegates seated theater style. It also
features 8,500 sq. ft. of public concourse and meeting rooms.
Figure 6: Charlotte Harbor Event & Conference Center
Source: North Port Hotel Feasibility Study, September 2010
3 http://money.cnn.com September 24, 2009
Page 31
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 31
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Regional Market/Economic Summary
As shown in the preceding sections, the City of North Port lies at the southern boundary of Sarasota and
Manatee Counties, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). It also lies immediately north of another MSA
that encompasses only one County (Charlotte). MSA’s are areas that exhibit strong economic inter-
relationships. Therefore, Manatee and Sarasota have inter-related economies, which does not extend to
Charlotte County (as it is its own MSA). As mentioned earlier, as of December 20094, due to its
population growth during the 2000-2009 time period, and as the largest city within the two county MSA,
North Port qualified as a new principal city of the Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL MSA. This resulted in
the new MSA name, North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL MSA. The US Office of Management and
Budget has also recognized this overall area as a Combined Statistical Area referred to as the Sarasota,
Bradenton, Punta Gorda CSA. It should be noted that designation was done prior to North Port being
recognized as the largest principal city in the CSA and one would assume that its name would change to
North Port, Bradenton, Punta Gorda CSA in the future. As noted, while North Port is the largest city in the
MSA, it is somewhat remote from the economic and population center of the MSA which appears to be
approximate to the Manatee/Sarasota County line. That said, the City is historically linked to Port
Charlotte/Punta Gorda’s economy especially in retail and medical services as recognized in the region’s
designation as a CSA.
Both MSA’s (and CSA’s) are projected to grow, albeit Charlotte County’s growth is projected to be
significantly slower than its northern counties. The economies of the MSA’s are largely based on retirees
and its large seasonal and tourism population which is drawn to its beaches, boating, climate, natural
resources and cultural facilities.
The economies of both MSA’s where highly clustered into four major economic sectors:
Construction (NAICS 23)
Arts, entertainment, and recreation (NAICS 71)
Real Estate and rental and leasing (NAICS 53)
Accommodation and food services (NAICS 72)
While both Sarasota and Charlotte Counties have a large and significant retirement and seasonal
population and housing segment, the City during the 2000’s captured a large percent of Sarasota’s
working households as a result of the construction of affordable workforce housing. As a result, the City
has a significantly younger population than Sarasota or Charlotte Counties.
The immediate North Port Service Area (10 mile radius) is currently estimated to have a permanent
population of 169,000 growing to almost 185,000 by 2015. Per capita income is currently estimated at
$25,500 rising to $28,126 by 2015.
4 OMB Bulletin # 10-02, December 1, 2009 and a new MSA code: 35840
Page 32
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 32
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Activity Centers5
The City of North Port has significant space to grow. As previously noted only about 20-25% of the City is
developed. The City is actively promoting economic growth within its boundaries. It should be noted that
when first incorporated the City was almost entirely platted for residential development but since that time
the city has aggregated platted lots, rezoning them for nonresidential uses as well as annexing
surrounding vacant land in order to diversify its residential offerings as well as increasing nonresidential
land uses.
The City has, as part of its Long Range Comprehensive Plan, created 8 major Activity Centers
(containing 4,184 acres) where it hopes to direct future employment.
Figure 7: North Port Activity Centers
Source: City of North Port 2012
Activity Center #1 is the City’s oldest and most developed center of commercial activity. The Activity
Center falls within the US 41 corridor and stretches for approximately three miles. It contains 716 acres;
should all current development plans be completed the Activity Center would only have about 18% vacant
land available.
Activity Center #2 is located on all four quadrants at the intersection of Sumter Boulevard and Price
Boulevard, both of which are major arterials. The Activity Center contains 556 acres of which 521 are
developable. The Activity Center has been designated as the new City Center. It currently contains the
new Government Center, two shopping centers and has 138 acres available.
Activity Center #3 is located around all four quadrants of the I-75/Sumter Boulevard interchange and is
established to provide for lower intensity highway uses such as motels, restaurants, or other uses
primarily serving interstate commuters, and a 32 acre site for a future hospital. The center contains a
5 City of North Port
Page 33
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 33
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
total of 177 acres, all of which are vacant at the present time. It should be noted that the northwest and
southwest quadrants of this Activity Center abuts the Myakkahatchee Creek, a water source for the City,
and future development will require assessment of impacts to the creek prior to development. This
Activity Center is currently not served by municipal water or sewer service.
Activity Center #4 contains 1,558 acres of which 1,297 are developable and is located around the I-75
Toledo Blade Boulevard interchange and extends a considerable distance southward to the banks of the
Snover Waterway. Portions of the Panacea Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and North Port Park
of Commerce and Industrial Park are included in the area. Municipal water and sewer service is available
to already existing development or is planned to be extended as development comes online.
Activity Center #5 is located on all four quadrants of the intersection of Toledo Blade Boulevard and Price
Boulevard, both major arterials. The Activity Center abuts Activity Center #4 at Snover Waterway. The
Activity Center contains 670 acres; with 298 net acreage remaining. The only operational business within
the Activity Center is King Plastics.
Activity Center #6, while also having an I-75 location is located in the vicinity of Raintree Boulevard and
Yorkshire Boulevard just off I-75. The Activity Center is an overlay district consisting of existing older
platted residential lots. To develop as an Activity Center, it will require funding for an interchange with
I-75 and this is not anticipated anytime in the near nor mid-term future.
Activity Center #7 was established to provide protection for Warm Mineral Springs while at the same time
allow for the development of synergistic uses supporting the Springs, which is co-owned by the City and
Sarasota County. The Activity Center contains 81 acres of which 48 acres remain developable.
Activity Center #8 is located in the West Villages adjacent to US 41. It contains 81 acres, of which 33
percent is unbuildable due to environmental sensitive lands, with 48 acres of buildable land.
Page 34
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 34
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Figure 8: North Port Park of Commerce located in Activity Center 4
The North Port Park of Commerce
is an upscale 170-acre mixed-use
commercial, office, professional,
and light industrial master-planned
development. The park features
over 4,700 linear feet of road
frontage along Toledo Blade
Boulevard, affording excellent
exposureand visibility.
The Park offers a wide range of
fully developed parcels to
accommodate commercial and
industrial users of all sizes. In
addition to parcels for sale, there
is available office-warehouse flex
space, as well as professional
office space.
The City designated this as an
Activity Center to permit the
highest allowable development
intensity and density.6
The North Port Park of Commerce is currently the most viable location in the City that has office, light
industrial and commercial space readily available. This park offers the only “shovel ready”7 sites for new
business development prospects or for existing businesses wishing to expand and it should be promoted
as the City’s premier business location.
6 ArnoldCompanies.net
7 Shovel ready is a site that is available for immediate development with proper zoning, permitting and infrastructure (roads, water,
sewer, power and telecommunications) in place.
Page 35
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 35
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Quality of Life
Educational Attainment
Secondary Education
Higher Education is available at the University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee campus, State College
of Florida in North Port and the Charlotte Technical Center in Port Charlotte, as well as Florida Gulf Coast
University and Edison State College in Punta Gorda.
Table 14: Higher Education
Source: SRI International “Workforce Structure and Capabilities in the Tampa Bay Region Study”,
September 2010
North Port Public School Ratings
The City of North Port has nine schools, seven of which had an “A” rating in 2010-11; the other two had a
“B” rating.
Table 15: School Ratings
Source: Florida Department of Education
Page 36
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 36
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Hospitals
North Port is served by one ER facility (North Port ER) in the city and by four full-service medical facilities
in the area, those being:
Peace River Regional Medical Center - Port Charlotte
Fawcett Memorial Hospital - Port Charlotte
Charlotte Regional Medical Center - Punta Gorda
Venice Regional Medical Center - Venice
Ethnicity
The City of North Port is predominately White at 87.6 percent, compared to the State at 75 percent. North
Port has 7 percent Black, compared to the State at 16 percent and 8.7 percent Hispanic, compared to the
State at 22.5 percent.
Table 16: Ethnicity
Race alone or in combination with one or more other
races North Port Florida
Total population 57,357 18,801,310
White, percent, 2010 87.60% 75.00%
Black or African American, percent, 2010 7.00% 16.00%
American Indian and Alaska Native, percent, 2010 0.30% 0.40%
Asian, percent, 2010 1.20% 2.40%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, percent, 2010 0.10% 0.10%
Persons reporting two or more races, percent, 2010 2.20% 2.50%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race), percent, 2010 8.70% 22.5%
White persons not Hispanic, percent, 2010 81.5% 57.9%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey
Page 37
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 37
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Crime Statistics
North Port crime statistics report an overall upward trend in crime based on data from 10 years with
violent crime increasing and property crime increasing. Based on this trend, the crime rate in North Port
for 2012 is expected to be higher than in 2009.
In 2009, the city violent crime rate in North Port was lower than the violent crime rate in Florida by 49.81
percent and the city property crime rate in North Port was lower than the property crime rate in Florida by
35.72 percent.8
Table 17 & 18: Crime Indexes
Source: Cityrating.com
8 CityRating.com
Page 38
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 38
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Housing Market Data
In the May 2012 Demand Institute study- The Shifting Nature of U.S. Housing Demand, it was stated that
the U.S. housing recovery will not be uniform across the country. While prices will rise by 3 to 3.5 percent
a year on average between 2015 and 2017, some regions could see rises of 5 percent or more by 2015.
Elsewhere, prices could remain flat or even continue to fall over the next three years.
About 20 percent of the population lives in areas which will see the slowest rate of recovery. Price drops
have been higher than the national average and there is a large proportion of foreclosure inventory.
These localities also suffer from higher than average unemployment, are more sparsely populated, and
have low walkability. The fact that housing is relatively cheap compared to the national average will not
greatly assist recovery. Indeed, long-term prospects are most uncertain. We do not expect price rises to
reach the national average even by 2017. Examples of cities in this segment include the smaller suburbs
of major metropolitan areas in Florida, such as Tampa and Orlando.”9
Due to the national, state and local recession the housing market in North Port has been severely
impacted. The City of North Port experienced the most active period for residential permits from 2002-
2005, with a high in 2004 of 4,114 permits issued. The most active period for commercial permits was in
2004 and 2009 with 61 permits in 2007 and 59 permits in 2004 and 2009.
Table 19: Permitting Activity
Year Commercial Residential Multi-Family Total
2011 18 23 0 41
2010 45 91 0 136
2009 59 64 0 123
2008 47 41 0 88
2007 61 185 0 246
2006 53 627 0 680
2005 57 2,826 91 2,974
2004 59 4,114 55 4,228
2003 17 3,088 15 3,120
2002 14 1,821 38 1,873
Source: City of North Port Building Dept. (February 2012)
The National Association of Home Builders/First American Improving Markets Index in May 2012 showed
a 3.5% increase in permits for the City of North Port from 1/31/09 through 3/31/11. While Punta Gorda
had an increase of only 1.1% and Tampa was 1.7%. This is a good indicator that the housing recession
has turned the corner in North Port; however it is unlikely that the City of North Port will ever return to the
permitting activity of the mid 2000’s.10
9 May 2012, Demand Institute
10 National Association of Home Builders (IMI), May 2012
Page 39
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 39
Community Assessment — Economic Profile
Table 20: First American Improving Markets Index
Permits Growth Prices Growth Employment Growth
Trough From Trough From Trough From
# MSA Date Trough Date Trough Date Trough
1 Little Rock, AR 04/30/11 1.4% 02/28/11 4.7% 02/28/10 1.0%
2 Phoenix, AZ* 03/31/09 3.8% 06/30/11 4.5% 09/30/10 4.1%
3 Boulder, CO 11/30/09 12.3% 01/31/11 0.1% 03/31/10 4.6%
4 Denver, CO 03/31/09 3.4% 02/28/11 0.5% 01/31/10 4.2%
5 Fort Collins, CO 03/31/09 7.3% 12/31/10 0.9% 09/30/09 4.3%
6 New Haven, CT 04/30/11 1.2% 02/28/11 2.0% 02/28/10 3.1%
7 Washington, DC 01/31/09 0.9% 01/31/11 1.3% 02/28/10 3.9%
8 Cape Coral, FL 03/31/09 4.0% 02/28/11 6.1% 01/31/10 3.5%
9 Crestview, FL 11/30/08 3.1% 04/30/11 6.9% 03/31/10 4.8%
10 Deltona, FL 03/31/11 3.2% 03/31/11 8.4% 12/31/10 0.1%
11 Jacksonville, FL 04/30/09 1.8% 02/28/11 3.7% 03/31/10 2.4%
12 North Port, FL 01/31/09 3.5% 03/31/11 2.9% 12/31/10 2.3%
13 Orlando, FL 05/31/09 3.3% 04/30/11 2.5% 12/31/09 2.2%
14 Panama City, FL 08/31/10 5.4% 04/30/11 2.4% 12/31/09 2.0%
15 Pensacola, FL* 05/31/09 0.3% 05/31/11 4.0% 12/31/09 1.4%
16 Punta Gorda, FL 01/31/09 1.1% 02/28/11 7.4% 06/30/09 2.5%
17 Tampa, FL 03/31/09 1.7% 03/31/11 2.3% 01/31/10 3.8%
18 Hinesville, GA* 02/28/11 11.2% 06/30/11 2.4% 12/31/07 7.7%
19 Rome, GA 05/31/11 15.1% 05/31/11 10.3% 08/31/11 1.6%
20 Warner Robins, GA* 09/30/11 3.0% 05/31/11 2.0% 12/31/07 2.9%
Source: National Association of Home Builders/First American Improving Markets Index (IMI), May 7, 2012
Page 40
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 40
Community Assessment — Economic Profile Summary
Economic Profile Summary
Location
North Port is part of the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of North Port/Bradenton/Sarasota MSA and is
the largest city in the three county Combined Statistical Area (CSA) of
North Port/Bradenton/Sarasota/Punta Gorda CSA
• Includes 2 MSA’s-
• North Port/Bradenton/Sarasota MSA and the Punta Gorda MSA
• Combined due to commuting patterns
• NORTH PORT IS PART OF A REGIONAL ECONOMY
Population and Employment
• Population increase of 152% in the period 2000-2010 (Most occurring in 2002-2006), Florida was
18%.
• Population is relatively young- average age is 40.9; Sarasota is 50.5; Florida is 40.7.
• 8th fastest growing city in Florida from 2000-2010
• Average commute is 28.1 minutes, FL is 25.7 minutes
• Only 22% of residents work within the City of North Port
• Occupations in North Port are evenly distributed with largest percent of residents employed:
• Sales/Office occupations
• Management/Business occupations
• Service occupations
• Top 5 industry sectors are: Education, healthcare and social assistance. Followed by Retail
Trade, Professional Services, then Arts Entertainment & food services, followed by construction.
During the early to mid 2000’s North Port was highly dependent on the construction sector. Large
retirement sector with high concentration of jobs in Health Services
• Largest employers in Sarasota County are School Board, Government and Healthcare (Hospitals)
Activity Centers
City created 8 activity centers (Totaling 4,184 acres) as part of its Long Range Comprehensive
Plan to direct future employment. Only Activity Centers 1, 4 and 6 allow for Light Industrial and
AC 6 has no power or interstate access. Only 56 acres of vacant land remain within both Trott
Circle and North Port Commerce Park.
• Commerce Park located in Activity Center 4 has 170 acres of mixed use with commercial, office,
professional, and light industrial. The ONLY true “Shovel Ready” sites in the city with easy access
to I-75. Commerce Park still has limited vacant commercial and vacant industrial sites available.
City needs to be careful on what is allowed to go on those parcels. Vacant commercial parcels
need to be office and not strip commercial.
• North Port should guard against giving up these premiere sites to just any use. Look at what
Charlotte County has done around the airport which is now bringing in businesses.
Page 41
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 41
Community Assessment — Economic Profile Summary
Quality of Life
City of North Port has nine schools, seven of which had a “A” rating in 2010 and the other two
had a “B” rating
Higher Education available at University of South Florida, State College of Florida, Charlotte
Technical Center, Florida Gulf Coast University and Edison State College
One ER facility and four full-service medical facilities
Ethnicity - North Port is predominately White at 87.6%, compared to the State at 75%
Population will continue to diversify and become more Hispanic
Crime rate is up over the past 10 years
Housing permitting - High was in 2004, with most activity during 2002-2005. Multifamily has not
been built since 2005. With the younger population, multi-family housing needs to be encouraged.
The fact that North Port has affordable housing will only take it so far as the price of gas
continues to increase, eventually the younger population will move away since they have limited
rental housing/apartment options.
Page 42
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 42
Page 43
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 43
Workforce Analysis
Workforce Structure11
Both Sarasota and Charlotte counties services base have been highly oriented to the construction and
trade sectors. Education and Health Services; and Trade, Transportation and Utilities are major
employment sectors as are Leisure/Hospitality, and Professional and Business Services.
In September 2010, the Tampa Bay Partnership and the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
contracted with SRI International to conduct a “Workforce Structure and Capabilities in the Tampa Bay
Region Study.” This study was the instrument used to establish the target industries for the region.
Following are key findings for Sarasota County from that study.
Sarasota County has experienced a decrease in employment from 2004 to 2009 at an annual rate of -
3.8%. While the county has undergone a decline in employment, there have been pockets of growth. The
highest‐growth career pathways in Sarasota County, which include Animal Systems, Visual Arts, and
Telecommunications, have grown at rates of over thirty percent annually.
The workforce of Sarasota County is primarily employed in occupations that require low levels of training,
education and experience. Nonetheless, a small but growing proportion of Sarasota County occupations
require extensive preparation.
The largest career pathway in the county is Restaurants & Food/Beverage Services, followed by
Administrative & Information Support and Therapeutic Services. Between 2004 and 2009, Sarasota
County has experienced decline or negligible growth in many of its largest career pathways, but
Teaching/Training and Maintenance/Operations (Construction) are two career pathways that experienced
growth, with rates of 6.8% and 12.8% respectively. Between 2004 and 2009, the career pathways adding
the highest number of new jobs in Sarasota County were: Maintenance/Operations (Construction),
Teaching/Training, and Insurance Services. Compared to the national average, Sarasota County’s most
concentrated career pathways include Consumer Services; Telecommunications; and Maintenance/
Operations (Construction). Each of these pathways experienced employment growth between 2004 and
2009.
Cross‐functional skills related to management and human resources are concentrated in the county’s
workforce, including Social Perceptiveness, Persuasion, Coordination, Management of Personnel
Resources, and Negotiation. Work activities evidence a very communication‐oriented workforce.
The workforce of Sarasota County is primarily employed in occupations requiring low levels of training,
education and experience.
In 55.1% of the county’s current jobs, employees are required to have no more than low
levels of job preparation. This is slightly higher than the national average of 52.5%.
While occupations requiring extensive preparation make up only 4.7% of the county workforce,
the number of jobs in this category increased at a rate of 3.4% annually.
Higher education institutions headquartered in Sarasota County awarded 16,247 degrees and certificates
over the past decade.
