[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]











     1          JOdt~~~~~~~~~~i Beach

                            tn"4




     I~~~~~~~~~Peae y
                    1439ri  Ricvmd'Patflm, orvisir

       I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~dI,
HD~
         268~~~~~~~~~~~~'  
IL6





I1991













                                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                      COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                      2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                      CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413





                                               Property of {i, Library


   I~I











   "A report of Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries &
   Parks to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
   pursuant to NOAA Award No. NA9OAA-D-CZ917"
C-f

        Ah                          And~~~~~IIIO1

         en                       I>;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








      U                     ~~~~~~~TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                           Page

          Acknowledgements...................                   5
          Introduction.                                        ....................7
I    ~~Study Area Definition.                                ...............11
          Socio-Economic Data.                                 ................14
               Population.                                      ...................14
               Income.                                          .....................17
               Employment.                                      ...................18
               Retail Trade.                                    ..................21
          Land Use And Zoning.                                 ................29
 I        ~~~Land Use Summary.                               ................29
               Zoning summary.                                  .................32
          Traffic And Parking.                                 ................37
 I        ~~~Traffic Summary.                                ................37
               Parking Summary.                                 ................40
          Issues And Concerns.                                 ................44
          Assets And Constraints.                              ...............47
I    ~~Opinion Surveys.                                      ..................50
               Merchant Survey Summary.                         ............50
               Resident Survey Summary.                         ............60
          Goals And Objectives.                                ................69
          Appendix A: Excerpt From Sand Beach Master Plan  . . . 94
          Appendix B: Property Ownership Listing And Map .  . . .104
          Appendix C: Survey Forms.                           ..............118
          Appendix D: Long Beach Urban Waterfront Advisory
                        Committee.                               ...............128









            LIST OF MAPS, TABLES AND FIGURES

                                                    Page

Map 1. Study Area Map ................ 12
Table 1.  Population and Growth Rate for Long
         Beach and Harrison County, 1930-1990....          14
Table 2.  Average Household Size for Mississippi,
         Harrison County, Long Beach, Biloxi,
         Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville,
         1980 and 1990 .............. 15
Table 3.  Age Distribution of Harrison County,
         Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass
         Christian and D'Iberville Residents, 1990. . . 15
Table 4.  Population by Sex for Harrison County,
         Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass
         Christian and D'Iberville, 1990 ........ 16
Table 5.  Population by Race for Harrison County,
         Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass
         Christian and D'Iberville, 1990 ........ 16
Table 6.  Population Densities for Harrison County,
         Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass
         Christian and D'Iberville, 1980 and 1990 . . . 17
Table 7.  Per Capita Income for Harrison County,
         Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass
         Christian and D'Iberville, 1979 and 1985 . . . 17
Table 8.  Median Household Income and Percent Below
         Poverty Level for Harrison County, Long
         Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian
         and D'Iberville, 1979 ............. 18
Table 9.  Percent of Working Residents in Long
         Beach by Employment Sector, 1980, and
         Projected 1992 Salaries for the
         Mississippi Coastal Area which Correspond
         to the Sectors ................ 19
Table 10. Projected Employment Increases by Sector
         from 1989 - 2000 for the Mississippi
         Coastal Area .............. 19
Table 11. Unemployment Rates for Harrison, Hancock
         and Jackson Counties, January, 1989 -
         September, 1991 ................ 20
Table 12. Percentage of Workers Aged 16 and Over
         Working Outside Area of Residence for
         Harrison County, Long Beach, Biloxi,
         Gulfport, Pass Christian and
         D'Iberville, 1980 ....... 20
Table 13. Total Annual Gross Sales in Harrison
         County, Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport,
         Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1987 ..... 23
Table 14. Amount of Change in Gross Sales from
         Previous Year by Industry Group in
         Harrison County, 1987 - 1991 ......... 24






                          3









          Table 15. Amount of Change in Gross Sales from
                      Previous Year by Industry Group in
                      Long Beach, 1987 - 1991.                        ...........25
          Table 16. Major Long Beach Manufacturers.                 .......26
I      ~~Table 17. Other Major Harrison County
                     Manufacturers.                                  ................26
          Map 2. Land Use Map.                                      ................31
          Table 18. Existing Land Use Acreage by Use Category
  I             ~~~~~within the Study Area.                       ............32
          Map 3. Zoning Map.                                        .................35
          Table 19. Average Daily Traffic on Selected Study
                     Area Streets, 1991.                            .............38
U       ~~Map 4.  Traffic Count Locations.                         ...........39
          Map 5.  Parking Location Map.                             ............42
          Figure 1. Issues and Concerns.                            .............44
          Figure 2. Assets.                                         ...................47
          Figure 3. Constraints.                                   .................48
          Map 6.  Business Directory Map.                           ...........52
I      ~~Figure-4. Business Directory Listing.                     .........53
          Table 20. Primary Methods Used For Promoting Study
                     Area Businesses.                                ...............56
          Figure 5. Proposed Beach/Harbor Access Project.           ....87
          Figure 6. Property Ownership Listing By Parcel.          ....104
          Map 7. Parcel Map.                                       .................116
          Figure 7. Merchant Survey Form.                          ............118
          Figure S. Resident Survey Form.                          ............119














        I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








     U                       ~~~~~~~ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I       ~~Numerous individuals have contributed to the preparation of
        this study, including private citizens and public officials
        in the City of Long Beach and representatives of regional
I     ~~and state agencies.
        The Gulf Regional Planning Commission is most appreciative
        of the valuable assistance provided by Mayor Glenn Rishel
        and the administrative personnel of the City throughout the
        course of the study.

I       ~~A special thanks is extended to the members of the Long
        Beach Urban Waterfront Advisory Committee for their
       dedicated assistance and guidance in developing the study.
        Particular thanks is due Mr. Phil Kies, Chairman of the
        Committee,, and Mrs. Karen Livengood for her energetic
        assistance in conducting the opinion surveys.

I      ~Additional  thanks must also be given to the nearly 400
       merchants and residents of Long Beach who took the time to
       participate in the opinion surveys which formed the premises
I     ~~upon which most of the recommendations herein were based.
        Last, but certainly not least, the Mississippi Department of
       Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks, Bureau of Marine Resources
       must be commended for its provision of- invaluable
        administrative and funding assistance.   once again,  the
       MDWFP/BMR has demonstrated its commitment to the
I     ~preservation  and enhancement  of the coastal  areas  of
       Mississippi.












       I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Introduction
I
I
I I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I









                             INTRODUCTION


       Like most communities on the coast, Long Beach's most
       notable feature is its waterfront.   And like most other
       communities, the bulk of business activity moved from the
       old downtown and waterfront area to a more centralized
       location in response to population growth, changing
       demographics, and marketing trends.

       Despite its similarities, Long Beach differs from other
       coast communities in the way its waterfront developed.  In
       contrast to the older cities of the coast which started
       their development on the water and because of the water,
       Long Beach had an inland birth.   It started as a market
       community and a rail shipment point for nearby farming
       operations. It never had the seafood and marine development
       so common to its sister communities.

I      ~~This history had demonstrable effect on the waterfront area
       of Long Beach, an effect which gives Long Beach certain
       development opportunities not shared by other cities.  The
I     ~~waterfront area is not as historic; the existing development
       patterns are less congested, there is a greater amount of
       land area to develop, and accommodating the automobile is
       much easier than in other places.   The infrastructure is
       generally in better shape, and can more easily serve
       additional development.

I      ~~The Long Beach Harbor is a contemporary development as
       harbors go on the coast. It is more spacious than most, and
       has a great deal of landward development potential.

       Finally, while some businesses have left the area and moved
       further north, leaving behind several large vacant
       buildings, the reverse has also happened when the Oak Harbor
I     ~~shopping center was developed on U.S. 90.  This is a major
       draw of traffic and people to the area, and is a testimony
       to the underlying economic vitality of Long Beach's
I     ~~waterfront area.  Even though this large scale development
       clashes with customary notions of "quaint" downtown
       development patterns, it does provide a business magnet for
*      ~the  area to  a degree  not enjoyed by other downtown
       districts.

       Long Beach has confronted the challenge of its waterfront
       area by initiating an urban waterfront study with the help
       of Gulf Regional Planning Commission  (GRPC) .   Financial
       support for urban waterfront planning is provided by the
I     ~~Mississippi Bureau of Marine Resources (BMR) as part of the
       Mississippi Coastal Program.





                                  7









       Urban waterfronts provide unique economic and social
       benefits to the coast.   Historic downtown areas provide
I      ~~important opportunities for public access to the waterfront.
        Even though many of these waterfront areas have lapsed into
        decline, they are still accessible to the areas' population
I     ~~centers.   These areas also include points of historical
        interest, and are typically the focus of a community's
       waterfront leisure activities.