11
SRI International Workforce Structure and Capabilities in the Tampa Bay Region Study, Sept. 2010
Page 44
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 44
Workforce Analysis
In North Port, as in the nation, demographic trends present important opportunities and challenges for
workforce development. The population in North Port is younger and less ethnically diverse than the
state. The educational level is slightly better than the Florida average for those individuals with a high
school diploma and lower for those with a bachelor’s degree or higher. The share of the state’s workforce
employed in elite, knowledge-intensive occupations is low. Domestic in-migration will be the most
important source of population and workforce growth for the City of North Port. 12
Table 1: Ten Largest Career Pathways
Source: SRI International “Workforce Structure and Capabilities in the Tampa Bay Region Study”, September 2010
It will be a challenge to improve workforce quality in order to compete successfully in the 21st century
knowledge-based economy. North Port will need to guard against losing its college-age population to
other places that have more diverse job offerings.
Suncoast Workforce
The City of North Port is served by the SUNCOAST Workforce Board which includes Manatee and
Sarasota Counties.
Since the official end of the recession in June 2009, online job demand in the Suncoast Workforce region
has increased by 4,427 jobs. Labor demand, measured by online advertised vacancies, bottomed out in
January 2009, and the Suncoast Workforce region has seen demand increase by 5,931 openings since
then. Online advertised vacancies were 9,964 jobs for Suncoast Workforce in March 2012. This
represented an increase of 323 jobs (+3.4 percent) from March 2011. Over the month, Suncoast
Workforce experienced an increase (+5.3 percent) in job demand, from 9,458 job ads in February 2012 to
9,964 job ads in March 2012.13
The SUNCOAST Workforce Board reported 13,841 residents from North Port received career services in
the past three years. The number of residents from North Port that received career services and entered
employment in the past three years was 557 (this is an underreported/recorded category).
12
21st Century Workforce Study: Sarasota and Manatee Counties, 2003
13 The Conference Board, Help Wanted OnLine, prepared by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Labor Market
Statistics Center.
Page 45
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 45
Workforce Analysis
Under the Workforce Investment Act training enrollees for 2010/11 and 2011/12, were 49 trainees
enrolled from North Port Area in 2010/11 and 48 enrolled in 2011/12. To put that in perspective, trainees
are allotted up to $5,000 per year for training for up to two years. This means that the workforce board
obligated approximately $240,000 to North Port residents for training in each of these program years.
The Tampa Bay Partnership reported in the Winter 2012 Scorecard that of the 15,500 jobs reported in the
Tampa Bay Region, South Tampa Bay (Manatee and Sarasota) accounted for 233, an MSA growth rate
of 0.10% year-over-year (2010Q3 – 2011Q3). The most recent updated data shows 3,400 jobs gained
between Jan. 2011 and Jan. 2012, for a 1.4% growth rate.14
Mobile Career Center
The Suncoast Mobile Career Center is an eleven-station computer lab on wheels with state-of-the-art
equipment. This Mobile Career Center has most of the resources available in the resource rooms of
Suncoast Workforce, the local one-stop career centers.
The Mobile Career Center is located in North Port every Monday at the library, every Wednesday and two
Tuesday’s at the North Port Family Services Center in the month, for a total of 10 days during each
month.
Job seekers use the Mobile Career Center to conduct an online job search, receive referrals to employers
with available positions, write resumes and cover letters, and evaluate their work skills, study software
applications with Microsoft Tutorials, and much more. All services are available at NO COST to job
seekers. Employers use the Mobile Career Centers to conduct computer training for employees, benefits
workshops, or any classroom activity requiring computer and/or Internet capability. Non-profit
organizations may use the Mobile Career Centers at no cost, while for-profit organizations and
businesses are charged a fee.
Job Seekers Services
Suncoast Workforce (SW) focuses on enhancing Manatee and Sarasota communities by assisting
residents with employment that ultimately helps them gain independence, better their career, and most
importantly place them in a gratifying position with an employer.
Table 2: Resources and Training from Suncoast Workforce
Resources Training
Unemployment Compensation Information
Employ Florida – Connects individuals with
employers and provides résumé building
opportunities
Resource Room with computers, internet access,
copiers, phone and fax
Labor market information to help determine which
industries are in, and not in, demand
Skills assessments to determine abilities
Software tutorials to polish professional skills
Veterans Services
Workers with Disabilities
Youth Services
Ability to complete GED in the Learning Lab
Assistance available for various training programs
Career Seeker Seminars
SW Workforce Professionals Network – a two week
series of workshops with speakers and presentations
focused on employment
SW Resume Writing Workshops
Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
Training programs available at educational institutions
on Approved Training Vendor List
Training programs are linked to high demand
occupations on the Regional Targeted Occupation List
for Region 18 (Manatee & Sarasota Counties)
Source: Suncoast Workforce Board web site. April 2012
14
Tampa Bay Partnership Winter 2012 Scorecard
Page 46
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 46
Workforce Analysis
Job search assistance, training scholarships, skills development and other services for veterans, military
families, laid-off workers, low-income individuals, youth, and professional adults are available through the
Suncoast Workforce Career Center.
Training Services
Suncoast Workforce acts as a liaison between individuals and local educational institutions to develop the
training programs needed or to connect individuals with local training providers. They also help individuals
find ways to finance that training by directing them to local, state or federal programs that are dedicated to
workforce development. Their services include:
On-the-Job Training - This program provides an incentive for employers to hire qualified people
who may not have the experience for a desired position. By hiring an employee in a training
capacity, a business can be reimbursed for a portion of that employee’s salary for up to six
months.
Incumbent Worker Training - All for-profit businesses that have operated in Florida for at least
one year are eligible to receive Incumbent Worker grants for current employees, which cover up
to 50 percent of training costs. These grants are available through Workforce Florida.
Workforce Summary
Cross- functional skills related to management and human resources are concentrated in the
county’s workforce.
The workforce of Sarasota County is primarily employed in occupations requiring low levels of
training, education and experience.
In 55.1% of the county’s current jobs-employees are required to have no more than low levels of
job preparation. Only slightly higher that US avg. of 52.5%.
Occupations requiring extensive preparation make up only 4.7% of the county workforce. This is
not just a North Port problem, it is a county problem.
Job growth rate in Tampa region is up this year at 1.4%, previous year it was 0.10%.
Ten Largest Career Pathways
Largest concentration is in Construction Maintenance followed by Construction and then
Administration and Information Support.
North Port needs to guard against losing its college age population to other places that have
more diverse job offerings.
SUNCOAST Workforce Board
SUNCOAST Workforce Board is active in North Port with the mobile career center being there 10
times/month. Over $240,000 a year has been spent on training in North Port during the past 2 years.
The SUNCOAST Workforce Board reported 13,841 residents from North Port received career services in
the past three years. The number of residents from North Port that received career services and entered
employment in the past three years was 557.
Page 47
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 47
Competitive Market Analysis
Competitive Market Analysis
The City of North Port lies at the southern boundary of Sarasota County adjacent to Charlotte County. As
previously mentioned, Manatee, Sarasota and Charlotte counties form a Combined Statistical Area or
region. The formation of this new region is largely due to North Port’s strong growth in the last decade
and its linkage to Port Charlotte which had served as its major retail/office center.
The overall regional market has been depressed for five years. North Port experienced significant
growth from 2000-2006 as it was positioned as the affordable/workforce housing center for the MSA,
registering 65% of Sarasota County’s growth. Like most of Florida, the “Great Recession” had a
significant dampening effect on the MSA’s growth since 2007. According to US Census estimates the
City is still experiencing some growth, which may not reflect the large number of foreclosures within the
City. There are currently (May 8, 2012) 822 homes in foreclosure15
which does not include those
foreclosures for the last 3-4 year period that have been resold. Port Charlotte currently has 1,223
foreclosed homes. There seems consensus that foreclosure rates, nationally and within Florida, will
increase at least for the short term as banks speed up their foreclosure backlog caused by Court delays
over the past 12 months. Economic projections from leading economists including Dr. Sean Snaith16
(University of Central Florida) indicate recovery not fully taking hold until 2015 with payrolls (employment)
taking to mid-2016 to recover to pre-recession levels.
The University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) in its latest population
projections reduced Sarasota County’s 2015 population projection to 394,800 from its 2011 estimate of
381,319 or a net gain of only 13,481 or approximately 6,300 households. The critical question is whether
the City of North Port will continue to attract the bulk (65%) of the County’s growth by virtue of lower
housing costs or whether changing housing demand (rental demand), and transportation costs will
negatively impact the City’s growth.
Retail
Retail space traditionally follows residential development or “roof tops”. As North Port was experiencing
its significant growth spurt, numerous retail developments were built within the City as well as in
neighboring Port Charlotte. Some of the construction was premised on the continued growth pattern of
the early 2000’s, the expectation of continued growth as well as cannibalization of Port Charlotte’s retail
market, as shown by the completion of Cocoplum Village Shops (Phase 2). The County has
approximately 10 million square feet of retail space and a vacancy of 13.7%17
or a vacancy of 1.3 million
square feet. Absorption peaked in 2004 at 150,000 square feet giving the County approximately 6 years
of inventory assuming a normal healthy vacancy rate of 5%.
Of the total existing shopping center space located within the North Port market area, approximately 55%
of the space is situated in neighboring Charlotte County and 45% is located in Sarasota County. This
space represents approximately 85% of Charlotte County’s total shopping center space and 26 of
Sarasota County’s.
15
Trulia.com 16
Florida & Metro Forecast, 2012-15 17
reisreports.com/Markets/Florida/Sarasota/Retail/
Page 48
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 48
Competitive Market Analysis
Figure 1: 30 Mile Radii of North Port
Source: Claritas, Inc, 2012; FIOG 2012
Significantly, almost half (45%) of the market areas’ shopping center inventory is 20 or more years of
age.18
Only 12% of the existing shopping center space was opened during the past 10 years and almost
half of all the space (46%) was built during the 1980’s. Thus, the existing shopping center space supply
within the market area is somewhat antiquated.
In general, residents in the southern part of Sarasota County, which includes the larger cities of both
North Port and Venice, are filling a major share of their comparison shopping needs in the City of
Sarasota and its suburbs to the north or at commercial facilities available to the south in Port Charlotte
which is located in neighboring Charlotte County. Both of these communities are anchored with regional
mall retail centers and large amounts of adjacent commercial space. That said, new developments like
Cocoplum Village Shops (Phase 1 and 2) as well as Home Depot and Lowe’s home improvement
warehouses are increasingly being built to satisfy North Port’s demand rather than Port Charlotte and/or
regional demand.
The delineated North Port primary market area is presently underserved by both retail and other
commercial services establishments and facilities. In light of increasing transportation costs, primarily fuel
prices, and increasing congestion on the local/regional transportation network, commercial development
opportunities to serve this market are anticipated to increase exponentially during the future should the
City maintain its ability to attract working age households.
18
Age significantly impacts the marketability of shopping centers. Lease pods are wider and shorter than 10 years ago. Signage and architectural finishes are also significantly different. Centers that used to be anchored with drug stores are experiencing problems as drug stores now are located on free standing parcels usually located at major intersections or what is considered 100% corners.
Page 49
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 49
Competitive Market Analysis
Retail Metrics
The overall MSA market has continued to experience a declining retail real estate market, with sales
prices declining from their 2006 highs of $294 per square foot to a current asking price of $194 per
square foot, as shown on following table. Sarasota County’s retail market asking price has declined from
a high of $326 per square foot in 2006 to a current asking price of $245 per square foot. The City of
Sarasota is the retail center for the County and MSA, and has seen asking prices decline from $358 to
$269 per square foot. It should be noted that the Metro, County and City of Sarasota retail asking prices
are still significantly higher than the State’s asking price of $152, reflecting the region’s higher median
income.
Retail Rents
Retail rents have experienced significant declines over the last five years. Asking retail rents have
converged for the MSA, County and City of Sarasota in the mid $14 per square foot range, down from a
high of $23 per square foot in 2006 within the City of Sarasota and $21 per square foot for the County.
With the exception of Cocoplum Village Shops, Phase 2, little new construction has taken place within the
region since the recession, as lower rents and financing requirements are negative for new construction.
Some indication that the market is bottoming-out is the recent announcement that Benderson
Development and Taubman are moving ahead with the construction of The Mall at University Town
Center in Sarasota at I-75. The approximately $315-million, two-level enclosed shopping center will
feature an 80,000 square foot Saks Fifth Avenue, a 160,000 square foot Macy's and a 180,000 square
foot Dillard's, along with approximately 115 stores – more than half expected to be new to the market. In
addition, a fourth department store is planned to be added at a future date.
Overall, the North Port and vicinity market is soft with limited absorption expected in the short term, at
least until the housing market shows true signs of recovery, which is not expected until late 2013 to mid-
2014, given the projected increase in foreclosure activity expected in the short term.
Graph 1: Sale Trends (Retail)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
Page 50
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 50
Competitive Market Analysis
Graph 2: Lease Trends (Retail)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
Office
Office developments have no defined trade or market area.19
Location is affected by numerous factors
including:
Employee access
Traffic congestion (drive time)
Parking
Image
Hotel/Restaurant amenities
Fuel/Transportation costs (employee costs)
As mentioned earlier in this report, most of the County’s larger retail and office developments (Lakewood
Ranch, Palmer Ranch, etc.) cater to the historic population center of the region (northern Sarasota
County and Manatee County). Similarly, planned commercial development on the University Parkway
corridor in Sarasota primarily serves City of Sarasota area residents, and to a much lesser extent,
Bradenton area residents.
The southern part of Sarasota County, due to its smaller population base, did not experience any major
retail or office developments until recently. Its residents had to travel longer distances to purchase goods
or find employment. From a technical level this southern area served as a secondary and/or tertiary
market to the County’s northern retail and office developments (the exception being retail opportunities
within Charlotte County).
The City of North Port and the southern sectors of Sarasota County are considered an entirely separate
market, and to a great extent more closely associated with the Port Charlotte/Venice markets.
The City of North Port does not have a large office sector and no Class “A” properties. Most of its office
inventory is smaller single condo office space; as can be found within the North Port Commerce Park.
19
ULI, Office Development Handbook
Page 51
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 51
Competitive Market Analysis
Based on recent data from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, there are approximately 2.3 million square feet
of vacant office space in Sarasota and Manatee counties.
Data for the Sarasota office market as of April, 201220
, show an asking price of $208.88 per square foot
versus actual sales price of $180.26 per square foot for Class “A” and “B” properties with 298 days on the
market.
The only published data for the immediate area is Charlotte County. Asking prices for office properties
(predominately Class “B” and “C” properties) in Charlotte County21
are $104 per square foot, declining
from $218 per square foot, and below new construction costs.
Graph 3: Sale Trends (Office)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
20
www.anthonyhomer.com 21
primarily Port Charlotte
Page 52
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 52
Competitive Market Analysis
Office rents for Sarasota County and the region have declined from approximately $20 - $18.50 range to
$14 range again below replacement cost.
Graph 4: Lease Trends (Office)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
According to Maddux Research22
, Sarasota County presently has the following inventory of
retail/commercial gross leasable area (GLA) or space in the following commercial categories:
-Retail Shopping Centers 10 million Square Feet GLA
-Business Parks 6.5 million Square Feet GLA
-Multi-Tenant Office Space 7.0 million Square Feet GLA
-Total 23.5 million Square Feet GLA
On a square foot or per capita basis, this equates to approximately 61 square feet of the indicated types
of commercial space overall. Retail shopping center space amounts to 24 square feet per capita,
business parks 18 square feet per capita, and 19 square feet per capita for multi-tenant office space.
Shopping center space per capita space statewide amounted to 28 square feet per capita and 41 square
feet per capita for total retail including related business services according to data compiled by the
National Research Bureau shopping center database and statistical model.
It should be noted that the indicated figures do not reflect the total amount of commercial space existing
within the County, but rather, that commercial space that is located in shopping centers, business parks
and multi-tenant buildings. Excluded are strip commercial as well as free standing facilities and single
user facilities.
22
2010 data
Page 53
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 53
Competitive Market Analysis
Industrial
Most of the MSA’s estimated 13 million square feet of industrial space is located within Manatee and
northern Sarasota Counties, of which approximately 6 million square feet is located in Sarasota County.
Asking prices for industrial properties have declined from a high of $150 per square foot in 2006 to the
mid $67-$68 per square foot range, well below State trends.
Graph 5: Sale Trends (Industrial)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
Industrial asking rents for the Sarasota County industrial market have declined from $10 per square foot
at the start of 2008 to a current asking rent in the low $6 dollar per square foot range, again below State
averages.
Graph 6: Lease Trends (Industrial)
Source: LoopNet March 2012
Page 54
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 54
Competitive Market Analysis
North Port has limited industrial inventory and limited shovel ready properties, particularly in close
proximity to I-75. The immediate North Port area, including northern Charlotte County is suited as a
distribution center as it lies half way between the City of Sarasota and the City of Ft. Myers. This is
shown by the selection of Cheney Brothers’ recent announcement to locate a distribution center at the
Punta Gorda Airport.
North Port Competitive Position
The City of North Port grew to be the largest City within Sarasota and Manatee Counties as a result of its
position as the MSA’s leading affordable/workforce housing market. Prior to 2000, most of the City’s
retail, office and industrial space requirements were met by existing inventories within the greater Port
Charlotte/Venice region (each independently serving as separate markets). As North Port’s growth
significantly outpaced those individual markets some retail supply, cannibalized primarily from the existing
Port Charlotte market, was created within the City, partly to satisfy existing North Port demand as well as
projected growth. Overall regional housing price declines, rising transportation costs, changing housing
demand (renter vs. ownership) and tighter financing requirements may impact the past decade’s growth
pattern.
That said, its geographic location within the projected fast growing Southwest Florida growth corridor:
Naples to Sarasota, should maintain its position as a growth center. Its ability to attract more jobs will be
necessary if it is to counter the housing demand issues described above. To that end the City has
several gaps. First, it has limited land at its I-75 interchanges that could be developed in the short term
(2015). Historically, properties entitled as job creating have been developed as residential further limiting
retail/office/industrial development. Today, the City’s main limited office/industrial acre/facilities are
located at or adjacent to the North Port Commerce Park which is approaching build-out. Simply stated,
the City has virtually no inventory to attract the workforce it desires. Furthermore, Charlotte County,
particularly the industrial properties adjacent to I-75 and the airport, have become competitive as a result
of the infrastructure being added to house the Cheney Brothers’ distribution facility. Long term, Murdock
Village could further Port Charlotte’s commercial/retail dominance of this sub region.
The fact that North Port lies within Sarasota County is a positive branding selling point as is its school
system and County services. To better position itself to the regional market, the City needs more shovel
or nearly shovel ready inventory via more business parks (developer controlled), and more sites for multi-
family housing to meet the changing national housing demand for rentals and mixed use developments
and changing demographics (Generation Y).
Competitive Market Analysis Summary
What is North Port’s Competitive Position?
• Geographic location in the Naples-Sarasota corridor
• North Port is part of the Sarasota County brand with good schools and county services
Page 55
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 55
Competitive Market Analysis
What are the gaps to attracting more jobs?
• Limited land at I-75 that could be developed in the short term (2015) Commerce Park is
approaching build-out
• Charlotte County industrial properties along I-75 and the airport have become more competitive.
• Basically, the City has no inventory to attract the workforce it desires
• City needs to stop allowing job creating properties to be developed as residential or strip
commercial
• North Port needs more developer controlled business parks and more multi-family
housing to meet the changing housing demands
Page 56
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 56
Page 57
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 57
Benchmarks
Benchmarks
The City of North Port asked the FIOG to evaluate and benchmark three other similar communities: Cape
Coral, Deltona, and Port St. Lucie. All three are large platted communities with different histories and
economic development outcomes.
Deltona
The City of Deltona is located within the western part of Volusia County across
the St. Johns River from Seminole County, one of the largest office sectors
within the Orlando MSA. The City lays approximately half way between the City
of Orlando and Daytona Beach. The 2010 Census reports that the city had a
population of 85,182. By population, it is the largest city in Volusia
County, and the second–largest city in Central Florida. It is a
principal city of the Deltona–Daytona Beach–Ormond Beach,
Florida Metropolitan Statistical Area, which was home to 494,593
people in 2010.
Founded in 1962 as "Deltona Lakes," the City, like North Port and Port
Charlotte, was a platted, master planned 41 square mile community
developed by Mackle Brothers, Inc. While originally planned as a retirement
community, during the 1990’s and early 2000’s it became the workforce
housing center of the sub-region reaching a population of 50,828 by 1990. This rapid
development of housing units since its opening in 1962 led to an almost entirely
residential cityscape. The City is bounded to the north by I-4 which allows for quick access to
Seminole and Orange County’s employment, shopping and entertainment.23
Because the city is close, in proximity to Orlando, it is generally considered to be an "edge city" of the
Orlando metropolitan area; the City is also a part of the Orlando–Deltona–Daytona Beach, FL Combined
Statistical Area, which was home to 2,818,120 people in 2010.
Figure 2: 30 Mile Radii of Deltona
Source: Claritas, Inc, 2007; FIOG 2012
23
Strategic Planning Group – Deltona Strategic Economic Development Plan 2007
Figure 1: Deltona
Location within Florida
Page 58
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 58
Benchmarks
The City’s major economic center is the SR 472 Activity Center. It is part of a large 1,824 acre
Development of Regional Impact covering the four corners of the I-4/SR 472 intersection. Two cities
(Deltona, Deland) plus an unincorporated area of the County fall within its boundaries. Deltona contains
the large land holdings at approximately 900 acres.
The SR 472 Activity Center as currently planned contains:
5.7 million square feet of Warehouse/Industrial
4.4 million square feet of Office
1.8 million square feet of Retail
266 hotel rooms
Figure 3: SR 472 Activity Center
Source: Strategic Planning Group – Deltona SEDP 2007
While there is some entertainment/retail development planned for the site, little of the non residential
development has progressed. Part of the City’s problem in developing the site was caused by the
publicly prepared area-wide DRI which failed to ensure transportation entitlements that would allow for its
development. Further, because this was a publically prepared DRI, its implementation is left to the
underlying land owners and the two cities (including Deltona, Deland) that have jurisdiction within this
Activity Center.
While the “Great Recession” has potentially affected the development of Activity Center, much of the
original delay was due to limited transportation entitlements and multiple land ownership and the constant
competition to challenge the internal land use allotments. Furthermore, none of the land owners had non-
residential experience.
Summary:
Size: 41.1 square miles
Developer: Mackle Brothers, Inc. / Deltona Corporation
Start of Development: 1962, City Charter 1995
Type of Development: Platted Residential Development
Problems: As originally planned, limited non residential land and no City Center. Inability to develop its
Activity Center was caused by lack of underlying ownership commercial development experience,
publically produced DRI with multiple land owners, and failure to secure needed transportation
entitlements.
Page 59
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 59
Benchmarks
Figure 1: Port. St. Lucie
Location within Florida
Port St. Lucie24
Incorporated in 1961 by the General Development Corporation (GDC), the City
was originally intended to be a bedroom and retirement
community. Prior to going bankrupt in 1990, GDC had largely
effectuated its plan, platting approximately 80,000 quarter
acre single family lots served by a limited transportation network,
undersized commercial areas, well water and septic tanks. In the early
1990’s, Core Communities (CC), acquired, and began
planning on what would become St. Lucie West.
Originally, St. Lucie West was planned to have contained
about 14,000 homes over a 20-year period on 7 square
miles. But after realizing the community’s strategic
position, they began developing it into more than just a
residential area. CC began building business sectors and
places where people could have fun. That resulted in
7,000 jobs being brought to the small town, helping it into
its boom during most of the early 2000’s. As configured
today the City contains 76.7 square miles of land/water.
There were several disadvantages of the GDC design:
The City had no central core or traditional downtown
Most residents had to work, shop and find entertainment outside of the City
Lead to a flat tax base
Reduced levels of public services
A diminished quality of life
Not happy with the City's original design, the community embarked on a bold journey to retrofit the
“original” City and enable economic development by:
Constructing a centralized water and wastewater utility system for $500 million
Comprehensive transportation improvements
Recruitment of targeted industries
Annexation of adjacent agricultural lands for the development of master planned mixed use
communities
Designation of a Community Redevelopment Area
Strong political will
These initiatives and investments, especially the utility system, enabled the infill of the original City and
the scores of new developments which have transformed this former bedroom and retirement community
into a “City for All Ages.”
Core Communities came into the picture and had property annexed into the City to provide a physical and
cost-effective location for job creation and commercial development because such a location was not
readily available within the existing City as a result of GDC’s design. This new area is called “Tradition.”
24
The data for Port St. Lucie came from discussions with EDO staff and some sections taken directly from the City’s website and Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org)
Page 60
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 60
Benchmarks
In 2008, Tradition and Core Communities welcomed the Florida Center of Innovation, a research
laboratory and campus, which is home to the 100,000 square foot Torrey Pines Institute for Molecular
Studies and the Vaccine & Gene Therapy Institute. This campus alone is projected to bring more than
30,000 jobs to the city of Port St. Lucie, alone. In 2012, Digital Domain Media Group's sister company
and animation studio Tradition Studios relocated to Port St. Lucie.
The City is home to New York Mets spring training, the St. Lucie Mets Florida State League team and the
Mets rookie level team in the Gulf Coast League. All three play at Digital Domain Field. The Treasure
Coast Galleons, a semi-pro soccer team also calls Port St. Lucie its home. Florida Atlantic University has
its Treasure Coast campus in the city. There is a golf complex, the PGA Village with 54 holes of golf, a
learning center and a historical center. The City also hosted the Ginn Classic at Tesoro, the City's first
ever PGA Tour Event, in 2007. Port St Lucie is the home of world renowned Mixed Martial Arts School,
American Top Team Port St Lucie campus. Port St. Lucie is also home to Local Skate Team. Port St.
Lucie is also the home of the 2009 & 2011 National Champions in Pop Warner Football Pop Warner Little
Scholars. The Daytona Beach Racers of the Stars Football League have relocated its franchise to Port St.
Lucie, and will begin playing in the 2012 season.
The Tradition Research Park is now home to the 100,000 square foot Torrey Pines Institute of Molecular
Studies and will house many more ancillary companies who provide support service to the bio-medical
industry. Incentives played a big role:
$40 million- City of Port St. Lucie
$32 million- State of Florida
$10 million- St. Lucie County
$6.5 million- in-kind from Florida Atlantic University
20 acres donated by Tradition developer Core Communities
Other components of Traditions include:
The Landing- 600,000 square foot retail center
Tradition Square- a collection of local and regional shops and restaurants
Village Pointe- 350,000 square foot of home furnishing outlets and amphitheater
Regional Mall- 1.3 million square foot regional mall is planned
Tanger Outlet Mall- 400,000 square foot has been announced
In an effort to achieve sufficient and long lasting results for the City, the City also created a 2,000 acre
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). The CRA is envisioned as a central gathering place that
creates an identity for the city as well as provides entertainment and economic opportunities. The area is
planned to include a variety of development districts and connective open space to better serve Port St.
Lucie’s current and future population.
Summary:
Size: 76.7 square miles
Developer: General Development Corporation
Start of Development: 1959
Type of Development: Platted Residential Development
Problems: As originally planned, limited non-residential land and no City Center. The City’s primary
success was the annexation of lands west of I-95 and the creation of “Traditions.” These
lands/developments were developer-driven (Core Communities) by those who understood commercial
development. Once conceived, a strong private public partnership was formed to transform this workforce
bedroom community for Palm Beach County into a growing economic entity.
Page 61
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 61
Benchmarks
Figure 1: Cape Coral Location within Florida
Cape Coral25
The City of Cape Coral is located in Lee County. Founded in
1957 and developed as a master-planned, pre-platted
community, the city grew to a population of 154,305 by the
year 2010. With an area of 120 square miles, Cape Coral is
reported to be the largest city between Tampa and Miami. It is
a principal city in the Cape Coral – Fort Myers, Florida
Metropolitan Statistical Area. The population estimate for the
statistical area was 618,754 in 2010 according to Census
estimates. The City is known as a 'Waterfront Wonderland", since,
with over 400 miles of navigable waterways, Cape Coral is reported to
have more miles of canals than any other city in the world.
Cape Coral was founded by real estate developers Leonard and Jack Rosen, Gulf American Corporation
(GAC), which was response for the planning and development of this pre-platted community. The City
incorporated in August 1970, and its population continued to grow rapidly. In its early years, Cape Coral
was known as a community with many retired residents. This changed with a population and construction
boom in the 1990’s, which brought in younger families and professionals. Twenty percent of the
population is seasonal residents. Today, the City has a wide variety of businesses, retail shops and
restaurants on its major arteries: Cape Coral Parkway, Del Prado Boulevard, Santa Barbara Boulevard
and Pine Island Road. As of 2010, there were 78,948 households in the City, out of which 23.0% were
vacant.
The economy in Cape Coral is based on local government services, health care, retail and real
estate/construction. The City's Economic Development Office promotes and incentivizes business
relocation to Cape Coral. The City's top five employers were the Lee County School District, Cape Coral
City Hall, Publix Supermarkets, Cape Coral Hospital and Wal-Mart.
Due to its canals designed for residential orientation, non-residential development has largely been
aggregated along major roads. Complicating development is direct access to Ft. Myers which is limited
by two bridges. A recently (2012) build-out study suggests that the City has a potential for 200 million
square feet of non-residential uses. Based on a quick review of the City’s land use and zoning, the City
has few aggregated parcels of 25 plus acres suitable for business park type development. One such
parcel has just been designated as the Veterans Investment Zone site for the new 220,000 square foot
Veterans Hospital.
25
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_Coral,_Florida
Page 62
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 62
Benchmarks
Summary:
Size: 120 square miles
Developer: Gulf American Corporation
Start of Development: 1957
Type of Development: Platted Residential Development
Problems: As originally planned, it was a canal oriented retirement center with limited non-residential
land and no City Center. The City grew significantly with the addition of a new bridge to provide
additional access to downtown Ft. Myers and like North Port became the workforce housing center for the
County. Its non-residential land has centered on its major road corridors and within its limited urban
service district and land assembly issues, the City has only two limited industrial parks and the new
Veterans Investment Zone as major areas for business development. As no large tracts are available
and access to the larger region is limited, economic development efforts are limited. Lessons learned are
to aggregate sufficient land for new business park development at locations which are market friendly and
hopefully associated with experienced commercial developers.
Benchmark Summary
Three large platted residential communities similar to North Port;
City of Deltona
• Limited non-residential land and no City Center
• Inability to develop its Activity Center due to lack of commercial development experience
• Publically produced DRI with multiple land owners
• Failure to secure transportation entitlements
City of Port St. Lucie
• Limited non-residential land and no City Center
• Successful because the City annexed lands west of I-95 and the creation of “Traditions”- contains
bio-medical companies, regional mall, outlet mall, misc. other retail and housing
• Developer driven
• Strong public-private partnership formed-over $88.5 million invested in incentives
City of Cape Coral
• Canal oriented retirement community with limited non-residential uses and no City Center
• Workforce housing center for Lee County
• Limited industrial parks
• No large land tracts available for new business park development
Back to Table of Contents
Page 63
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 63
Section 3
SECTION
Target Industry Analysis Economic Development Incentives Best Practices in Economic Development
SECTION
3
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
Page 64
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 64
Page 65
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 65
Target Industry Analysis
Target Industries
Target industry businesses bring quality job growth to a community thus making a significant economic
contribution. Most communities use the State’s measurement of paying an average annual wage that is at
least 115 percent of the state, metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or local average wage in order to
qualify as a target industry. Communities select the types of target industries that aid in providing
economic diversification; pay higher wages; retain young professionals; enhance economic growth; meet
a variety of skill sets; and leverage local assets and infrastructure.
Numerous economic development groups, including State, regional and county organizations within North
Port’s overall market area, have prepared detailed target industry studies that can directly assist the City
in its economic development efforts. Most of the industries discussed below are referred to as “Target
Industries” which for this report means “value added”. A City, unlike a state, region or county, is more
dependent on property taxes for revenue; therefore, a city’s target industries or businesses also include
tourism, retail, as well as blue collar jobs.
State of Florida/Enterprise Florida
Enterprise Florida, Inc. (EFI) is a public-private partnership serving as Florida's primary organization
devoted to statewide economic development. EFI's mission is to facilitate job growth for Florida's
businesses and citizens leading to a vibrant statewide economy.
EFI accomplishes this mission by focusing on a wide range of industry sectors, including clean energy,
life sciences, information technology, aviation/aerospace, homeland security/defense,
financial/professional services, manufacturing, corporate headquarters, research & development,
emerging technologies and beyond. In collaboration with a statewide network of regional and local
economic development organizations, EFI helps to improve Florida's business climate, ensuring the
state's global competitiveness. EFI last updated the Florida Target Industry List in 2011.
Enterprise Florida’s Target (Value-Added) Industries
• Cleantech
• Life Sciences
• Infotech
• Aviation/Aerospace
• Homeland Security/Defense
• Financial/Professional Services
Businesses need to be able to locate in other states and serve multi-state and/or international markets.
Call Centers and Shared Service Centers may qualify if certain economic criteria are met.
Tampa Bay Partnership
The Tampa Bay Partnership is the regional organization (representing eight counties) that works with its
partners to market the region nationally and internationally, to conduct regional research and to coordinate efforts
to influence business and government issues that impact economic growth and development.
Page 66
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 66
Target Industry Analysis
Tampa Bay Partnership Target (Value-Added) Industries26
Applied Medicine & Human Performance
High Tech Electronics & Instruments
Business, Financial & Data Services
Marine & Environmental Activities
The Tampa Bay Partnership is developing a Regional Business Plan and hopes to accelerate job growth
in the target industry clusters by 10%; this could net an increase of approximately 12,000 jobs above and
beyond forecasted growth, and a total of 22,000 direct and indirect jobs in Tampa Bay by 2020. These
22,000 jobs will, over the period they’re created, result in nearly $6.4 billion in personal income. The
Tampa Bay Region will realize over $8 billion in additional gross regional product over these 9 years, and
generate more than $176 million in sales taxes. Overall, the net fiscal return to the state is $443 million.27
Industry Cluster Analysis - Tampa Bay Region
In September 2010, the Tampa Bay Partnership and the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
contracted with SRI International to conduct an “Industry Cluster Analysis of the Tampa Bay Region” this
study was the instrument used to establish the target industries for the region. Following are key findings
for Sarasota County from that study.28
A. Sarasota County Overview
Sarasota County’s five largest industry clusters (by employment) provide 92,738 jobs, or 71.4% of total
employment in the county. The five top employment clusters include: Life Sciences & Medical Services,
Tourism, Retail Trade, Construction & Real Estate, and Education & Government. The ten largest
industry clusters represent 91.4% of employment in the county. Seven of Sarasota County’s ten largest
industry clusters are service industries, while the other three are knowledge- & technology-based
industries.
Service industries comprise 67.6% of employment in Sarasota County, just above the 66.5% of
employment that such industries represent in the region overall. At 29.0% of employment, knowledge- &
technology-based industries in the county comprise a slightly higher percentage of employment than the
eight-county average of 28.3%. Traditional & manufacturing industries are a smaller proportion of
employment in Sarasota County (3.4%) than in the region overall (5.2%).
Overall, Sarasota County’s economy is dominated by service industries.
Seven out of the county’s ten largest industry clusters are service industries.
About 68% of the county’s total jobs and approximately 71% of total establishments in 2009 were
in services. However, employment in these sectors shrank by -3.7% between 2004 and 2009.
Several of Sarasota County’s large service clusters, such as Construction & Real Estate, General
Services, Retail Trade, and Tourism, provide lower than average wages within both the county
and regional contexts, as demonstrated in the bubble chart. On average, wages in Sarasota
County’s service industries are 13% lower than the county average wage.
26
Tampa Bay Partnership, 2011 27
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council 28
SRI International-“Industry Cluster Analysis of the Tampa Bay Region”, September 2010
Page 67
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 67
Target Industry Analysis
Figure 1. Sarasota County Industry Clusters
SOURCE: SRI International “Industry Cluster Analysis of the Tampa Bay Region”,
September 2010
Knowledge- & technology-based industries represent a sizeable and stable share of employment
in Sarasota County.
Knowledge- & technology-based industries employ about 29.0% of the county’s total
workforce and represent 25.9% of its establishments.
In the county, Life Sciences & Medical Services, Financial Services, and Research &
Engineering Services are the three largest knowledge- & technology-based clusters by
employment.
Given the overall economic environment, knowledge- & technology based industries have
been relatively stable in Sarasota County, with an employment of -0.7% from 2004 to 2009.
All of the county’s knowledge- & technology-based industries offer average pay that exceeds
the county average of $36,799, ranging from a high of $65,721 in the Financial Services
cluster to a low of $38,317 in Telecommunications.
Traditional & manufacturing industries represent a small and generally contracting percentage of
Sarasota County’s economy.
These sectors account for only 3.4% of the county’s employment, an amount that has
declined by
-9.7% annually between 2004 and 2009.
Page 68
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 68
Target Industry Analysis
Traditional & manufacturing industries comprise 2.9% of the county’s establishments, but, in
contrast to employment, the number of enterprises has grown slightly, at 0.5% annually
between 2004 and 2009.
Except for Agriculture & Agribusiness and Wood & Furniture, Sarasota County’s Traditional &
manufacturing industries offer pay that meets or exceeds the county average wage.
B. Industry Cluster Trends and Growth Rates
The following table presents key data regarding Sarasota County’s ten largest industry clusters (by
employment) in 2009. The statistics reveal that, for all but one of the ten clusters, the county’s
employment moved downward in parallel with national trends, although the county experienced greater
job contraction than the average for these clusters across the United States. The Business Services
cluster was a particularly hard hit in Sarasota County, with an employment decline of -16.2% annually,
versus a drop of -1.6% annually nationwide. Seven of the ten largest clusters have employment
concentration ratios that are above the national average. With the exceptions of Tourism, Retail Trade,
and General Services, all of the ten largest clusters have average annual pay that is near or above the
overall 2009 average pay for Sarasota County ($36,799).
Figure 2. Sarasota County’s 10 Largest Industry Cluster in Q3 2009
SOURCE: SRI International “Industry Cluster Analysis of the Tampa Bay Region”, September
2010
C. Employment by Cluster
1. EMPLOYMENT
Life Sciences & Medical Services, Tourism, and Retail Trade are the county’s largest employers,
followed by Construction & Real Estate and Education & Government. In 2009, the five largest
clusters accounted for 71.4% of employment, with 92,738 jobs, and the ten largest represented
91.4% of employment, or 118,757 jobs.