I       ~~Under contract with the City of Long Beach, Gulf Regional
        Planning Commission (GRPC) developed an urban waterfront
        plan for the city in conjunction with a task force
        consisting of area businesspeople and other interested
U       ~~citizens.   The study was logically broken down into four
        components:

 U          ~~~1.  PRELIMINARY WORK:   During this phase, the project
        area was identified, existing planning work for the area was
        compiled along with other documentary information on
I      ~property  boundaries,  utility  locations  and easements,
        bulkheads and marine structures, and other infrastructure
        characteristics.   Local,  state,  and  federal  laws and
I      ~~regulations affecting the area were reviewed.
           2.   DATA  COLLECTION:   This  component  included  a
        comprehensive land use survey to document current user
        activities and to inventory structures in the area.   In
        addition, data was collected on aesthetic and environmental
        concerns, traffic circulation, parking and road conditions.
I      ~~Finally, opinion surveys were conducted to identify business
        conditions, shopping patterns, perceptions and other issues
        relevant to the area's business climate.

            3.  ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS:   All of the data
        collected was analyzed to identify the problems and
*       ~~opportunities for improving the area.

            4.  RECOMMENDATIONS:   Based on the data collected and
        analysis, a set of recommendations for the future
        development of Long Beach's urban waterfront was developed.
        During the course of this study, the Gulf Regional Planning
        Commission conducted extensive field research and surveys to
        compile data and obtain insight regarding the attributes,
        problems and potential of the Long Beach urban waterfront
        area.   Studies and reports of downtown and waterfront
I      ~~development and/or revitalization activities and experiences
        of other areas were obtained and reviewed to broaden the
        perspective from which the conclusions and recommendations
I      ~~herein were drawn.







I       ~While  data  collection,  compilation  and  analysis  play
        important roles in any study, two very important components
        of this study were the Advisory Committee and the opinion
I      ~~surveys.   The Advisory Committee consisted of 32 members
        whose individual and collective participation provided
        invaluable insight regarding their perceptions of existing
I      ~~conditions, And their ideas for creating a more viable urban
        waterfront area.   Two opinion surveys were conducted,  a
        merchant survey and a resident survey, which illuminated
        many of the concerns and visions of the Long Beach people
        regarding their city both as it is today, and as they would
        have it tomorrow.   Insight obtained through the resulting
        broad-based public participation formed the premises upon
        which most of the recommendations of this study are based.



















      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
   I*~ ~Study Area Definition
I
I

I 

I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I








     U                        ~~~~~~~THE STUDY AREA

I       ~~The primary study area (see Map I on the f ollowing page)
        consists of the downtown area of Long Beach south of the
        LouisvilIle and Nashville Railroad, bounded on the east by
I      ~~South Burke Avenue, Fourth Street and Nicholson Avenue; on
        the west by Church Avenue, Magnolia Street and Russell
        Avenue; and on the south by the Mississippi Sound.

I       ~~While Long Beach has approximately four miles of waterfront
        beaches on the Mississippi Sound, for the purposes of this
        study, the area extending from Nicholson Avenue westward to
I      ~Russell  Avenue  was  the  waterfront  area  of  primary
        consideration. It was felt by the Committee that this area
        was the most dynamic and economically viable portion of the
        waterfront area, and that recreational and commercial
        activity was likely to intensify in the area in coining
        years.   Very  little  commercial  activity  exists  along
        waterfront areas outside this designated study area, and
I      ~~recreational  activity  is generally low to moderate.   In
        those primarily residential areas, it was felt by the
        Committee, that while some additional recreational use may
I      ~~be generated by initiating access improvements and amenities
        recommended in the Sand Beach Master Plan published in 1986
        (see Appendix A), existing use patterns would remain largely
        unchanged in the near future.

        The delineated study area includes the traditional downtown
        commercial area which primarily consists of Jeff Davis
I      ~~Avenue and one block east and west of it, from the railroad
        to U.S. 90.  Additional commercial and fringe residential
        areas between U.S. 90 and Fourth Street east and west of the
        abovementioned downtown area were also included in the study
        area.

        There is approximately one mile of waterfront within the
I      ~~study area, with Long Beach Harbor being the focal point of
        commercial and recreational activity.







                    /         /'//i  ii   ~T-7;7/ YWEST  RALROAD  STREET I                       .      RO     SRE

                        _   I           -  -   -, -  -  ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ -   -  -  -   -  FTRST          STRIS
                                  I ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1                                      1\ 

                         m  PI NE STREE T
                     I///(  I/               Tu,4aSD STREET
                                                 TKIRD        ~FIST REETC








                                LEFOURTH                     STREET                     -   -   -    -




                                          -  FIFTH                          STREET
m-   II- 
 *~~~~~~~~~~~


                                  I                                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~KERR  4-
     I I)




                            14CHAY go





   *                           ~~~~~~~MISSISSIPPI SOUND                                HcHA~9
             *~j                                                                           2












                       ---    STUDY AREA
II 













                            OULE01ONAL PLANNNG COMMISSiON                                                                    12
                                                   SBUDY AREA-----    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
*                  Socio - Economic Data
I
I
I
I
I
I         .                       .
I
I
I
I
I
I









                    SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA

                        Population

 Long Beach is a small but steadily growing city.   Since
 1930, the City's population has grown by nearly 1200%, a
 rate over four times that experienced by Harrison County as
 a whole.  While much of the population growth was a result
 of annexation, particularly in 1981, Long Beach has
 consistently grown at a more rapid rate than the rest of the
 County.

 It is anticipated that the steady westward current of
 population growth in Harrison County will continue since
 there is considerably more available space for both
 residential and commercial development in the western
 portions of the County.   Long Beach's proximity to the
 waterfront and to nearby commercial areas of its neighboring
 communities, in addition to the nearby Naval Construction
 Battalion Center and the Stennis Space Center will likely
 ensure that the City's population will continue to grow at a
 higher rate than the county as a whole.   That growth has
 been and will be significantly nurtured by the City's
 attractive  image  as a small  bedroom  community  with
 relatively good educational opportunities and low crime
 rates.

                          Table 1
       Population and Growth Rate for Long Beach and
              Harrison County from 1930 - 1990

              Long Beach  Growth  Harrison County   Growth
     Year     Population   Rate      Population       Rate

     1930       1,346      N/A         44,143         N/A
     1940       1,495     11.1%        50,799        15.1%
     1950       2,703     80.8%        84,073        65.5%
     1960       4,470     76.5%       119,489        42.1%
     1970       6,170     29.4%       134,582        12.6%
     1980       7,967     29.1%       157,665        17.2%
     1990     *15,804     98.4%       165,365         4.9%

     Source:    U.S.  Bureau  of  Census,  Census  of  the
     Population, Mississippi, 1930, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970,
     1980, and 1990.

     *In 1981, Long Beach annexed a large area to its north,
     essentially tripling its incorporated land area and
     increasing its population by approximately 78.2% over
     the 1980 Census counts. With the annexation, Long Beach
     jumped from its rank as the 33rd largest city in the
     State to the 20th largest. Long Beach's adjusted
     population for 1980 was 14,199, including the annexed
     area.   The actual population increase for the City's
     entire incorporated area from 1980 to 1990 was 11.3%.



I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1









 The average household size in Long Beach in 1990 was 2.97
 persons, a decrease of only .02 persons, while the averages
 for the State, Harrison County and all of Long Beach's
 sister communities were lowered far more substantially from
 their 1980 averages. This can be attributed largely to Long
 Beach's annexation of the North Long Beach area in 1981
 which was relatively rural in nature.   Rural areas of the
 State generally have larger average household sizes.

                          Table 2
      Average Household Size for Mississippi, Harrison
    County, Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian
               and D'Iberville, 1980 and 1990

                              Average Household Size
     Governmental Unit         1980      1990    +/-

     Mississippi               2.97       2.75   -.22
     Harrison County           2.85      2.65   -.20