Page 69
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 69
Target Industry Analysis
2. EMPLOYMENT GROWTH RATES
In light of the county’s overall employment contraction of -3.1% from 2004 to 2009, it is not surprising
that only five clusters experienced growth during the same period. Three of the five clusters in which
employment expanded – Life Sciences & Medical Services, Education & Government, and Tourism –
account for large numbers of jobs in the county. The other clusters in which employment grew –
namely Energy & Environment and IT Services – are very small employers, together representing
less than 2% of Sarasota County’s workers.
Sarasota County’s employment contraction parallels that of the broader region but has generally been
more severe. For instance, between 2004 and 2009, the county suffered deep job losses, of -16.2%
annually, in Business Services, compared to an -8.7% annual drop across the eight-county region.
Likewise, in Financial Services (another large employment cluster in Sarasota County) job losses
reached -3.8% annually, versus -1.2% in the region. Research & Engineering Services, also one of
Sarasota County’s ten largest clusters by employment, saw job reductions of -4.4% in the county,
while the overall region’s employment in the cluster actually grew by 1.2%.
D. Key Clusters And Sub-Clusters
The Life Sciences & Medical Services cluster is the largest employer in Sarasota County,
providing jobs for 18.2% of the county’s workers.
Tourism, which grew in employment by a modest 0.6% from 2004 to 2009, accounts for 14.8% of
employment in Sarasota County. The county’s job growth has been driven by expansion in two
sub-clusters – Food & Beverage and Sports & Recreation – which saw annual increases of 0.3%
and 9.9%, respectively.
Though the Construction & Real Estate Services cluster experienced job losses of -4.4%
annually from 2004 to 2009, surprisingly, the Real Estate & Building Services sub-cluster, which
represents 41.8% of the cluster’s total employment, continued to grow at an annual rate of 3.1%.
This cluster posts the county’s highest employment concentration ratio, at 1.670.
A small cluster in terms of employment size (with 1,083 jobs, or 0.8% of total county
employment), IT Services in Sarasota County maintained a growth rate of 1.0% annually
between 2004 and 2009.
Summary of Findings - SRI International “Industry Cluster Analysis of the Tampa Bay Region”
Study
There is an inherent relationship between industry employment needs and current employment skills sets.
The SRI International study noted that:
The workforce of Sarasota County is primarily employed in occupations requiring low levels of
training, education and experience.
In 55.1% of the county’s current jobs-employees are required to have no more than low levels of
job preparation. Only slightly higher that US average of 52.5%.
Largest concentration of employment skills is in construction maintenance followed by
construction and then administration and information support.
Occupations requiring extensive skill set preparation make up only 4.7% of the county workforce.
This is not just a North Port problem; it is a county problem too.
According to figures obtained from the Tampa Bay Partnership-South Tampa Bay (Manatee and
Sarasota Counties) grew by only 233 jobs (0.10%) in 2010. In 2011, it grew by 3,400 jobs (1.4%),
an indication that the economy is getting better.
Page 70
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 70
Target Industry Analysis
The FIOG also looked at Charlotte County’s targeted industries as it is part of North Port’s economic
region.
Charlotte County Economic Development Office
Employment incentives are limited to Targeted Industry Businesses, to include those industries identified
by Enterprise Florida, Inc., and the Governor’s Office of Tourism, Trade, Economic Development at the
time of application, or identified by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Charlotte County.
Charlotte County Target Industries29
Manufacturing
Communications & Production of Communications Equipment
Back Office Operations
Marine & Related Industries
Aircraft & Avionics Related Industries
Aquaculture & Related Support Industries
Green Technology Industries
Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County
The EDC works to create a thriving economic environment in Sarasota County by attracting and retaining
businesses that provide high-wage jobs. From October 2010 through September 2011, the EDC’s
business development efforts assisted companies anticipating the creation of 1,125 jobs and more than
$65 million in capital investment. The County updated its strategic plan in April 2009.
Like many counties across the United States, Sarasota County experienced a sharp downturn in jobs and
the tax base. Because the region was highly dependent on housing and development industries, the
county took an early hit as that market declined. Other industries soon followed with job losses. To return
to employment levels of 2005 and 2006 and grow at a steady rate of approximately 2–3% per year,
Sarasota County will need to add approximately 15,000 jobs to its economy over the next five years. On
an annual basis, that is approximately 3,000 jobs per year.30
Sarasota County Target Industries31
Medical & Life Sciences
Applied Environment Services & Sustainable Systems
Digital Media & Web-enabled Technologies
Creative Services
Specialty Manufacturing Cluster
29
Charlotte County Economic Development Office, February 2012 30
Sarasota County Five-year Economic Development Strategic Plan, April 2009 31
Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County, April 2012
Page 71
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 71
Target Industry Analysis
The FIOG Team also reviewed the target industries identified in the Scruggs & Associates, Sarasota
County Economic Assessment-Phase One Report, November 2008.32
Figure 3 depicts Sarasota County’s five targeted clusters.
Figure 3. Sarasota County Summary of Cluster Opportunities
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
Because North Port is the largest city within Sarasota County, the recommendations found within the
County’s target industry study are also applicable to the City of North Port.
32
www.EDC of Sarasota County, Scruggs & Associates, Sarasota County Economic Assessment-Phase One Report, November 2008.
32
Page 72
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 72
Target Industry Analysis
Initial North Port Target Industry Screening
In reviewing the Medical and Life Sciences cluster, it is recommended that the City look at this cluster for
opportunites for new business growth. The demographics of the City show a need for the services
provided by this cluster now and into the future. The industry that experienced the greatest percentage
increase was Diagnostic Imaging Centers. As the population continues to increase in age, more medical
related services will need to be located closer to the customer base. These types of businesses can be
located throughout the city in a variety of zonings.
Figure 4. Medical and Life Science Employment, Sarasota County, 2002-2007
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
Companies in the Energy and Environment cluster are growing rapidly due to the technology changes
that are occurring worldwide. Many of these smaller businesses start as a home based business until
they reach the critical mass in size to move into vacant office space. This cluster is fairly easy to locate,
as they require small office space and can fit into most zoning categories throughout the city.
Figure 5. Energy and Environment Employment, Sarasota County, 2002-2007
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
Page 73
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 73
Target Industry Analysis
The Digital and Web-enabled cluster was found to have only minimum growth during the period from
2002 to 2007. This is a sector that will continue to grow and shrink as new entrepreneurs come and go.
This cluster is easy to locate, as they require small office space and can fit into most zoning categories
throughout the city.
Figure 6. Digital and Web-Enabled Technologies Employment, Sarasota County, 2002-2007
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
Creative Services shows the most promise and was the cluster with the largest growth. Sarasota County
has a draw for more of these types of industries, as it is already thought of as a performing arts center;
the County is home to the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Sarasota Opera, Ringling College of
Art and Design, Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall, Sarasota Film Festival, Sarasota Ballet Company and
many more venues. This cluster already exists and the City of North Port can capitalize of this branding.
Figure 7. Creative Employment, Sarasota County, 2002-2007
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
Page 74
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 74
Target Industry Analysis
Specialty Manufacturing employment increased in three sectors; however, manufacturing overall is down
in the State of Florida and in the United States and there are no signs that this will change in the
foreseeable future. North Port should continue to have manufacturing on its target list with more of a
focus toward manufacturing/ distribution given its central proximity in the SW Florida region. North Port
has limited sites available to locate a manufacturing business. The City needs to designate more land for
manufacturing and light industrial in key locations close to the interstate.
Figure 8. Specialty Manufacturing Employment, Sarasota County, 2002-2007
SOURCE: Scruggs & Associates LLC. “Sarasota County Economic Assessment”, November 2008
North Port Recommended Target Industries
After close examination, it has been determined that the City of North Port does not currently have any
true target industry clusters. In order to establish industry clusters, it is recommended that the City set
rationale for adopting target industries, such as the following:
Economic diversification
Higher wages
Retention of young professionals
Enhance economic growth
Meet a variety of skill sets
Leverage local assets and infrastructure
Current Target Industries
The City’s current target industries are shown below:
Light manufacturing
Education (Public and Private)
Healthcare
Retail
Hospitality
Page 75
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 75
Target Industry Analysis
Recommended Target Industries
The City needs to take advantage of the branding and name recognition of Sarasota County. In its
branding efforts, the City needs to emphasize that the City of North Port is the largest city in population
and area in Sarasota County, the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and the Combined Statistical Area
(CSA).
As shown in the SRI Report it is important that the City utilize the services provided by the SUNCOAST
Work force Board to increase the skills sets of its residents to match those skills most needed by
businesses. Furthermore, higher education needs to be included in discussions regarding the training
available to meet current business needs.
Economic development strategies need to be holistic and recruit or retain companies that create jobs at
all levels including high value added, mid management, and low skill-entry level. A community needs to
be mindful that it cannot survive alone on recruiting high paying jobs; in order to be successful and build
job opportunities it needs jobs at every skill/occupational level. This is especially true given the job losses
that occurred during this current recession.
The following table shows the industries that are projected to growth the fastest over the next eight years
(2011-2019). This should help guide the City in analyzing its current inventory of facilities and sites as
well as training needs.
Figure 9. Sarasota County Projected Fastest Growing Industries: 2011-2019
Employment Annual Change
Rank Title 2011 2019 Total Percent
1 Specialty Trade Contractors 5,878 7,906 254 4.31
2 Management of Companies and Enterprises 615 826 26 4.29
3 Rental and Leasing Services 433 576 18 4.13
4 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores 847 1,126 35 4.12
5 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 569 755 23 4.09
6 Ambulatory Health Care Services 10,628 13,861 404 3.80
7 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 1,272 1,621 44 3.43
8 Construction of Buildings 1,760 2,239 60 3.40
9 Building Material and Garden Supply Stores 1,575 1,979 50 3.21
10 Waste Management and Remediation Service 336 422 11 3.20
11
Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services 9,038 11,249 276 3.06
12
Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and
Brokers 513 628 14 2.80
13 Educational Services 2,616 3,198 73 2.78
14
Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation
Industries 3,407 4,145 92 2.71
15 Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods 1,921 2,312 49 2.54
16 Social Assistance 2,113 2,537 53 2.51
17 Real Estate 2,577 3,062 61 2.35
18 Warehousing and Storage 280 330 6 2.23
19 Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods 1,274 1,499 28 2.21
20 Health and Personal Care Stores 1,639 1,916 35 2.11
Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, 2012
Page 76
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 76
Target Industry Analysis
The City should concentrate on the five target industries that have been identified by the Economic
Development Corporation of Sarasota County and three additional clusters as identified in SRI
International Report, plus three others that FIOG recommends.
The EDC of Sarasota County:
Medical & Life Sciences (e.g. Charlotte Heart & Vascular Institute)
Applied Environment Services & Sustainable Systems (e.g. Earth Balance)
Digital Media & Web-enabled Technologies (e.g. FLWebtech, Inc.)
Creative Services (e.g. ROI Media)
Specialty Manufacturing Cluster (e.g. King Plastic Corporation)
Additional FIOG recommended clusters are:
Education
Logistics/Distribution
Retail Trade
Construction & Real Estate
Tourism
Warm Mineral Springs By-Products
In reviewing the current target industries for the City and those of the neighboring counties, the City can
decide to leave retail trade on the list; however, it is recommended that incentives not be awarded to retail
establishments unless it has been determined that the retail is destination driven. Typically, the location of
a retail business is a direct correlation to residential demand for the type of retail. When the demand is
there, retail will come. Also, retail jobs pay low wages and do not bring up the area’s cost of living
standards.
Page 77
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 77
Economic Development Incentives
Economic Development Incentives
The City of North of Port currently has available a large number of incentives from the State and
its own specific incentive programs.
Florida Economic Development Incentives Toolbox 33
The tool box of incentives for the State of Florida has been virtually unchanged for the past 20 years.
There have however been updates as new technologies were added to the State’s Target Industry List.
The State is committed to providing incentives that are up to date with the changing technology market;
as such, in 2011 the State revised its target industry list to be more inclusive of emerging technology
sectors, new types of manufacturing, corporate headquarters and research and development.
E-Florida Incentives
Florida offers bottom-line advantages for long term profitability for all types of businesses, from corporate
headquarters to manufacturing plants to service firms. Florida offers incentives for:
Targeted Industries
Workforce Training
Infrastructure
Special Opportunities
Targeted Industry Incentives
Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund (QTI)
The Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund incentive is available for companies that create high wage jobs
in targeted high value-added industries. This incentive includes refunds on corporate income, sales, ad
valorem, intangible personal property, insurance premium, and certain other taxes. Pre-approved
applicants who create jobs in Florida receive tax refunds of $3,000 per net new Florida full-time
equivalent job created; $6,000 in an Enterprise Zone or Rural Community (county). For businesses
paying 150 percent of the average annual wage, add $1,000 per job; for businesses paying 200 percent
of the average annual salary, add $2,000 per job; businesses falling within a designated high impact
sector or increasing exports of its goods through a seaport or airport in the state by at least 10 percent in
value or tonnage in each year of receiving a QTI refund, add $2,000 per job; projects locating in a
designated Brownfield area (Brownfield Bonus) can add $2,500 per job. The local community where the
company locates contributes 20 percent of the total tax refund. There is a cap of $5 million per single
qualified applicant in all years, and no more than 25 percent of the total refund approved may be taken in
any single fiscal year. New or expanding businesses in selected targeted industries or corporate
headquarters are eligible.
Qualified Defense and Space Contractor Tax Refund (QDSC)
Florida is committed to preserving and growing its high technology employment base by giving Florida
defense, homeland security, and space business contractors a competitive edge in consolidating
contracts or subcontracts, acquiring new contracts, or converting contracts to commercial production. Pre-
approved applicants creating or retaining jobs in Florida may receive tax refunds of $3,000 per net new
Florida full-time equivalent job created or retained; $6,000 in an Enterprise Zone or rural county. For
33
e-Florida web site, www.eflorida.com
Page 78
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 78
Economic Development Incentives
businesses paying 150 percent of the average annual wage, add $1,000 per job; for businesses paying
200 percent of the average annual salary, add $2,000 per job.
Capital Investment Tax Credit (CITC)
The Capital Investment Tax Credit is used to attract and grow capital-intensive industries in Florida. It is
an annual credit, provided for up to twenty years, against the corporate income tax. Eligible projects are
those in designated high-impact portions of the following sectors: clean energy, biomedical technology,
financial services, information technology, silicon technology, transportation equipment manufacturing, or
be a corporate headquarters facility. Projects must also create a minimum of 100 jobs and invest at least
$25 million in eligible capital costs. Eligible capital costs include all expenses incurred in the acquisition,
construction, installation, and equipping of a project from the beginning of construction to the
commencement of operations. The level of investment and the project's Florida corporate income tax
liability for the 20 years following commencement of operations determines the amount of the annual
credit.
High Impact Performance Incentive Grant (HIPI)
The High Impact Performance Incentive is a negotiated grant used to attract and grow major high impact
facilities in Florida. Grants are provided to pre-approved applicants in certain high-impact sectors
designated by the Governor's Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development (OTTED). In order to
participate in the program, the project must: operate within designated high-impact portions of the
following sectors-- clean energy, corporate headquarters, financial services, life sciences,
semiconductors, and transportation equipment manufacturing; create at least 50 new full-time equivalent
jobs (if a R&D facility, create at least 25 new full-time equivalent jobs) in Florida in a three-year period;
and make a cumulative investment in the state of at least $50 million (if a R&D facility, make a cumulative
investment of at least $25 million) in a three-year period. Once recommended by Enterprise Florida, Inc.
(EFI) and approved by OTTED, the high impact business is awarded 50 percent of the eligible grant upon
commencement of operations and the balance of the awarded grant once full employment and capital
investment goals are met.
Workforce Training Incentives
Quick Response Training Program (QRT)
Quick Response Training (QRT) - an employer-driven training program designed to assist new value-
added businesses and provide existing Florida businesses the necessary training for expansion. A state
educational facility - community college, area technical center, school district or university - is available to
assist with application and program development or delivery. The educational facility will also serve as
fiscal agent for the project. The company may use in-house training, outside vendor training programs or
the local educational entity to provide training. Reimbursable training expenses include:
instructors'/trainers' wages, curriculum development, and textbooks/manuals. This program is
customized, flexible, and responsive to individual company needs. To learn more about the QRT
program, visit Workforce Florida.
Incumbent Worker Training Program (IWT)
Incumbent Worker Training (IWT) - a program that provides training to currently employed workers to
keep Florida's workforce competitive in a global economy and to retain existing businesses. The program
is available to all Florida businesses that have been in operation for at least one year prior to application
and require skills upgrade training for existing employees. Priority is given to businesses in targeted
Page 79
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 79
Economic Development Incentives
industries, Enterprise Zones, HUB Zones, Inner City Distressed areas, Rural Counties and areas, and
Brownfield areas. For additional information on the IWT program, visit Workforce Florida.
Infrastructure Incentives
Economic Development Transportation Fund
The Economic Development Transportation Fund, commonly referred to as the "Road Fund," is an
incentive tool designed to alleviate transportation problems that adversely impact a specific company's
location or expansion decision. The award amount is based on the number of new and retained jobs and
the eligible transportation project costs, up to $3 million. The award is made to the local government on
behalf of a specific business for public transportation improvements.
Special Opportunity Incentives
Rural Incentives
Florida encourages growth throughout the state by offering increased incentive awards and lower wage
qualification thresholds in its rural counties. Additionally, a Rural Community Development Revolving
Loan Fund and Rural Infrastructure Fund exist to meet the special needs that businesses encounter in
rural counties.
Urban Incentives
Florida offers increased incentive awards and lower wage qualification thresholds for businesses locating
in many urban core/inner city areas that are experiencing conditions affecting the economic viability of the
community and hampering the self-sufficiency of the residents.
Enterprise Zone Incentives
Florida offers an assortment of tax incentives to businesses that choose to create employment within an
enterprise zone, which is a specific geographic area targeted for economic revitalization. These include a
sales and use tax credit, tax refund for business machinery and equipment used in an enterprise zone,
sales tax refund for building materials used in an Enterprise Zone, and a sales tax exemption for electrical
energy used in an enterprise zone.
Brownfield Incentives
Florida offers incentives to businesses that locate in brownfield sites, which are underutilized industrial or
commercial sites due to actual or perceived environmental contamination. The Brownfield
Redevelopment Bonus Refund is available to encourage Brownfield redevelopment and job creation.
Approved applicants receive tax refunds of up to $2,500 for each job created.
Jobs for the Unemployed Tax Credit Program (JUTC)
The Jobs for the Unemployed Tax Credit Program provides incentives to businesses throughout Florida
to hire qualified employees who were previously unemployed. The program is available to all businesses
that are identified as a "target industry". The business may receive a tax credit of $1,000 for every
employee hired as of July 1, 2010. The business may claim only new hires that were previously
unemployed for a minimum of 30 days, and that remain employed after a 12-month period at an average
of 36 hours per week. This program will run until June 30, 2012 with a limit of $10 million available for tax
credits.
Page 80
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 80
Economic Development Incentives
Local Government Distressed Area Matching Grant Program (LDMG)
The Local Government Distressed Area Matching Grant Program stimulates investment in Florida's
economy by assisting Local Governments in attracting and retaining targeted businesses. Applications
are accepted from local governments/municipalities that plan on offering financial assistance to a specific
business in the area. These targeted businesses are required to create at least 15 full-time jobs and the
project must either be new to Florida; expanding operations in Florida; or leaving Florida unless it
receives local and state government assistance. The amount awarded by the State of Florida will equal
$50,000 or 50% of the local government's assistance amount, whichever is less, and be provided
following the commitment and payment of that assistance.