     Long Beach                2.81      2.97   -.02
     Biloxi                    2.67      2.50   -.17
     Gulfport                  2.60      2.45   -.15
     Pass Christian            2.74      2.55   -.19
     D'Iberville               3.23      2.88   -.35

     Source:   U.S.  Bureau of Census,  General  Population
     Characteristics, 1980, and Summary Population and
     Housing Characteristics, Mississippi, 1990.

 The median age of Long Beach residents was 1.6 years older
 than that of Harrison County residents, but 4.7 years
 younger than that of neighboring Pass Christian.   However,
 29.2% of Long Beach's residents were under the age of 18
 compared to 27.5% of Harrison County residents, indicating a
 proportionately higher school age population.  Long Beach's
 18-54 year old population, or primary "work force" age
 group, was of essentially the same proportion as that of
 Harrison County.

                          Table 3
      Age Distribution of Harrison County, Long Beach,
      Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville
                      Residents, 1990

 Governmental Unit   Median Aae  Under 18   18-54  55 & Older

 Harrison County        30.7        27.5%    53.3%    19.2%
 Long Beach             32.3        29.2%    53.2%    17.6%
 Biloxi                 28.4        25.3%    55.4%    19.3%
 Gulfport               33.0        24.1%    51.2%    23.7%
 Pass Christian         37.0        25.1%    45.1%    29.8%
 D'Iberville            30.4        29.3%    54.5%    16.2%

     Source:  U.S. Bureau of Census, Summary Population and
     Housing Characteristics, Mississippi, 1990.



I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1









 Both Long Beach and Pass Christian had proportionately
 higher female populations than the county-wide average.
 That can be at least partially attributed to the fact that
 there are significantly higher military affiliated
 population concentrations, which are predominantly male, in
 the eastern portions of Harrison County, and that a
 proportionately higher number of working age males may leave
 Long Beach to find employment.

                          Table 4
     Population by Sex for Harrison County, Long Beach,
  Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1990.

                               Male           Female
 Governmental Unit         % of Population  % of Population

 Harrison County                 49.8%            50.2%
 Long Beach                      48.4%            51.6%
 Biloxi                          51.6%            48.4%
 Gulfport                        49.0%            51.0%
 Pass Christian                  46.8%            53.2%
 D'Iberville                     50.1%            49.9%

     Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Summary Population and
     Housing Characteristics, Mississippi, 1990.

 Long Beach has the lowest percentage of minorities of all
 the Mississippi coastal cities.  Its 91.2% white population
 is 14% higher than that of Harrison County.   From 1980 to
 1990 the City's white population fell proportionately by
 1.5%, mostly due to the slightly higher black percentage in
 the newly annexed area, and to the 1.3% proportional
 increase in other minorities (primarily Vietnamese) during
 that period.  The City's relatively low minority population
 is, unfortunately, often a detriment toward securing Federal
 funds for community improvement programs and projects.

                          Table 5
    Population by Race for Harrison County, Long Beach,
  Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1990.

                     % White      % Black      % Other
 Governmental Unit   1980  1990   1980  1990   1980  1990

 Harrison County     78.7  77.2   19.3  19.5    2.0   3.3
 Long Beach          92.7  91.2    5.2   5.4    2.1   3.4
 Biloxi              78.6  74.6   17.7  18.6    3.7   6.8
 Gulfport            64.4  69.9   34.3  28.6    1.3   1.5
 Pass Christian      63.8  63.6   34.3  30.8    1.9   5.6
 D'Iberville         92.6  88.9    5.6   7.6    1.8   3.5

     Source:   U.S.  Bureau of Census,  General  Population
     Characteristics, 1980, and Summary Population and
     Housing Characteristics, Mississippi, 1990.




I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1









Long Beach's 1990 population density of 1,564.8 persons per
square mile is fairly normal among comparably sized cities
in the State.   That figure represents a drastic reduction
from the City's 1980 population density of 2595.1 persons
per square mile prior to the 1981 annexation.

                         Table 6
  Population Densities for Harrison County, Long Beach,
    Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville,
                     1980 and 1990.

Governmental Unit   Land Area (Sa. Miles) Persons/Sa. Mile

Harrison County             581.0               284.6
Long Beach                   10.1             1,564.8
Biloxi                       19.6             2,363.2
Gulfport                     22.6             1,804.2
Pass Christian                8.4               661.5