Discussion of Florida Incentives
Most of the State’s programs require the company pay an average annual wage that is at least 115
percent of the state, metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or the local average wages. For a project located
in a designated brownfield area, an enterprise zone or a manufacturing project paying at least 100
percent of the prevailing average wage, the wage requirement may be waived in special circumstances.
It appears that most Florida communities use the State of Florida incentives when appropriate, while not
all of the State of Florida incentives can be applied in rural and urban counties equally. Many local and
county governments in Florida have eliminated transportation impact fees for a two year period to allow
time for the local economy to rebound. This currently appears to be the new “norm”.
The most recent Economic Development Incentives Report 2012 prepared by The Florida Legislature
Office of Economic and Demographic Research reported that 72 local government entities completed the
annual survey questionnaire. Of the 37 municipalities that reported, 9 municipalities did not issue
economic development incentives which met the statutory reporting requirement (incentives greater than
$25,000 during the previous fiscal year). Incentives in the amount of $25.8 million were reported by the
municipalities that completed this survey. The largest percentage of the incentives granted was in the
form of below market leases and deeds, accounting for $10.0 million of the total incentives (38.9%).34
Projects are typically evaluated based on the type of industry, wages, target industry, clean industry and
whether the new project is the first project of a desired type of industry. For instance, if a community is
attempting to relocate a financial services company and the community currently does not have this type
of industry, then a larger incentive is usually offered to the first company to relocate. It’s the concept of a
“lost leader,” which is what stores will do to get you in the door. The second company will typically receive
a smaller incentive award.
Generally, a community makes the decision for awarding incentives based on not wanting to give a
company more in incentives then it can reasonably except to receive back in the form of increased ad
valorem taxes, business fees, franchise fees, utility payments, etc. over a reasonable period of time.
Sarasota County
The Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County (Sarasota EDC) is the primary contact for all
economic development interfaces with the State and Enterprise Florida, the State’s economic
development organization. The County’s primary economic incentives are those offered by the State as
described above. The only other incentive offered is the newly approved economic development ad
34
Economic Development Incentives Report 2012 prepared by The Florida Legislature Office of Economic and Demographic Research
Page 81
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 81
Economic Development Incentives
valorem tax exemption which was approved on August 24, 2010 for unincorporated Sarasota County, the
City of North Port, and the City of Sarasota and the City of Venice. The County has also adopted an
Economic Energy Zone which includes the City of North Port.
Sarasota County Economic Development Incentive Program
Sarasota County has established an Economic Development Incentive Program that is used to help retain
existing businesses and assist those who want to expand and to help attract new businesses that are
considering relocating to Sarasota County. Companies that are interested in requesting financial
assistance from Sarasota County in order to complete their expansion or relocation plans are encouraged
to contact the Sarasota EDC.
Ad Valorem Tax Exemption
Available in unincorporated Sarasota County, the cities of Sarasota, Venice and North Port.
The economic development ad valorem tax exemption (EDAVTE) program is designed to encourage new
businesses to relocate to Sarasota County. In addition, it serves as a catalyst for existing businesses to
expand, creating new job opportunities for residents within the County and the Cities of Sarasota, Venice,
and North Port. This program authorizes the County, and those respective Cities' Commissions, to grant
qualifying businesses a property tax exemption for up to 100 percent for up to 10 years, on both real and
tangible personal property.
Rapid Permitting Program
SMART
A fast-track permitting system, the Sarasota Means Action Response Team (SMART) program will allow
targeted industry companies wishing to expand or relocate in Sarasota County to develop a facility within
a time frame that meets corporate goals and deadlines. This time frame is usually shorter than working
through the system without special assistance.
The SMART program doesn’t eliminate or circumvent existing land use regulations or construction
standards; it accelerates the process by making certain determinations and decisions about the
development of the land and facilities in a more expeditious manner.
COSMOS
The City of Sarasota has established a system for fast-tracking the development review process. Our
objective is to offer a compressed timeline for targeted firms and industries that wish to expand or
relocate in the City of Sarasota. Our objective is not to eliminate or circumvent existing land use
regulations or construction standards, but to reduce the amount of time it would normally take to work
through the system. In short, what the Sarasota EDC offers is a process for accelerating the review
process by making decisions in a more expeditious manner.
Employed Worked Training (EWT)
The EWT program is administered by Suncoast Workforce and provides short-term training to upgrade
skills for employed workers in Manatee and Sarasota counties. The program coordinator meets with the
company to assess training needs. In most cases, training can be customized, and employees can
receive training on-site or at a local training institute. Examples of training include Leadership, Team
Building, Customer Service, Microsoft Office Software, Work Place English or Spanish, Work Place Math
Page 82
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 82
Economic Development Incentives
or Industrial Math, ISO, and Forklift. Please note there is a maximum hourly wage limit for employees to
qualify for this training grant.
On the Job Training (OJT)
This program provides an incentive for employers to hire qualified individuals who may not have the
experience for your position. By hiring an employee in a training capacity, businesses can be reimbursed
for a portion of that employee's salary for up to six months. Interested businesses are invited to consult
Suncoast Workforce for candidates. The training opportunities are endless! Employers interested in
learning more about OJT may contact the EDC.
Road Impact Fee Mitigation
The Road Impact Fee Mitigation allows the county to mitigate up to 100% of the road impact fees (short
term cost, typically paid before a building permit or certificate of occupancy is issued), designed to assist
business that will benefit the local economy. A formal application is required and final approval of the
Sarasota County Commission is required.
Florida Power & Light Economic Development Rates
New or expanding businesses that add a minimum of 350 kW of new electric load and create at least 10
new jobs per 350 kW of added load by June 1, 2013, can apply for the new economic development rates.
After June 1, 2013, businesses wishing to take advantage of the rates will be required to add 25 new jobs
per 350 kW of new electric load.
Community Redevelopment Zones
Englewood CRZ
Newtown CRZ
North Port Incentives
In addition to economic development incentives provided by the State of Florida, the City of North has
developed a number of its own specific incentives.
Ad Valorem Tax Exemption
Transportation & Solid Waste Impact Fee Moratorium-2Year
The Small Business Assistance Program, including
o Revolving Loan Guarantee Program
o Entrepreneurial Academy
o Lunch and Learn Program
Expedited Plan Review and Permitting
Economic Development Grants
Local Preference Ordinance
Benchmarked City Incentives
As described earlier in this plan; three cities were selected by the City as benchmarks: Cape Coral; St.
Lucie and Deltona. Incentives offered by these benchmarked cities vary considerably.
The City of Cape Coral and Lee County, like North Port, were heavily impacted by the recession. The
Cape Coral has developed a few local incentives in addition to those provided by Lee County and those
offered by the State. The City offers a Cash Incentive Program of up to $2,000 per job created above the
Page 83
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 83
Economic Development Incentives
average wage, and up to $1,500 per job that equals the average wage. It also has an Impact Fee
Deferral Program, wherein it defers payment of road and utility capital improvement impact fees for
targeted industries. The Shell Building Impact Fee Deferral is also available wherein impact fees can be
deferred up to 36 months. Their road impact fee incentive is set to sunset on September 1, 2012.
Lee County offers Financial Incentives for Recruiting Strategic Targets with performance incentives up to
$25 million in reserve. The County has a Job Opportunity Program provides is a cash incentive of up to
$6,000 for each full-time job created. Details of the City/County incentive programs can be found on the
Cape Coral’s webpage.
The City of Deltona, according to its webpage, does not offer any unique incentives other than those
provided by the State.
Lastly, the City of St. Lucie offers a Job Growth Investment Grant in the range of $1,500 - $3,000 per job
paying over 107% of the current hourly wage. They also provide an Ad Valorem Tax Abatement
Incentive, expedited site plan review and fast track permitting.
Other Incentives Programs Used in Florida
City of Sanford
Subsidization of UCF Sanford Business Incubator35
The UCF Sanford Incubator was opened on September 18, 2009, in a 3,791 sq. ft. space. The facility is
the sixth of the award winning UCF Incubators, designed for mentoring and start-up assistance of
emerging technology companies. In the agreement negotiated with UCF, the Sanford CRA agreed to
subsidize the rent and other operational costs of the Incubator in recognition of the positive benefit the
facility would have to the community development of downtown Sanford. With-in three months of its
opening the facility was at full capacity. In March 2010, the facility was expanded to 6,000 sq. ft. and a full
time administrator was hired. After six months the facility was again near full capacity with 12 tenants,
representing mainly technology firms. The Sanford Incubator is recognized as one of the fastest growing
and highest quality facilities of the UCF Incubator system.
City of Gainesville
Grow Gainesville Fund36
Flexible SBA 7(a) Loan; Can be used for working capital, inventory, equipment, refinancing debt and
acquiring existing buildings. Program has only been in place for one year. All the underwriting for the
loans is done by the National Development Council. Two projects qualified to date, both are restaurants.
The loan amounts were $300,000+ for renovation and working capital and $400,000+ for renovations and
expansion. Restaurants must be in existence for 3 years to qualify. Following is an overview of the Grow
America Fund:
35
Sanford, Florida CRA Annual Report 2009-2010 36
Gainesville, CRA, Grow Gainesville Fund
Page 84
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 84
Economic Development Incentives
What is Grow America Fund?
• It’s a long-term, revolving loan fund designed to help businesses expand
• Licensed by the SBA to provide loans to operating businesses
• The goal of the program is to help businesses create and retain jobs
• GAF is designed to leverage equity approximately 4 to1
• Lending since 1993
• For profit corporation, governed by Board of Directors
• Loans approved by GAF Loan Committee
• Oversight by the Small Business Administration
• Affiliate of NDC
• Average loan size - $300,000
What are the advantages of this program for the businesses?
• Long term financing
• Low equity requirement
• Flexible underwriting criteria
• Limited pre-payment penalties
• Loans tailored to individual borrowers
What can GAF dollars be used for?
• Real estate acquisitions
• Construction
• Debt refinancing
• Leasehold improvements
• Machinery and equipment and working capital
Company Relocation Incentive Program37
Gainesville also has a Company Relocation Incentive Program Policy, which was approved on March 15,
2012.The program will offer eligible companies a 50% match on eligible business relocation costs, up to a
maximum award of $50,000. The program will reduce costs associated with physically relocating an
eligible company into a Redevelopment Area. The objective of the Relocation Incentive is to alleviate
blight and economic distress. The relocation of companies and their employees into the Redevelopment
Areas will help to lower vacancy rates, increase employment levels, raise the tax base, diversify economic
opportunities and promote redevelopment goals. The encouragement of private enterprise will help the
Redevelopment Areas become self-sustaining in the long term and will serve to implement the
Redevelopment Plan.
37
Gainesville, CRA, Company Relocation Incentive Program Policy, March 15, 2012
Page 85
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 85
Economic Development Incentives
Pasco County
Pasco County Job Creation Incentive38
Pasco County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Pasco County Job Creation Incentive
Ordinance to promote the attraction and expansion of target industries or businesses within Pasco
County. Following is a summary of the ordinance:
Application for the Job Creation Incentive must be submitted prior to making a location decision.
Companies must meet one or both of the following industry classifications and meet the job creation
requirement:
Primary Target Industry:
Pay an average annual wage of at least 115% of the prevailing Pasco County average wage
(As of January 2012 this amount is equal to $36,319)
Must sell at least 51% of products or services outside of Pasco County
Qualified Target Industry:
Businesses serving multi-state and/or international markets and that create new jobs at
greater than the annual average wage of Pasco County
Job Creation:
Project must result in a minimum of 10 new full-time jobs in Pasco County within one year of
the project completion
Qualifying companies are eligible for the following:
Average Wage Incentive/New Job
$36,319 $2,000
$39,478 $3,000
$47,373 $4,000
$63,164 $5,000
This incentive award can be used in addition to any qualifying State program
Expedited plan amendments, zoning, plan review and permitting is available
This ordinance can be used for businesses either relocating/expanding to Pasco County or for
businesses already residing in Pasco County which need to expand.
Completed applications along with supporting documentation must be submitted to Pasco Economic
Development Council for consideration by Pasco County Board of County Commissioners. An
economic/cost benefit analysis and comprehensive plan compliance review will be completed for a
complete incentive package.
Permitting and Regulatory Assistance
Pasco Economic Development Council works with county and state regulatory representatives to
expedite the review and approval process for qualified projects.
38
Pasco County Job Creation Incentive Ordinance, www.Pasco EDC.com
Page 86
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 86
Economic Development Incentives
Conclusion
Discussions were conducted with economic development professionals from around the State and with
Jerry Walker at Impact DataSource. Impact DataSource is a Texas based economic consulting, research
and analysis firm. The firm specializes in economic and fiscal impact analysis and other economic
studies. The City is ahead of other communities in Florida by recognizing the need for an independent
third party to evaluate economic development projects. The City retained the services of Impact
DataSource starting in 2010 and continues to use them.
FIOG staff worked with Impact DataSource to develop Guidelines for Making Good Decisions on
Incentives. (Exhibit 1).
FIOG recommends that the City develop formal incentive guidelines. The guidelines need to be broad
rather than restrictive and projects should always be evaluated individually. There is no magic solution
that will work the same for every project.
Now would be the ideal time for the City to explore other options in addition to developing criteria for
evaluating economic development projects. In order to stay current with new technologies being used by
businesses today and to improve its competitiveness, the City should explore the broad band capacity.
This is one area where the City can jump out ahead of its competition. The FIOG would be available to
coordinate this research with subject experts at the University of South Florida should the City desire to
do this in the future.
Some rules of thumb on incentives should include the following:
Rules of Thumb on Incentives39
Provide incentives to projects where the additional public revenues generated by the project
exceed public costs
The larger the rate of return on investment, the better the deal is for the community
The shorter the payback period, the better the deal is for the community
A general guideline is that communities only consider investments that result in a rate of return
greater than 10% and a payback period less than 10 years
Each community should establish its minimum investment objectives
If the firm is leasing a building, consider the lease term as the maximum payback period – the city
should get its money back before the lease expires
Go outside the box on a community-changing deal
Incentives should be provided to projects that improve the quality of life for residents
Concentrate incentives on target industries
Give priority to incentives for basic industries – those that:
o Export products (Primary Industry) and bring in new dollars
o Create more spin-off economic impacts in the community
Do not offer incentives to firms that will be harmful or destroy existing businesses
Make incentives available equally to existing local businesses and to businesses recruited from
outside the community
It is more efficient and less costly to retain existing local businesses and assist local businesses
to expand than to recruit a business from outside the community
39
Jerry Walker, Principal, Impact DataSource
Page 87
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 87
Economic Development Incentives
At a minimum, a community should do the following:
Conduct an economic and fiscal impact analysis of your economic development projects to:
o Validate the economic value to the community
o Determine appropriate incentives
Establish a Rate of return and payback period should be the primary factors in awarding
incentives
Keep in mind that throwing good money at a project won’t make a bad deal good; however, it will
make a good deal better.
Page 88
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 88
Page 89
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 89
Economic Development Incentives — Exhibit 1
Economic Development Incentives-Exhibit 1
Guidelines for Making Good Decisions on Incentives Goal of Economic Development
Economic development activities should:
– Create revenues for businesses in the community
– Create jobs and salaries
– Attract investment to expand a community’s tax base
Goal of economic development is to have thriving communities with good quality of life for its
residents
Economic Development and Incentives
Location decisions involve many factors:
– Availability of sites
– Access to markets
– Adequate labor force
– Adequate infrastructure
– Good quality of life
– Reasonable cost of doing business
– Incentives
Incentives for a firm reduce its cost of locating or expanding in your community and their cost of
doing business
Incentives can make a firm feel wanted
Incentives are only appropriate when the firm will generate positive net benefits for a community
and it’s a good deal for a community
Many incentives available for prospects are state programs
Some of the State of Florida incentives require local participation and future ones may also
– Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund Program (QTI)
– Economic Development Transportation Fund
General Incentive Guidelines
All counties, cities and EDC’s should have written incentive guidelines
Why written incentive guidelines?
– Get all local officials on the same page and keep them there
– Consistency in granting incentives
– To respond quickly to prospects requesting assistance
Guidelines for Revenue Reducing Incentives
Try to make city, county and other local taxing districts’ exemption and rebate guidelines
consistent
The length and percent of tax exemption and rebate should be based on the level of a firm’s
investment and specific industries
Greater investments by a firm justify longer periods and larger percentages of exemptions or
rebates
Grant larger percentage of exemptions or rebates in first years
Don’t give the company a total free ride
Page 90
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 90
Economic Development Incentives — Exhibit 1
Guidelines for Cash Incentives
Establish a written procedure for granting cash or like cash incentives, including who gets priority,
when and how determined
Common ways the amount of cash incentives are determined:
– Give the firm what they ask for or just guess at what they might want
– Go with large, round numbers to impress the prospect, such as $2 million
– Offer a certain amount per new job, such as, $4,000 per job
The best way to determine appropriate levels of incentives is by using an objective, consistent,
analytical approach with an economic impact analysis.
Revenue Reducing Incentives
Two philosophies on revenue reducing incentives, such as tax exemption:
1. Taxes exempted represent a cost to local governments. “It’s corporate welfare.”
– Taxes exempted should be compared to what a local government is getting after the
exemption
– Taxes received should be more than those exempted
2. Taxes exempted are not a cost
– The firm generates its own incentives.
– Firms generate taxes for the benefit of local governments, where little or no taxes were
being generated before.
– Communities should be grateful for anything that they are getting.
Cash or Near-Cash Incentives
How should cash incentives be viewed?
Incentives are an investment that a city is making in a firm or project
The tax revenues, that a firm receiving incentives generates, are the city’s returns on that
investment
By comparing the investment (the amount of incentives offered) and returns on investment (tax
revenues that the city will give over ten years, for example) you can determine:
– The rate of return on this investment
– The payback period
This is how businesses, as well as most individuals, evaluate investment decisions
Use economic impact analysis to make these financial calculations and to make good decisions
on incentives
What is an Economic Impact Analysis?
The analysis is a calculation of the worth of a project, firm or activity to a state or community
It should be used to determine appropriate levels of incentives
An economic impact analysis includes two major components:
– Economic impact component
– Fiscal impact component
Economic impacts include:
– Direct Impacts and
– Indirect and induced or spin-off impacts
Page 91
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 91
Economic Development Incentives — Exhibit 1
Direct & Spin-off Economic Impacts
Direct Impacts –economic activities generated by a new firm and its workers
Indirect Impacts – economic activities that occur in other businesses in a community that supply
goods and services to the direct firm
Induced Impacts – economic activities generated by direct and indirect workers spending money
in the community at grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, etc.