D'Iberville                   4.7             1,397.0

    Source:   U.S.  Bureau of Census,  General Population
    Characteristics, 1980, and Summary Population and
    Housing Characteristics, Mississippi, 1990.


                         Income

Per capita income for Long Beach residents was the highest
in the County in 1979, 14.5% higher than the County average.
By 1985 that margin had grown to 15.5% even though the
City's  neighbors  of Gulfport  and Pass  Christian had
experienced proportionately higher increases during that
period, with Pass Christian's per capita income edging
slightly ahead.

                         Table 7
Per Capita Income for Harrison County, Long Beach, Biloxi
 Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1979 and 1985.

                                   Per Capita Income
Governmental Unit                1979    1985    % Chanae

Harrison County                  $5807   $8622       48.5
Long Beach                        6649    9955       49.7
Biloxi                            5687    8557       50.5
Gulfport                          6456    9734       56.3
Pass Christian                    6367    9995       57.0
D'Iberville                       N/A     N/A       N/A

   Source:   U.S. Bureau of Census, County and City Data
   Book, 1988.








                           17











The median household income for Long Beach in 1979 was
$15,634, 16.7% higher than that of Harrison County, and
29.2% higher than that of the State.   Long Beach's median
family income was the highest in the County, 14.1% higher
than the average.   Long Beach's 11% of households below
poverty level is substantially lower than other cities in
the County, being 20.9% lower than the County-wide rate and
41.2% below the State's rate.

                        Table 8
 Median Household Income and Percent Below Poverty Level
    for Harrison County, Long Beach, Biloxi, Gulfport,
          Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1979.

Governmental  Median Household  Median Family    % Below
   Unit          Income            Income     Poverty Level

Harrison County  $13,402            $15,712         13.9
Long Beach        15,634             17,925         11.0
Biloxi            12,226             14,400         16.1
Gulfport          12,715             14,977         17.1
Pass Christian    16,075             16,695         28.4
D'Iberville       15,148             15,987         13.5

    Source:   U.S. Bureau of Census, County and City Data
    Book, 1988.


                       Employment

The professional and related services sector and the retail
trade sector were the predominant employment sectors for
Long Beach in 1980, employing 25.9% and 18.9% respectively
of the City's workers.   The public administration and
manufacturing sectors followed, providing employment for
9.8% and 9.4% of the City's work force respectively. Table
9, on the following page, illustrates the employment of City
residents by employment sector and the projected average
weekly salaries of persons employed in those sectors in the
Mississippi coastal area.

















                           18









                         Table 9
Percent of Working Residents in Long Beach, by Employment
    Sector, 1980, and Projected 1992 Salaries for the
Mississippi Coastal Area which Correspond to the Sectors.

EmDlovment Sector               % Emplovment  1992 Salaries*

Professional & Related Services      25.9          N/A
Retail Trade                         18.9       $ 222/week
Public Administration                 9.8      $ 325/week
Manufacturing                         9.4       $ 517/week
Construction                          7.2      $ 371/week
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate      6.1      $ 379/week
Communications/Public Utilities       5.1       $ 502/week
Transportation                        5.1       $ 502/week
Personal, Entertainment and
   Recreation Services                4.3      $ 382/week
Others                                8.3           N/A

    Sources:  U.S. Bureau of the Census, General Social and
    Economic Characteristics, Mississippi, 1980; and, *
    Mississippi  Employment Security Commission,  Annual
    Planning Information for the Gulf Coast Service Delivery
    Area, 1992.

According to Mississippi Employment Security Commission
projections, between 1989 and 2000, the Mississippi coastal
area should experience considerable increases in the
professional and related services (17.5%) and the trade
(17.7%) sectors, Long Beach's two largest sources of
employment.

However, the City's next two largest sectors of employment,
public administration and manufacturing, are expected to
show only modest increases (3.9% and 4.3% respectively)
during that period.   The following table  illustrates
projected employment increases by sector from 1989 - 2000.

                        Table 10
 Projected Employment Increases by Sector from 1989-2000
            for the Mississippi Coastal Area.

    Employment Sector                   Proiected Increase

Services                                      22.1%