Determining Indirect & Induced Impacts
Indirect and induced economic impacts may be calculated using regional industry multipliers and
applying these multipliers to revenues, jobs and salaries of the direct firm
Industry and region specific RIMS II multipliers from US Bureau of Economic may be used
IMPLAN multipliers may be used
Examples of Direct Economic Impacts
Revenues of the new firm
Investments by a firm
New jobs at a firm
Salaries paid to these new workers
Residential property added to local tax rolls by some new workers moving to the community
The firm’s taxable sales
Lodging sales to out-of-town visitors to the firm
Illustration of Indirect and Induced Economic Impacts
For every dollar earned by new company in a community, there may be 50¢ in revenues
generated in other businesses in the community
For every 1 job created at a new business, there may be a half of a spin-off job created in other
local businesses
For every dollar paid to a worker at a new business, there may be 50¢ paid to workers in other
businesses in the community
Sources of Economic Impacts
From activities while a firm’s facility is being constructed
From the firm’s operations
From spending by direct and spin-off workers
From spending by out-of-town visitors to a firm
Fiscal Impacts
Economic impacts translate into fiscal impacts
Fiscal impacts are:
– Additional revenues for local governments
– Additional costs for local governments
– Net benefits for local governments
Page 92
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 92
Economic Development Incentives — Exhibit 1
Illustration of Public Revenues
Sales taxes are collected on the following:
– Purchases of construction materials/equipment and spending by workers
– Taxable sales at the firm
– Taxable spending by the firm
– Taxable spending by workers
– Taxable spending by out-of-town visitors
Net Benefits
Net benefits for local governments from a new firm and its workers are:
– Additional revenues for local governments
– Less additional public costs
Conducting an Economic Impact Analysis
Collect data from a prospect firm using a data sheet
Collect community data, tax rates and multipliers
Typical economic impact analysis is a ten year study, but can be longer
Study includes calculating:
– Additional revenues for each local taxing district
– Additional costs for each local taxing district
– Net benefits for each local taxing district
– Taxes to be exempted or rebated
– Rate of return on investment and payback period for cash and other incentives
Incentives That Could Be Offered
An economic impact analysis may show net benefits for a typical county over ten years to be
$874,915
Incentive objectives:
– Payback period of 10 years
– 10% rate of return
– Therefore, maximum possible incentives would be $874,915
What if we had used an old school approach of $4,000 per job or $1.2 million to determine
incentives rather than using an objective economic impact analysis approach?
– Incentives of $1.2 million would have:
7% average annual rate of return on investment over ten years
Payback period of 13.2 years
Rules of Thumb on Incentives40
Provide incentives to projects where the additional public revenues generated by the project
exceed public costs
The larger the rate of return on investment, the better the deal is for the community
The shorter the payback period, the better the deal is for the community
40
Jerry Walker, Principal, Impact DataSource
Page 93
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 93
Economic Development Incentives — Exhibit 1
A general guideline is that communities only consider investments that result in a rate of return
greater than 10% and a payback period less than 10 years
Each community should establish its minimum investment objectives
If the firm is leasing a building, consider the lease term as the maximum payback period – the city
should get its money back before the lease expires
Go outside the box on a community-changing deal
Incentives should be provided to projects that improve the quality of life for residents
Concentrate incentives on target industries
Give priority to incentives for basic industries – those that:
– Export products (Primary Industry) and bring in new dollars
– Create more spin-off economic impacts in the community
Do not offer incentives to firms that will be harmful or destroy existing businesses
Make incentives available equally to existing local businesses and to businesses recruited from
outside the community
It is more efficient and less costly to retain existing local businesses and assist local businesses
to expand than to recruit a business from outside the community
At a minimum, a community should do the following:
Conduct an economic and fiscal impact analysis of your economic development projects to:
– Validate the economic value to the community
– Determine appropriate incentives
Establish a Rate of return and payback period should be the primary factors in awarding
incentives
Keep in mind that throwing good money at a project won’t make a bad deal good; however, it will
make a good deal better.
Page 94
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 94
Page 95
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 95
Best Practices in Economic Development
Best Practices in Economic Development
Best practices provide insights into economic development activities that have garnered attention
because of their innovative approach, creative solutions or contributions to improving implementation and
processes.
In analyzing best practices, the FIOG teamed concluded the two biggest deficiencies that impact the
City's competitive edge for business attraction are the lack of inventory data for available sites and
buildings, and the lack of shovel ready sites. Therefore, the focus of best practices is to highlight some of
the tools that could address current City deficiencies of data and access to data.
In analyzing best practices, the FIOG teamed concluded the two biggest deficiencies are the lack of
inventory data for available sites and buildings, and the lack of shovel ready sites. Therefore, the FIOG
team narrowed its focus of best practices to address current City deficiencies of data and access to data.
Today, one of the most important functions of a high performing economic development organization is
the provision and dissemination of data related to site and building inventory. The initial steps in any site
selection process are to eliminate communities that do not have this data available on their web sites. If a
community does not have readily accessible current web data, it isn’t even going to come up on the radar
screen for consideration by a site selector.
The City and its Economic Development Division needs to have the proper tools to be more productive
and to provide timely information that commercial brokers, business owners or site selectors need to
make location decisions.
The City has a good general marketing presence. However, it appears that the Economic Development
Division functions more as a marketing arm for the entire City when it needs to be more focused on
economic development efforts. This is especially true with the limited resources and size of the current
staff.
Page 96
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 96
Best Practices in Economic Development
Florida’s Great Northwest
A good example is Florida’s Great Northwest economic development website –
www.floridasgreatnorthwest.com . As shown in the screens below, the website offers site selectors
detailed inventory data. The home screen has immediate links to its data of available buildings and sites.
http://www.floridasgreatnorthwest.com/
Data is available by area/size, ceiling height (industrial buildings), acreage and rail service. The results
can be produced in a report format (note report builder button at lower left side of screen).
http://www.floridasgreatnorthwest.com/
Page 97
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 97
Best Practices in Economic Development
Loudoun, Virginia
Another example or best practice is Loudoun, Virginia’s website www.biz.loudoun.gov . Again, their
website provides direct access to its inventory of land and buildings by providing large easily directed
buttons to access the data base.
http://www.biz.loudoun.gov/index.aspx?NID=141
The information is presented on maps and in tabular form, with further links to detailed site/facility data.
http://www.biz.loudoun.gov/
The example above shows land data.
Page 98
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 98
Best Practices in Economic Development
For facility data, Loudoun uses a program called Showcase.com to store its land and building inventory
data.
http://www.showcase.com
City of North Port
FIOG looked at current inventory available for the City of North Port with Showcase.com, and found that
existing data is very limited, showing only 66 properties/facilities within the City and surrounding area.
An example of Showcase.com information available for North Port is shown below. It should be noted
that
Showcase.com is now part of CoStar Realty Information, Inc.
http://www.showcase.com
Page 99
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 99
Best Practices in Economic Development
Another data source is LoopNet (www.LoopNet.com). An example of LoopNet’s North Port data is shown
below.
http://www.loopnet.com
Page 100
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 100
Best Practices in Economic Development
Developing Your Own Data Base
Generally speaking there are two types of data uses: one for providing data as shown above and one for
business retention and expansion (BRE). The Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance won a national award a
few years ago for its BR & E Program. Also, Pinellas County Economic Development is regarded as
having an excellent business outreach program.
There are special software programs that can be used to support BRE programs. In contacting ED
professionals, one program that is highly regarded is Salesforce. Florida’s Great Northwest uses this
program. Many EDO’s are private versus public/government entities and they not only track BRE activity,
they also track membership, events, company contact data, etc. This data is integrated into their websites
and bulk e-mail distribution. At least five references have been mentioned by ED professionals including
Internetoffice (http://internetoffice.biz); Atlas Marketing-Insite, Synchronist, CoStar and LoopNet for
tracking existing businesses. Another good contact is Sue Noe at Lee County Economic Development,
they are known for conducting a good BRE program.
City of North Miami
The City of North Miami has developed a web presence and also has some unique tools that can be used
by existing businesses, citizens, and businesses looking to relocate. The first screen below shows the
web page for the Economic Development Department of the City with appropriate links.
http://www.northmiamifl.gov/departments/cp&d/economic_development.asp
Page 101
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 101
Best Practices in Economic Development
Specific site/property information is readily available along with mapping as shown next.
http://wwww.showcase.com
The City has also created a web presence especially designed for businesses, referred to as NoMi biz
available at www.NOMIbiz.com.
http://www.NOMIbiz.com
The site provides helpful information as well as being an excellent market analysis tool that anyone can
use. The site also provides information on where existing grants are being used.
Page 102
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 102
Best Practices in Economic Development
The following screen introduces the Market Analysis Tool. This tool shows demographic and household
income data within the selected market area, as shown in purple.
http://www.NOMIbiz.com
http://northmiamicra.org/MarketAnalysis.html
Back to Table of Contents
Page 103
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 103
Section 4
Community
Engagement
Strategic
Framework
Implementation
Matrix
SECTION
4
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
Page 104
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 104
Page 105
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 105
Community Engagement
Community Engagement
The FIOG team conducted personal interviews, focus groups, and surveys with representatives from the community. This series of public input activities served several purposes. The purpose of the interviews was to gain a sense of community self-perception and marketing strengths, along with the critical community “buy-in” to the project and its resulting economic development initiatives. Second, it provided qualitative and quantitative information used to sculpt the Community Assessment, Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT), and Final Action Plan.
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT Analysis )
SWOT Analysis
Unlike traditional SWOT assessments that focus on issues so general they could apply to almost any community, FIOG paid special attention to those critical issues that will clearly differentiate the City from other communities. FIOG's SWOT process is unique because it ensures that the city considers not only internal issues, but also issues that impact national and international competitiveness.
During the public input process, FIOG conducted a series of 26 stakeholder interviews and three (3) focus group meetings with a total of 71 attendees to assess the public’s perception of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Leaders from government, business, education, civic institutions, the media, and general public participated. Following is a summary of the survey results:
Figure 1. Stakeholder and Focus Group Summary
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Access to I-75 (18)
Warm Mineral Springs (16)
Availability of higher education (10)
Available and skilled workforce (7)
Pro-Business City Government and City Commission (5)
Small town feel, family oriented (5)
Low Cost of Living (5)
Available and affordable land (5)
Elimination of impact fees for 2 years (4)
Affordable housing (4)
Over regulation and misinterpretation by City Govt. (21)
No full service hospital (11)
Lack of job opportunities and skilled workforce (10)
Lack of vocational/technical school (9)
Lack of consistent vision by the City Commission (8)
Competition of other cities (6)
No downtown (5)
Lack of a hotel/resort (5)
Lack of an equestrian venue (5)
Step-child to Sarasota County (4)
Lack of opportunity for citizen comment and feedback (4)
Low wage jobs, blue collar/semiskilled (4)
Warm Mineral Springs-develop and promote (31)
Reducing Govt. Regulation to assist business growth (17)
Develop eco-tourism-kayaking, camping, hunting, bird watching
(10)
Develop more retail, dining, entertainment and cultural amenities
(9)
Expand educational programs & services at USF and State
College of Florida (8)
Support small business expansion through programs (7)
Look at aged-based population for business growth (Young and
Old) (7)
Develop canals for recreational opportunities (6)
Develop amenities-forest, Little Salt Springs, Myakkahatchee
Greenway (6)
Big and intrusive government (25)
Shift in City Commission away from pro-business (21)
City lacks a long term vision (16)
Brain drain due to lack of job opportunities (13)
Increased taxes (9)
Weak national economy (8)
Decrease in Federal, State, and Local funding (6)
Inefficient use of economic resources (6)
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
Page 106
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 106
Community Engagement
Community Online Survey After completion of the stakeholder interviews and the focus group meetings the FIOG team compiled the
results. The FIOG team then worked with the City and the Business and Economic Development Advisory
Board (BEDAB) Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) Task Force to develop an online survey
that was transmitted via non-traditional media through the City’s web page and through community
partners social media outlets.
Starting on April 30, an online survey was posted to the City’s web page and distributed to local civic
groups for dissemination. Computers were also available at USF-North Port and at the North Port Public
Library. The public was asked to review the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats and then to
select their top 3 priorities. The survey remained active from April 30-May 15.
Over 6,000 survey’s distributed
1,230 respondents started the survey
930+ completed the survey
408 provided comments
Following is a summary of some of the background information on the survey respondents:
23%
77%
Are you employed by a business located in North Port?
Yes No
79%
21%
Do you live in North Port?
Yes No
18%
82%
Do you work for a business or organization that is not located in North Port but does business in North Port?
Yes No
14%
86%
Do you own a business in North Port?
Yes No
Page 107
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 107
Community Engagement
FIOG compiled the survey responses and provided a summary report of the survey results along with an
overview of the Community Assessment on June 8, 2012 to a joint meeting of the BEDAB Executive
Committee and the EDSP Task Force. The Community Assessment included the Socio Economic
Profile, Workforce Analysis, Competitive Market Analysis, and Benchmarking of selected similar cities.
Survey Results
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Survey
Rank Response
Focus
Group
Rank
Survey
Rank Response
Focus
Group
Rank
1 Access to I-75 1 1 Lack of job opportunities 3
2 Affordable Housing 6 2 Lack of a hotel 7
3 Small town feel, family oriented 5 3 Low wage jobs, blue collar/semi-
skilled
8
4 Available and affordable land 6 4 No downtown 7
Survey
Rank Response
Focus
Group
Rank
Survey
Rank Response
Focus
Group
Rank
1 Development of more retail, dining,
entertainment and cultural amenities
4 1 Weak national economy 6
2 Support small business expansion
through programs
6 2 Brain drain due to lack of jobs 4
3 Reduce government regulation to
assist business growth
2 3 Increased taxes 5
4 Expand educational programs at USF
and State College of Florida
5 4 Inefficient use of economic resources 7
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
Strengths
Access to I-75 ranked #1 by both the survey respondents and the focus groups
Weaknesses
Lack of job opportunities ranked #1 by survey respondents and #3 by the focus groups
Opportunities
Development of more retail, dining, entertainment and cultural amenities ranked #1 by survey
respondents and #4 by the focus groups. It is interesting to note that Develop and Promote Warm Mineral
Springs ranked #6 by survey respondents and ranked #1 by the focus groups.
Threats
Weak national economy ranked #1 by survey respondents and #6 by the focus groups. It is interesting to
note that Big and Intrusive Government ranked #6 by survey respondents and ranked #1 by the focus
groups.
Page 108
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 108
Page 109
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 109
Strategic Framework
Strategic Plan Framework
The recommended economic development strategic plan for the City of North Port is composed of the
following elements:
Goals, objectives and strategies;
Organizational responsibilities for each strategy; and
Order and magnitude of financial requirements
Goals, Objectives and Strategies
In the recommended strategic plan, statements are set forth to identify the desired ends of the plan
(goals), provide specific and measurable milestones toward which the goals are directed (objectives), and
stipulate how activities and programs shall be conducted to achieve the goals and objectives (strategies
and action items). Related objectives are listed under each of the goal statements. Explicit strategies are
provided for each of the objectives.
Goals and objectives need to be clearly defined and based on realistic expectations in order to formulate
specific programs for action and define the organizational structure necessary for implementation. The
goals constitute an overall working framework for identifying and assessing alternative strategies, which
are assigned priority. The economic development strategies represent action-oriented approaches to the
achievement of the stated goals and objectives.
A strategy or strategic action consists of a project or course of action to be undertaken to accomplish a
defined objective. Generally, it is possible to express a strategic action in a single sentence or phrase
reflecting an approach that could encompass any number of specific activities or tasks. For example, one
strategy for attracting high technology firms could be the establishment of a direct mail program based on
the purchase of address lists for firms that might be identified in a target industry study. This strategic
action would involve such tasks as procuring a mailing list, formulating a series of letters, packaging and
mailing the marketing materials, and conducting follow-up contacts.
The strategic plan is the means by which the goals recommended herein or developed as the process
continues can be accomplished, despite the likelihood of change over a period of time. The strategies
should be clearly stated, but the individual tasks within each strategy need not be outlined. Some
accommodation for flexibility in implementation is desirable. If goals, objectives, and strategies are
structured properly, the plan will be flexible enough to respond to unexpected changes with a minimum
degree of disruption or disturbance to area economic development efforts as a whole. The EDSP is a
living document and as such should be reviewed at least annually in order to determine the status of the
objectives and strategies and updated as appropriate.
Organizational Responsibilities
Once the EDSP has been approved, an implementation matrix defining organizational responsibilities for
each of the strategies in the recommended strategic plan should to be specified, with the desired results
and a suggested schedule for when the actions are to be undertaken and completed. An implementation
matrix is provided in the recommended strategic plan indicating the proposed lead and support roles for
the strategies. It will be up to the individual agencies and organizations to reach agreements on
assuming the proposed responsibilities.
Organizations currently assuming responsibility for economic development activities in North Port must
promote a commitment to the strategic economic development process. The organizations must accept
responsibility for the actions and be committed to achieving the desired results. Potential conflicts must
Page 110
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 110
Strategic Framework
be resolved and a consensus among the organizations involved in economic development must be
achieved for successful plan implementation.
It is necessary to translate responsibilities for the strategic actions which have been accepted by
participants into a work plan. While the recommended strategic plan focuses on overall goals and
strategies for developing the economy of North Port, the City’s plans must focus on the specific tasks to
be accomplished. An annual work program is the means by which the strategic plan implementation
results are achieved and evaluated.
The work programs for the participants in this process should define the actions to be taken to achieve
the responsibilities agreed to, but until these specific actions are undertaken, little or nothing will be
accomplished. It is therefore essential that agreements to assume responsibilities for the various
strategies presented in the plan be made explicit. This helps to avoid misunderstandings and provides an
incentive for performance.
It is recommended that each organization with economic development responsibilities define their
involvement in the form of a detailed work plan on an annual basis, and stipulate tasks to be
accomplished consistent with the strategic plan. These should include the specific tasks, time frames,
staff requirements, resource requirements, estimated budget, and sources of funding.
Implementing the Strategic Plan
While several characteristics distinguish strategic planning from other types of planning and goal-setting
efforts, it is implementation that really sets it apart. The key to strategic planning is that it is action-
oriented; its focus is on the allocation of scarce resources to critical issues. The implementation phase is
crucial. The success of the strategic planning process comes as much from the process itself as from the
strategies defined in the plan. The key to implementation is organization.
The various individuals, agencies, and organizations that have helped identify concerns to be addressed
for the recommended strategic plan should now continue to be involved in “getting the job done”.
Responsibilities for the specific projects and actions defined in the plan must be clearly understood and
accepted.
Each participant should:
Commit to agreed responsibilities for action;
Understand the desired results;
Accept responsibility for the actions and their results;
Establish an acceptable time frame within which the actions are to be taken and completed;
and
Be committed to achieving the desired results.
The importance of creating an effective organizational structure within the community to implement the
strategic plan cannot be overemphasized. Turf protection, organizational jealousies, and duplication of
effort must be avoided. The process of consensus-building and negotiation which brings about
agreement on the strategic plan components should resolve such problems. If not, they must be resolved
as organizational responsibilities are assigned and agreed to.
As discussed previously, there must be a link between strategy and budget. Although some strategies
will be oriented to policy changes and removal of administrative barriers and not involve monetary
resources, successful strategic planning will require allocation of scarce financial resources to implement
project-oriented strategies.
Page 111
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 111
Strategic Framework
One of the last activities of the BEDAB Advisory Board for this project, other than a suggested ongoing
responsibility for monitoring, will be to ensure that each responsible organization prepares a work plan,
with a one-year time frame recommended.
Conclusion
A list of characteristics found in effective strategic plans is presented below as an appropriate summary
for the strategic planning model. Ensuring that programs and projects are credible and relate to the
community’s economic development goals and objectives is a basic requirement of an effective plan. A
clear connection between the plan and the proposed projects or programs is essential for favorable public
response and continued financial support by all stakeholders.