Trade (Wholesale and Retail)                  17.7%
Professional and Related Services             17.5%
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate            14.9%
Construction                                  12.7%
Communication, Transportation
   and Public Utilities                       12.5%
Manufacturing                                   4.3%
Government                                      3.9%

    Source:   Mississippi Employment Security Commission,
   Annual Planning Information, Gulf Coast Service Delivery
   Area, 1992.


                          19









The  three  Mississippi  coastal  counties,  particularly
Harrison and Hancock, have faired relatively well compared
to the State's unemployment average over the past 2 1/2
years or so.  In September, 1991, all three counties were
well below the State's unemployment rate of 8.0%. Table 11
depicts the unemployment rates for Harrison, Hancock and
Jackson Counties for selected months from January,  1989
through September, 1991.

                        Table 11
   Unemployment Rates for Harrison, Hancock and Jackson
        Counties, January, 1989 - September, 1991.

                            Unemployment Rate
   Month\Year    Harrison Co.  Hancock Co.  Jackson Co.

September, 1991      6.7%           6.4%        7.5%
May, 1991            6.4%           6.4%        7.4%
January, 1991        6.6%           6.8%        7.8%
September, 1990      6.4%          7.2%         7.4%
May, 1990            5.3%          4.7%         6.5%
January, 1990        7.0%           5.1%        8.3%
September, 1989      6.7%          5.4%         9.5%
May, 1989            7.8%           7.3%       10.1%
January, 1989        8.0%           7.7%       11.3%

    Source:   Mississippi Employment Security Commission,
    Labor Market Data, February, 1989 - October, 1991.

The high percentage of Long Beach workers whose places of
employment were outside the city in 1980 (80.4%) illustrates
the need for job creation within the City and validates the
City's image as a "bedroom community". Table 12 illustrates
the percentage of residents over the age of 16 who were
working outside their area of residence in 1980 for Harrison
County, and the individual cities within the County.

                        Table 12
  Percentage of Workers Aged 16 and Over Working Outside
    Area of Residence for Harrison County, Long Beach,
 Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1980.

    Governmental Unit          Percent

    Harrison County             41.8
    Long Beach                  80.4
    Biloxi                      64.1
    Gulfport                    32.9
    Pass Christian              70.5
    D'Iberville                 95.9

    Source:   U.S.  Bureau of Census,  General Social and
    Economic Characteristics, Mississippi, 1980.





                           20









                      Retail Trade

In fiscal year 1991, gross annual sales in Long Beach were
nearly $5.3 million (7.3%) higher than in 1986, while the
County's gross  sales had fallen by nearly  $63 million
(4.4%).  As can be seen in Tables 12 And 13, Long Beach's
total annual gross sales had fluctuated moderately from 1986
through 1990, and then in 1991 increased dramatically by
$11.3 million (17.1%).

Annual  gross  automotive  sales declined by nearly  $1.7
million (19.8%) in the City, and by nearly $63 million
(4.4%) in the County from 1986 to 1991.

In 1991 machinery equipment and supplies sales were lower by
over $39,000 (3.2%) in the City compared to their 1986
total, despite an annual increase of over 108% in 1990.
Conversely, the County's total was nearly $11.1 million
(30.4%) higher in 1991 than in 1986.

Food and beverage sales were up by nearly $7.7 million
(27.1%) in the City, with the bulk of that increase
occurring in FY 1991.  The County's gross annual food and
beverage sales were over $54 million (17.1%) higher in 1991
than in 1986.

Furniture and fixtures sales were down by over $4 million
(63.8%) from their 1986 totals in Long Beach in 1991, and
down by over $2 million (5.3%) in the County. However, both
Long Beach and the County had increased sales in this
industry group for both 1990 and 1991.

Gross annual public utilities sales grew by nearly $2
million (54.5%) in the City, and by nearly $9.5 million
(15.1%) in the County from 1986 to 1991.

Apparel and general merchandise sales were over $3.8 million
(47.7%) higher in Long Beach in 1991 than in 1986. Sales in
this industry group have fluctuated wildly in the City in
the past few years (40.7% in 1991, and +304.1% in 1991.
Sales in the County for this industry group have experienced
fairly steady moderate growth during those years, with the
1991 total over $20 million  (10.8%) higher than that of
1986.

Annual lumber and building materials sales had fallen by
over $4.7 million (47.1%) in 1991 from the 1986 total in the
City, and by nearly $27 million (25.7%) in the County.

Miscellaneous retail sales, while showing a steady and
moderate annual increase in the County, were over $440,000
(6.7%) lower in the City in 1991 than in 1986. Conversely,