The characteristics are:
1. The strategic plan has an analytical basis based on accurate and current information.
2. Available previous studies have been consulted and reflected in the strategic plan.
3. The strategic plan reflects a meaningful public participation process.
4. Projects and activities in the strategic plan are compatible with the findings.
5. The strategic plan specifies concrete actions that will be undertaken in a defined period of time
(approximately one to five years, as warranted).
6. There is appropriate linkage between capital projects and program activities necessary to make
the capital projects effective.
7. Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and assigned within the strategic plan for each
proposed action.
8. Organizations or persons assigned roles and responsibilities formally make a commitment to
attempt to achieve the related proposed actions.
9. The strategic plan reflects or creates an institutional framework necessary to achieve its
objectives or to complete its proposed projects and activities.
10. Proposed actions are realistically achievable within a reasonable time frame.
11. The strategic plan has a formal commitment to an ongoing evaluation and monitoring process,
including a formal progress review.
Strategic Action Plan
Many elements of the strategic plan recommended in this chapter address issues raised in the preceding
chapters. The framework is designed for actual decision making guidance by providing the
recommended goals, objectives and strategies. These are the items to be acted upon which will direct
the participants in the economic development process.
The programs and actions proposed in this recommended strategic plan are intended to provide the
foundation for maintaining a collaborative working relationship among the public and private sector
entities involved in promoting economic development in the City of North Port, to set forth achievable
implementation strategies to guide decision making based on the concerns expressed during the
interview and charrette processes conducted for this study, and to provide a successful model for city-
wide application.
Page 112
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 112
Strategic Framework
The Mission Statement
This EDSP has been shaped and driven by the following overall Mission Statement:
To facilitate the location and expansion of quality businesses by attracting and retaining value added jobs; and by working closely with key stakeholders to promote the region as a preferred business destination.
The EDSP’s central conclusions are as follows:
To effectively pursue economic growth, the community must better manage its total
economic process (business development, tourist development, community development and
workforce development). A new emphasis on thinking and acting as a unified city/community
first, requiring better cooperation between cities, county and private sector, and as a multi-
county region second.
The city’s economic development efforts must refocus attention on programs to support
existing businesses and existing job skills. Further economic diversification is also needed,
through continued development of the Sarasota County Target Industries:
o Medical & Life Sciences o Applied Environment Services & Sustainable Systems o Digital Media & Web-enabled Technologies o Creative Services o Specialty Manufacturing
While also developing the new target industries identified for North Port that include
Education, Logistics/Distribution, Retail Trade, Construction & Real Estate, Tourism, and
Warm Mineral Springs By-Products; and through expanded support for entrepreneurs.
To achieve effective and consistent leadership for planning, infrastructure investment and the
delivery of other public services to support economic development, cooperation among all
stakeholders will be required.
Growth must accommodate the protection and enhancement of the natural and man-made
resource base that defines the community’s existing quality of life.
Initiatives have been identified throughout the EDSP to address most of the City’s major liabilities or its
opportunities for future growth. However, funding these proposals will not be easy. Although the City has
committed significant resources, other public and private resources (county, state, regional and national)
will be required to fully implement the EDSP.
On these key points this EDSP has achieved a resounding consensus. The time now has come to move
forward with implementation. The greatest strategic challenge facing North Port is no longer a matter of
establishing the correct goals and objectives. Rather, the attention of civic and private sector leaders
must now focus on ensuring that the community has viable mechanisms to harness the public and private
resources at hand, to develop additional resources, and to deploy them in a way that will make a tangible
difference in the future performance of North Port’s economy.
Page 113
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 113
Strategic Framework
Action Plan for Change
Economic development is no longer seen as merely a real estate marketing effort to entice businesses
(usually headquarter offices or manufacturing plants) to relocate into the area. Today, economic
development is truly about enhancing quality of life. It’s about increasing per capita wages, training its
workforce, enhancing infrastructure that in turn will protect and enhance the area’s natural resources.
Economic development encompasses not only business expansion and retention; it also addresses
community development and workforce development.
As a result of significant public input, five major themes serve as the “Goals” for the EDSP.
Goal 1: FOSTER ECONOMIC GROWTH AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES
Goal 2: DEVELOP PRODUCT - LAND AND BUILDINGS
Goal 3: DEVELOP INFRASTRUCTURE
Goal 4: DEVELOP TALENT AND WORKFORCE
Goal 5: IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Each of the Goals listed have numerous objectives and strategies, which provide the means of attaining
their individual and collective results.
This EDSP is very comprehensive. The EDSP contains 5 Goals, 20 objectives and 56 strategies. It
should be noted that there is considerable overlap between goals, objectives and strategies and that
responsibility for the objectives/strategies involves a host of public and private stakeholders. Without
cooperation among all parties, the EDSP as outlined below will fail.
Overview of Goals
Goal 1: FOSTER ECONOMIC GROWTH AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES
Promote and support positive economic change by conducting strategic activities
designed to expand and diversify the existing economy to create additional
employment and income opportunities.
Goal 1 represents the more traditional view of economic development: the attraction of new jobs and the
retention of existing jobs for the community. To achieve this goal, the EDSP identifies 5 objectives and
17 strategies. The thrust of this goal is not only to provide strategies to retain and expand the existing
business base of the city but also to reposition the city to attract a higher paying and diverse employment
base. This goal and its objectives/strategies address existing and proposed opportunities required to
build necessary inventory to attract future businesses and investors.
Goal 2: DEVELOP PRODUCT - LAND AND BUILDINGS
Collaborate with public and private sectors to increase the availability of developed
sites for value added businesses
One of the City’s greatest weaknesses is the lack of existing/appropriate inventory to house future
recruitment of specific targeted industries. This includes lack of existing facilities and lack of shovel ready
sites. This goal and its 3 objectives and 8 strategies address the need for the creation of additional
inventory: pre-permitted building sites, commerce parks and buildings necessary to attract major
employers to the city.
Page 114
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 114
Strategic Framework
Goal 3: DEVELOP INFRASTRUCTURE
Build on strengths and competitive advantages and provide the necessary
infrastructure and services to support and enhance quality of life and economic
growth.
The City needs to provide the necessary infrastructure (water/sewer, transportation, broadband, natural
gas) to sites that have the greatest possibility of being developed within the next five years. To achieve
this goal, the EDSP identifies 6 objectives and 14 strategies.
Goal 4: DEVELOP TALENT AND WORKFORCE
Ensure development of progressive workforce initiatives to meet the existing and
future needs of employers. Develop local and regional partnerships to meet the
training and skills development needs of target industries.
Today, labor force issues rank as two of the three top factors that businesses analyze when relocating.
This goal mainly addresses the existing workforce with strategies addressing enhancement of skills
through training. The goal has 2 objectives and 8 strategies.
Goal 5: IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Assist the City in determining its identity. Explore the concept of a City Center to give
it a sense of “place” and diversify retail opportunities city-wide.
Throughout the public involvement process in the development of this EDSP, the public voiced its
concerns about not having an identity or a downtown or any other type of central area for activities. This
EDSP acknowledges the community’s desire to examine the need for a sense of “place”, and also look at
retail and cultural amenities that are lacking that weigh heavily in defining the area’s excellent quality of
life. This Goal’s 4 objectives and 9 strategies define the EDSP’s commitment to utilize resources of the
city in its approach to expanding and diversifying the City’s economic base.
Page 115
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 115
Implementation Matrix
EDSP Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
GOAL 1: FOSTER ECONOMIC GROWTH and EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES
OBJECTIVE 1.1: Promote available sites and buildings
Strategy 1.1.1: Identify key sites and buildings
Strategy 1.1.2: Develop plan to market land/building assets
Strategy 1.1.3: Develop a web data inventory of available land and buildings
Strategy 1.1.4: Collaborate with commercial real estate brokers for data onsite and buildings
Strategy 1.1.5: Collaborate with bank owned foreclosed industrial/office properties
OBJECTIVE 1.2: Create innovative partnerships to support existing businesses and expansion
Strategy 1.2.1: Work with businesses to create, attract and retain target industries
Strategy 1.2.2: Develop a comprehensive existing industry program
Strategy 1.2.3: Explore options for collaborating with the private sector
Strategy 1.2.4: Increase the awareness and use of local, State and Regional resources that assist with retention, attraction and growth of value-added businesses
Strategy 1.2.5: Collaborate with commercial real estate brokers
Page 116
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 116
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
OBJECTIVE 1.3: Create a regulatory environment that embraces collaboration and cooperation
Strategy 1.3.1: Identify regulations that inhibit business growth
Strategy 1.3.2: Explore business friendly actions that encourage business attraction and retention
Strategy 1.3.3: Implement ULDC Task Force recommendations related to changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan to encourage business growth and consistency with the EDSP
Strategy 1.3.4: Implement ULDC Task Force recommendations on the City's Land Use and Zoning regulations
Strategy 1.3.5: Work with other City departments to further streamline the permitting process
OBJECTIVE 1.4: Encourage public/private collaborations for development of Warm Mineral Springs, as it relates to spin-off industries
Strategy 1.4.1: Issue RFQ for exploring marketable uses of Warm Mineral Springs mineral water
OBJECTIVE 1.5: Evaluate whether current City economic development incentives are effective
Strategy 1.5.1: Develop and adopt guidelines for awarding incentives
Page 117
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 117
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
GOAL 2: DEVELOP PRODUCT-LAND and BUILDINGS
OBJECTIVE 2.1: Increase available Shovel-Ready sites for Manufacturing, Research & Development, Office Uses, Distribution
Strategy 2.1.1: Explore the opportunity of creating a Land Bank
Strategy 2.1.2: Work with landowners to develop sites in Activity Centers 4 and 5
Strategy 2.1.3: Prioritize areas for design and funding of water and sewer main lines to increase number of shovel and pad ready sites
OBJECTIVE 2.2: Identify key parcels of 20 Acres or more within Activity Centers that can be readily converted to shovel ready sites
Strategy 2.2.1: Compile inventory of land and ownership of properties with 20+ acres that are zoned and ready for detailed master site planning
Strategy 2.2.2: Meet with landowners/developers of larger land holdings to determine actions needed to develop shovel ready sites
OBJECTIVE 2.3: Encourage development of office and business parks at or near key interchanges
Strategy 2.3.1: Create options that will expedite infrastructure for office and business park investment
Strategy 2.3.2: Lead in the creation of public/private partnerships to prepare North Port to attract business investment
Strategy 2.3.3: Develop ways North Port can partner with developers to creatively structure financing for infrastructure needs and reduce impacts of regulatory demands
Page 118
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 118
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
GOAL 3: DEVELOP INFRASTRUCTURE
OBJECTIVE 3.1: Develop water related infrastructure to encourage business growth and expansion in Activity Centers
Strategy 3.1.1: Conduct an inventory of water needs as it relates to Activity Centers
Strategy 3.1.2: Develop a plan for addressing water related deficiencies that deter business expansion
Strategy 3.1.3: Provide incentives or financing mechanisms to developers to extend water and sewer lines in prioritized areas
OBJECTIVE 3.2: Develop sanitary sewer system to encourage business growth and expansion in Activity Centers
Strategy 3.2.1: Conduct an inventory of sanitary sewer deficiencies to and within Activity Centers
Strategy 3.2.2: Develop a plan for addressing sanitary sewer related deficiencies that deter business expansion
OBJECTIVE 3.3: Develop roads to encourage business growth and expansion in Activity Centers
Strategy 3.3.1: Conduct an inventory of roadway deficiencies to and within Activity Centers
Strategy 3.3.2: Develop a plan for addressing sanitary sewer related deficiencies that deter business expansion
OBJECTIVE 3.4: Develop broadband to encourage business growth and expansion in Activity Centers
Strategy 3.4.1: Inventory current broadband capacity
Strategy 3.4.2: Meet with providers to explore methods of expanding and increasing coverage
Page 119
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 119
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
OBJECTIVE 3.5: Develop natural gas related infrastructure to encourage business growth and expansion in Activity Centers
Strategy 3.5.1: Conduct a natural gas needs assessments as it relates to Activity Centers
Strategy 3.5.2: Develop a plan for addressing natural gas deficiencies that deter business expansion
OBJECTIVE 3.6: Enhance exposure and name recognition for the City of North Port
Strategy 3.6.1: Work with FDOT to add North Port exit signs on I-75
Strategy 3.6.2: Work with FDOT to add Warm Mineral Springs exit signs on I-75
Strategy 3.6.3: Work with US Department of Commerce to change name designating the new Combined Statistical Area
Page 120
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 120
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
GOAL 4: DEVELOP TALENT AND WORKFORCE
OBJECTIVE 4.1: Develop local and regional partnerships to meet the training and skills development needs of target industries
Strategy 4.1.1: Support STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) careers by working with North Port High School
Strategy 4.1.2: Work with Suncoast Workforce Board and School Board to identify career academies and training needs for target industries
Strategy 4.1.3: Increase awareness of training and skills improvement funding opportunities to service the young and older populations
Strategy 4.1.4: Work with value-added employers and local, regional, state partners to develop and implement strategies to reverse the "brain drain" of younger workers
Strategy 4.1.5: Work with USF Sarasota-Manatee and State College of Florida to expand programs and training for the changing workforce
OBJECTIVE 4.2: Support small business expansion through partnerships with workforce providers
Strategy 4.2.1: Work with the Chamber, higher education and the high school to develop programs to assist small businesses to expand
Strategy 4.2.2: Work with Suncoast Workforce Board and School Board to identify career academies and training needs for businesses
Strategy 4.2.3: Work with entrepreneurs to grow businesses
Page 121
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 121
Implementation Matrix
Actions Responsible Parties Timeframe
Funding Sources Ongoing 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years
GOAL 5: IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OBJECTIVE 5.1: Assist with determining a place identity for the City furthering the findings of the Branding Study-May 2010
Strategy 5.1.1: Explore the concept of a City Center to give residents a sense of place
Strategy 5.1.2: Continue to diversify retail offerings by recruiting national name brand stores and chain restaurants
Strategy 5.1.3: Modify City's Brand to include its strategic location in Sarasota County and SW Florida
OBJECTIVE 5.2: Develop a list of unmet cultural and retail amenities for the City to pursue
Strategy 5.2.1: Examine gaps in services such as theatres, bowling alleys, skating rinks, and other activity generating uses
Strategy 5.2.2: Prepare a feasibility study for development of a 5,000 seat amphitheater
OBJECTIVE 5.3: Explore City assets to determine tourism opportunities
Strategy 5.3.1: Determine the types of entertainment or meeting space needs
Strategy 5.3.2: Promote Warm Mineral Springs as a tourism attraction
Strategy 5.3.3: Promote use of City's natural resources for tourism
OBJECTIVE 5.4: Increase the amount of new multi-family housing
Strategy 5.4.1: The City needs to work with developers to construct new multi-family housing
Back to Table of Contents
Page 122
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 122
Page 123
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 123
Section 5
Appendix
SECTION
5
CITY OF NORTH PORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
2013-2018
Page 124
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 124
Page 125
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 125
Appendix
Appendix 1: Focus Group Meeting Attendees
April 5, 2012 Morgan Family Community Center
Chris Lisiecki
Cheryl Cook
Gene Vaccaro, Warm Mineral Springs
Sam Jones, Candidate
Tom Jones, City Commission
Steve Boone, BEDAB Board
Sherry Smart
Maria Grubbs
Joseph Tu, Starwood Capital
Amanda Pasik, Carlson Studio Marketing
Jill Luke, Patriot Storage
Linda Yates, Commissioner
William Murray, Banks Engineering
Darlene Wedler-Johnson, SCF
Carol Sakowitz, North Port Sun
Joan Sanlwin, Self
April 12, 2012 Toledo Blade Elementary School
Bob Johnson
Carl Motteler, Carl’s Land Clearing
Julie Reece
Matt Reece
Wendy Namack, ED Taskforce
James Miller
Lorraine Epton
Marc Epton
Mark Huey, Sarasota County EDC
Mark Klingel, Mark J Klingel, CPA, LLC
Kathy Brown, TBES Booster
Jennifer Pellechio, SWFRPC
Cheryl Cook, Resident
Steve Barnhardt, Citizen
Ken Maturo, Resident, Vision North Port
Beth Mayberry, Fire Bait / Resident / Teacher
Valdy Olenster, Domociled
Maria Grubbs, Citizen
Fred Tower, BEDAB Board
Jane Seolt
Sam Jones, Candidate
Sherry Smart
Elaine Allen-Emrich, North Port Sun
Pete Pederson, Citizen
Kelley Eggleston, Resident & Estates Trail
Blazers
Linda Yates, Commissioner
April 14, 2012 Warm Mineral Springs (WMS)
Margaret Wuerstle, SWFRPC
Jim Fleming, McGyver Antique Bicycle
Robert Rosenberg, North Port EDC
Ed Davis, North Port Chamber
Mimi Steger, North Port EDC/North Port
Taekwondo
Sam Jones, Candidate
Cheryl Cook, Resident
David Flagel, Flagel Pediatric and Family
Medicine
James Miller
Ken Maturo, North Port EDC
Anne Merrill, EDC Sarasota County
Norma Norris, Resident
Carly Heininger, Resident
Dave Runfeldt, Resident
Delores Tricarico, Potential Business Owner
Ray Stoner
Brayan Felipe, USF
Mary E Williams, WMS/ Little Salt Springs
Archeology
George Hangle, WMS/ Little Salt Springs
Archeology
Peter Bartolotta , North Port EDC
Wanda Gower
Wendy Namack
David Auxier, SCF
Susan Flagel, Flagel Pediatric and Family
Medicine
Lawry Reid, Friends of Little Salt Springs
Sam George, CHAT
Lyn Runfeldt, Friends of Little Salt Springs
Cindy Sprik, North Port EDC
Ken Brand
Page 126
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 126
Appendix
Appendix 2: Key Stakeholders Interviewed
Elected Officials
North Port City Commissioners (5)
Tom Jones, Chair
Michael Treubert, Vice Chair
Jim Blucher
David Garofalo
Linda Yates
Sarasota County Commission (1)
Christine Robinson
Target Industry Sectors (5)
Jonathan Adams – Adams Group
Dr. Lora Kosten – University Of South Florida
Amy Schult – Kyle Kurtis Salon & Spa
William Woeltjen – Sarasota Memorial Health
Gene Vaccaro – Warm Mineral Springs
Civic & Community Organizations (3)
Bill Gunnin – North Port Area Chamber of
Commerce
Ken Maturo – Vision North Port
Daisy Vulovich – State College of Florida
Economic Development Resources (6)
John Holic, Mayor, City of Venice
Mark Huey – Sarasota EDC
Jeff Maultsby – Sarasota County ED
Bill Murray (BEDAB Chair) – Banks Engineering
Tom Patton – Charlotte County EDO
Mimi Steger – North Port EDC
Development Community (4)
Patrick Neal – Neal Communities
Don Arnold – Arnold Development Companies
Ron York and Jim Bevallard – Heron Creek
Development
Lee Pallardy – North Port Gardens
City Staff (6)
Jonathan Lewis, City Manager
Cindi Mick, Utilities Director
Scott Williams, Neighborhood Development
Services Director
Michele Norton, Planning Director
Page 127
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 127
Appendix
Appendix 3: Summary of All Focus Groups
Strengths
Access to I-75 (18)
Warm Mineral Springs (16)
Availability of higher education (10)
Available and skilled workforce (7)
Pro-Business City Government and City
Commission (5)
Small town feel, family oriented (5)
Low Cost of Living (5)
Available and affordable land (5)
Elimination of impact fees for 2 years (4)
Affordable housing (4)
Weaknesses
Over regulation and misinterpretation by City
Govt. (21)
No full service hospital (11)
Lack of job opportunities and skilled workforce
(10)
Lack of vocational/technical school (9)
Lack of consistent vision by the City
Commission (8)
Competition of other cities (6)
No downtown (5)
Lack of a hotel/resort (5)
Lack of an equestrian venue (5)
Step-child to Sarasota County (4)
Lack of opportunity for citizen comment and
feedback (4)
Low wage jobs, blue collar/semi-skilled (4)
Opportunities
Develop and promote Warm Mineral Springs
(31)
Reducing Govt. Regulation to assist business
growth (17)
Develop eco-tourism-kayaking, camping,
hunting, bird watching (10)
Develop more retail, dining, entertainment and
cultural amenities (9)
Expand educational programs and services at
USF and State College of Florida (8)
Support small business expansion through
programs (7)
Look at aged-based population for business
growth (Young and Old) (7)
Develop canals for recreational opportunities (6)
Develop amenities-forest, Little Salt Springs,
Myakkhatchee Greenway (6)
Threats
Big and intrusive government (25)
Shift in City Commission away from pro-
business (21)
City lacks a long term vision (16)
Brain drain due to lack of job opportunities (13)
Increased taxes (9)
Weak national economy (8)
Decrease in Federal, State, and Local funding
(6)
Inefficient use of economic resources (6)
Page 128
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 128
Appendix
Focus Group 1-April 5
Additional Comments
How do we pay for economic development without raising taxes?
Focus Group 2-April 12
Additional Comments
This process is not going to help, it will increase property taxes
Pro-business, less taxes and govt. regulation, spending issues
Does the City have an economist on staff?
Focus Group 3-April 14
Additional Comments
Need for an animal shelter, roller skating rink
Need to philanthropy and training opportunities
Lack of Mass Transit
Need to promote existing businesses and amenities
Need an opportunity for city vision to promote vision once created
Need to focus on vision, not just developing the vision
Lack of respect for citizens expressing opinions at City Commission Meetings
Page 129
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 129
Appendix
Appendix 4: Rankings from Each Focus Group Meeting
Focus Group 1-April 5
Strengths
Access to I-75 (7)
Pro-Business City Government and City
Commission (5)
Small town fell, family oriented (5)
Low Cost of Living (5)
Weaknesses
Competition of other cities (6)
No full service hospital (5)
Step-child to Sarasota County (4)
Lack of a technical school (4)
Lack of opportunity for citizen comment and
feedback (4)
Opportunities
Expansion of USF and State College of Florida into
full service universities (8)
Warm Mineral Springs (8)
Ease of Doing business and cultural productivity
(7)
Threats
Big and Intrusive government (9)
Shift in City Commission away from pro-business
(8)
Weak national economy (8)
Decrease in Federal, State, and Local funding (6)
Additional Comments
How do we pay for economic development without raising taxes?
Focus Group 2-April 12
Strengths
Warm Mineral Springs (9)
Access to I-75 (7)
Available and affordable land (5)
Elimination of impact fees for 2 years (4)
Availability of higher education (4)
Weaknesses
Over regulation and misinterpretation by City Govt.
(21)
Lack of vocational/technical school (5)
No downtown (5)
Low wage jobs, blue collar/semi-skilled (4)
Opportunities
Warm Mineral Springs-develop and promote (11)
Develop eco-tourism-kayaking, camping, hunting,
bird watching (10)
Develop canals for recreational opportunities (6)
Develop amenities-forest, Little Salt Springs,
Myakkhatchee Greenway (6)
Threats
Big and intrusive government (16)
Increased taxes (9)
Shift in City Commission away from being pro-
business (7)
Additional Comments
This process is not going to help, it will increase property taxes
Pro-business, less taxes and govt. regulation, spending issues
Does the City have an economist on staff?
Competition from Charlotte County and region
Page 130
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 130
Appendix
Focus Group 3-April 14
Strengths
Available and skilled workforce (7)
Warm Mineral Springs (7)
Availability of higher education (6)
Access to I-75 (4)
Affordable housing (4)
Weaknesses
Lack of job opportunities and skilled workforce (10)
Lack of consistent vision of City Commission (8)
No full service hospital (6)
Lack of a hotel/resort (5)
Lack of an equestrian venue (5)
Opportunities
Warm Mineral Springs (12)
Reducing Govt. Regulation to assist business
growth (10)
Develop more retail, dining, entertainment and
cultural amenities (9)
Support small business expansion through
programs (7)
Look at aged-based population for business
growth (Young and Old) (7)
Threats
City needs a long term vision (16)
Brain drain due to lack of job opportunities (13)
Inefficient use of economic resources (6)
Shift in City Commission away from being pro-
business (6)
Additional Comments
Need for an animal shelter, roller skating rink
Need to philanthropy and training opportunities
Lack of mass transit
Need to promote existing businesses and amenities
Need an opportunity for city vision to promote vision once created
Need to focus on vision, not just developing the vision
Lack of respect for citizens expressing opinions at City Commission Meetings
Page 131
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 131
Appendix
Appendix 5: All Stakeholder Responses
1a) What are the city’s greatest strengths or assets for increased job growth?
Please list the five (5) most important city strengths for economic
development: Nice people
Receptive city government
Low priced housing
Affordable housing
Great access from I-75
Pro-business – city employees and elected officials
Quality of life
Warm Mineral Springs
Affordable housing
Strong recreation assets
Develop Cocoplum for recreational events (rowing events)
City works with developers
Pro-business, pro-developer
Good location for distribution between Naples and Tampa
Attractive entry at #182 and #179 exits – beautiful entryways
Stable elected bodies
Development review process is very reasonable
I-75 Location – Easy access to major west FL cities
Small town feel – friendly, sense of belonging
Good amenities- golf, Morgan Center, Mullen Center
Excellent schools
“You can be the future – you can help to mold this city.”
Warm Mineral Springs
Younger population
Pro-business City administration and City officials
Low cost of housing
Low crime
High quality of life
Young population
Spirit cannot be bought – sense of pride
Pro-business City Government – they want you to be successful
Efficiency and attitude toward new development
Affordable housing with variety housing types and prices
Environmentally friendly, green city
Positive attitude and willingness to partner
Available capacity with Water and Sewer
Available and skilled workforce
Education – Higher Education available
Warm Mineral Springs has an identity
Opportunity for several downtown destinations
NP Commerce Park
Affordable land on interchanges
Pro-business community
Architectural design standards
Unified effort to become pro-business
Strong chamber
I-75 access, central location
Access to international airports
Business leaders want to live here – quality of life
Cost of living is low
Family oriented community
City manager – Jonathan Lewis
Affordable housing
Access to I-75
Proximity between Tampa and Ft. Myers
Access to international airports
Potential to help shape the City
Transparency (welcoming) of ideas from the business community
Available land
Young population
Affordable population
Affordable housing – great schools
Proximity to Ft. Myers and Sarasota
No impact fees for two years
I-75 access for businesses
Newness – clean, crisp
Family friendly
No bad neighborhoods – new, pristine
Affordable land and available land
Pro-business government
Available workforce with the right age
USF and State College to train the workforce
I-75 Access
Positive outlook, sensible community accommodating
Political will-can do
Young population
Skilled workforce
Access to I-75
Proximity to Ft. Myers and Tampa – central location
Plotted community for 250,000 people
Available workforce
Cooperative utility providers
Openness of membership on the BEDAB Board – don’t have to be a resident to be on the board.
o Came out of the last plan
Page 132
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 132
Appendix
USF campus and State College of Florida
Warm Mineral Springs
Diamond in the rough – the Cheeseburger in Paradise
Only 20% built out
Streamlined permitting – business friendly (less than 30 days)
Shovel ready land available at key interchange AC 4
Affordable housing
Affordable land
Warm Mineral Springs – “The Fountain of Youth”
Good intergovernmental relations with County government
Largest city in 4-county area
12,000 school aged children – diverse community
Available workforce – one of the largest
Median age of 39
Proximity between Ft. Myers and Tampa
Access to three international airports
Shovel-ready land at AC 4
NP is designated as “Playful City USA” via National League of Cities and Kaboom
Not built up – 80% not developed
Less competition – room for your company to grow
Proximity to Ft. Myers and Tampa metro areas
Market access – three airports
Affordability – low cost of living
Best residential community on W. coast of Florida
Natural assets: Warm Mineral Springs, Little Salt Springs (University of Miami), Myakkahatchee Environmental Park, State Forest
1b) What are Sarasota/Charlotte County greatest strengths? Cultural and natural amenities of Sarasota
Natural amenities of Charlotte County
Low priced place to live
Higher education in the area is a plus
Florida weather
Tourism – good fishing / quality of life
Beaches
Cultural assets
Restaurants
Good transportation network
Located between 3 international airports and 1 local airport
Natural resources – beaches, port
Historical resources – Edison-Ford Estates in Ft. Myers
Education – Higher education available
Hotels
Beaches
Charlotte Harbor
International Airport in Fort Myers
Quality of Life – climate
Florida business tax structure is good
Airport – Punta Gorda
2a) What are the major liabilities (weaknesses) within the city that limit economic
growth? Please list the five (5) most significant city liabilities for economic
development: There is no educational infrastructure
There is no industrial infrastructure (skilled workers, educational facilities)
There are no major plants or industrial activities
Nothing to attract jobs but low wages
Step-child to Sarasota County
NP has not promoted itself in the past
Lack of anchor company, hospital 500+ employees
Too many septic tanks
Infrastructure – lack of water and sewer, canal structures, roads are old – need repairs
No water frontage – limits tourism
Need more light industrial and office suites
Need to identify one dominate reason for companies to be here.
Limited shovel ready Light Industry
No beaches – no water access is a challenge for hospitality industry
National economy slow down
Not being in close proximity to major metro area
Lack of diversity of industry
No defined city center – focal point
Housing foreclosures
Lack of physical connectivity
Infrastructure piecemealed for housing – no comprehensive planning
Need more targeting marketing
Lack of a consolidated plan for incentives (cash, water and sewer, roads)
No downtown
Areas are not being marketing for education
How do AC centers tie into ED plan?
“What’s so special about North Port besides having a lot of land and it’s cheap?”
No real events
Need more information to give to developers
Water and local roads
Page 133
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 133
Appendix
Development Code along with code of ordinances
Funding – local, state, federal
Getting a vision and staying on course
Lack of large tracts of land with infrastructure and properly zoned
Competition from more established cities
City and county impact fees
Lack of large # of businesses
People outside of NP are not aware of us
Lack of government property to offer for industry – hotel, office and light industrial
Lack of a downtown core area
Lack of identity
No hotel or conference room
Potential of not being competitive with other cities
Lack of identity – not known for anything
City does not own land for business development – office, light industrial, commercial
Could be more business friendly
Lack of skilled workforce
Reputation as a bedroom community
City should not have purchased Warm Mineral Springs
Lack of infrastructure – roads – especially arterial and secondary roads
Lack of job opportunities for young professional
Location is remote from cultural Sarasota
Identity crisis – people outside of NP don’t know who they are
No real water access
Lack of social infrastructure- college, hospital
Need a central hub to be “their-there”
Lack of adequate infrastructure (roads, water and sewer)
Government overreaching
Identity crisis
All government spending has to go out for referendum
Lack of a consistent vision of the leadership – City Commission
No hotel
No hospital
Lack of shovel ready land for light industrial and office
Lack of available buildings
No downtown – no real identity/gathering place
Lack infrastructure – roads, water, city and sewer (especially at AC 3, 4, 6)
No hospital
Requirements put in place in 2006 requiring a referendum for all bonding – this should be addressed
Lack power brokers
Perception of being a bedroom community
Workforce that is too blue collar/semi-skilled
Lack of strong intergovernmental relation between NP and Charlotte County.
Competition to the south is too close
Perception of being the redheaded stepchild by neighboring cities
Lower income and too much lower end housing stock
Lack of infrastructure – older, damaged roads
Majority of city is on septic
Lack of a full service hospital
No full campus for USF
2b) What are Sarasota/Charlotte County greatest liabilities? There is no educational infrastructure
There is no industrial infrastructure (skilled workers, educational facilities)
There are no major plants or industrial activities
“We don’t think regionally in South Sarasota County”
Limited by being a peninsula
Region doesn’t tie to east coast of Florida well
Distance to large metro area is too great
No deep water access
Nothing to attract jobs but low wages
Isolated from a metropolitan region
3a) What are the major opportunities facing North Port that can have a major
impact on economic development within the city? Please list five (5) city
opportunities (10 years out) for economic development: North Port has been this way since 1959
It was low Pine Flatwoods subdivided into 80 by 250 ft. lots (57,000 lots)
Never has had any economic development
Sarasota County actively resists economic development
Aging population – hospital needed
University presence
Manufacturing needed
Need an international airport
Aging infrastructure – water, sewer, roads
Development & marketing of Warm Mineral Springs
Veteran’s hospital
Page 134
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 134
Appendix
A teaching hospital
Price Blvd. needs to be widened and residential changed to commercial
Another arterial road is needed
Spend funds on Warm Mineral Springs to advertise
Offer incentives for a hotel at Warm Mineral Springs
Expand the USF campus in North Port
Hotel in North Port
Increasing Gas prices – more people will want to commute closer to home
USF – Sarasota Manatee will admit freshman in Fall 2013
USF – North Port expanded facilities in all of the past 4 years
Warm Mineral Springs needs to be updated and promoted globally
Hotel for Warm Mineral Springs
Increasing gas prices could cause companies to open satellite location in North Port
Starbucks is needed to show diverse economics – discretionary income
A unified plan that is easily understood
Communication –need community buy-in
Incentives are needed for Target Industries
USF Campus in 20 years - Funding for construction
Widening of Price Blvd.
Constructing the Green Way Plan
Warm Mineral Spring Overlay w/ Arts – needs private dollars
Warm Mineral Springs
Downtown destination
Connect Toledo Blade N to 72
Streamline LDC within 2-3 years and a code of ordinance
Turn Town Trop into equestrian community
Use the forest as an Eco Park
Sports tourism
Promote Warm Mineral Springs as a tourist destination
More diverse (and a variety of) shopping and restaurants
Water, sewer, and roads need to be developed more
Overgrowth of business in Port Charlotte & Sarasota
Need a reason for people to get off I-75
Development of Murdoch village in Charlotte County
Identify economic engines that are catalysts for sustained economic development
Higher education – USF campus
Arts, culture, and education center needs to be developed
Development of Warm Mineral Springs and the surrounding area (Ortiz to 41)
Little Salt Spring – examine opportunities for preservation and eco-tourism and school outings
USF campus – four years
Hospital and related medical services
City owned business park
Marketing to let surrounding areas know about North Port
Convert Warm Mineral Springs into a weeklong destination – private dollars
Develop AC 3 and AC 4
Warm Mineral Springs underdeveloped – set sights to make this a destination driver
Hospital is needed with related services
Assisted living facilities
Myakkahatchee Greenway
Warm Mineral Springs
Need to market NP as South Sarasota County
Warm Mineral Springs is one of a kind
Healthcare and related clinic services and resort complex (eco-tourism)
Two additional interchanges off I-75
Strengthen the intergovernmental relations between NP, Charlotte County and Sarasota County
Hospital –“ we have trained medical workforce that now commutes”
14 miles of undeveloped interstate property
Available, affordable land
Develop Warm Mineral Springs as a medical tourism destination
Bring in “Big League Dreams” at AC 4/I-75
Outlet Mall at AC4
Toledo/Price – Dining/night life district
Development of State Forest for eco-tourism
Development of the Greenway and Trail Plan
Expansion of River Road
Building “Big League Dreams”
Developing Warm Mineral Springs as a resort eco-tourism destination
Widening and improvements to Price Blvd.
Full service hospital at AC 3
Full service USF campus
Page 135
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 135
Appendix
3b) What are the major opportunities facing Sarasota/Charlotte County? For the most part, Sarasota County does not
favor economic development
Popular focus is on maintenance and quality of life
No major opportunities for economic development except “business owners will retire here and bring their companies’”
Medical complex
Expanding USF campus
Need to capitalize on the airport at Punta Gorda
More resorts at the beaches
Casinos in Florida – brings tourism
Expansion of Port Manatee
Expansion of rail for industry from Port Manatee to other points north
Port in area for commerce
Need more collaboration with Charlotte County to capitalize on shared assets included social services like hospitals
Joint marketing for the region
Always opportunity for retirement, healthcare, residential development and services
4a) Do you believe that 10 years into the future that there could be any major
threats that could prevent or slow economic development within the city? If
so please list five (5) citywide threats (10 years out) for economic
development? Very low priced lots
Water supply (Myakkahatchee Creek) becomes unavailable
Higher impact fees
Gas prices
No International airport
National threat – no leadership from Congress & the President
As the economy picks up, the City Government needs to stay pro-business in how they charge impact fees
Impact fees need to stay reasonable
Decrease in federal funding (ex. Transportation)
Sarasota & Venice are closing Section 8 housing developments
Lack of jobs will cause younger population to move away
Elected officials who are not pro-business or pro-development
Weak national economy
General lack of state funding
Water supply is limited
Activists could disrupt the status quo in the future
Weak national economy
Decreased Federal and State grants and funding
Increasing gas prices
Fire district taxes collected are getting out of control
New elected officials could not be less pro-business
Borrowing ability for new businesses – banking is difficult
Banks need to loosen up money
Slow recovery of national economy
Long term vision needs to be maintained and stay on course
Old time thinkers – people that just don’t want change
Going back to high impact fees
Lack of adequate infrastructure
Available shovel ready development sites for businesses
Opinions of its residents – many people oppose change of any kind
Lack of funding – city, county, state, and federal
Losing economic development as a top priority for the City Commission at every level
City Pride – city values need to stay high as a priority
What are the values and then promote them
Hurricane destruction
If schools deteriorate
Infrastructure
Availability to meet water capacity
Continued weak economy – state and federal
A non-business-friendly City Commission
Lack of funding for infrastructure
County Commission could stop development by purchasing more conservation land in the NE quadrant
Big shift in City Commission with a return to a non-business friendly atmosphere
Not being able to keep up infrastructure with pace of growth
Need an identity – who and what are we?
Page 136
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 136
Appendix
4b) What are the major threats to slow economic growth for Sarasota/Charlotte
County? Regional Planning Council
Sarasota & Venice are closing Section 8 housing developments
Water supply is limited
Elected officials who are not pro-business or pro-development
Weak national economy
General lack of state funding
Lack of adequate commercial air access at Punta Gorda Airport
Decrease Federal and State grants and funding
Page 137
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 137
Page 138
© USF FIOG 2012 All Rights Reserved Page 138
Prepared on behalf of: Angela Crist, Director
University of South Florida Florida Institute of Government
4202 East Fowler Ave, CHE 205 Tampa, FL 33620
Ph: (813) 974-8423 Fax: (813) 974-2819
[email protected]