the County total was nearly $11.1 million higher in 1991
than in 1986.





                          21










                         Table 13
 Total Annual Gross Sales in Harrison County, Long Beach,
Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and D'Iberville, 1987-91.

       Harrison County                       Long Beach
   Amount       % Change    Year         Amount      % Change

$1,380,021,296    -3.82       1987      $ 67,743,991   - 6.02
 1,294,726,359    -6.18       1988        64,289,427   - 5.10
 1,331,409,161    +2.83       1989        67,674,436   + 5.27
 1,349,106,273    +1.33       1990        66,066,833   - 2.38
 1,372,084,293    +1.70       1991        77,370,116   +17.11


           Biloxi                             Gulfport
    Amount       % Change    Year         Amount      % Change

$   386,719,223   -6.78       1987     $419,460,347   - 5.04
    375,989,159   -2.77       1988      373,290,298   -11.01
    389,855,312   +3.69       1989      381,696,502   + 2.25
    394,640,079   +1.23       1990      380,119,123   - 0.41
    403,583,301   +2.27       1991      378,884,108   - 0.32


       Pass Christian                      D'Iberville
    Amount       % Change    Year      Amount         % Change

  $    16,611,539   -5.19    1987      $ N/A             N/A
     17,145,692   +3.22       1988       23,838,530*    N/A
     16,589,412   -3.24       1989       71,728,307      N/A
     15,237,109   -8.15       1990       71,240,085   - 0.68
     16,449,015   +7.95       1991       73,631,375   + 3.36

    (* D'Iberville incorporated in 1988.  This total does
    not represent an entire year.)

    Source:   Mississippi State Tax Commission - Annual
    Report 1991, and Service Bulletins, 1986-1990.


Tables 14 and 15, on the following two pages, depict the
amount of change in gross sales from the previous year, by
industry group, in Harrison County and in Long Beach for the
years 1987-1991.














                            23









                         Table 14
    Amount of Change in Gross Sales from Previous Year
     by Industry Group in Harrison County, 1987-1991.
           (In millions of dollars and percent)

Industry Group          1987    1988    1989    1990    1991

Total               $  -54.9   -85.3   +36.7   +17.7   +23.0
                  %  - 3.8   - 6.2   + 2.8   + 1.3   + 1.7

Automotive          $  -31.0   -49.2   - 7.6   - 6.7   + 2.9
                  %  -10.4   -18.2   - 3.4   - 3.1   + 1.4

Machinery, Equip. $  - 1.3   -  .7   + 9.0   +  .4   + 3.7
  & Supplies       %  - 3.6   - 2.0   +26.0   +  .9   + 8.5

Food & Beverages  $  + 8.3   -28.4   +21.5   +24.5   +28.4
                  %  + 2.6   - 8.7   + 7.2   + 7.6   + 8.2

Furniture          $  - 2.5   - 2.4   - 1.7   + 3.0   + 1.5
  & Fixtures       %  - 6.2   - 6.4   - 4.9   + 8.9   + 4.1

Public Utilities  $  + 3.0   + 3.5   +35.2   -30.0   - 2.2
                  %  + 4.8   + 5.3   +50.8   -28.7   - 2.9

Apparel & Gen.    $  - 4.4   + 5.7   + 5.4   + 8.9   + 4.4
  Merchandise      %  - 2.4   + 3.2   + 2.9   + 4.6   + 2.2

Lumber & Building $  -19.0   - 4.5   - 5.6   + 4.6   - 2.5
  Materials        %  -18.1   - 5.3   - 6.9   + 6.1   - 3.0

Misc. Retail        $  +  .4   -  .9   - 1.8   + 7.7   + 3.2
                  %  +  .4   - 1.0   - 2.0   + 8.4   + 3.3

Misc. Services    $  -10.4   + 1.2   + 2.1   + 5.8   + 2.4
                  %  -13.5   + 1.9[B + 3.1   + 8.3   + 3.3

Wholesale           $  -11.1   -19.9   + 4.6   + 2.8   + 2.8
                  %  -13.0   -26.9   + 8.6   + 4.8   + 4.5

Contracting        $  +11.9   + 7.8   -25.3   - 2.0   -21.2
                  %  +  .9   + 5.6   -17.1   - 1.6   -17.6

Recreation          $  + 1.7   +  .6   +  .4   +  .8   -  .6
  & Amusement      %  +45.3   +11.0   + 7.3   +11.8   - 8.2

Total Retail       $  -43.8   -65.4   +32.0   +14.9   +20.2
                  %  - 3.3   - 5.0   + 2.6   + 1.2   + 1.6

      Source:  Mississippi State Tax Commission - Annual
      Report 1991, and Service Bulletins 1986-1990.







                            24









                         Table 15
   Amount of Change in Gross Sales from Previous Year,
       by Industry Group in Long Beach, 1987-1991.
           (In millions of dollars and percent)

Industry GrouD      _   1987    1988    1989    1990    1991

Total               $  - 4.0   - 3.5   + 3.4   -  1.6  + 11.3
                  %  - 6.0   - 5.1   + 5.3   -  2.4  + 17.1

Automotive          $  - 1.6   -  .5   +  .5   +   .6  -   .6
                  %  -19.0   - 7.7   + 7.6   +  8.3  -  7.9

Machinery, Equip. $  -  .4   -  .3   +  .1   +   .7  -   .2
  & Supplies       %  -29.9   -36.8   +23.8   +108.1  - 15.2

Food & Beverages  $  + 1.0   -  .04  -  .4   +  1.8  +  5.4
                  %  + 3.5   - 1.5   - 1.5   +  6.3  + 17.5

Furniture           $  -  .2   +  .1   -  .4   +   .05+   .03
  & FiXtures       %  -22.7   +18.1   -72.7   + 30.3  + 11.7

Public Utilities  $  +  .7   +  .4   + 3.3   -  2.5  +   .02
                  %  +20.5   +10.2   +69.1   - 31.4  +  3.0

Apparel & Gen.      $  - 1.8   -  .8   -  .5   -  2.0  +  9.0
  Merchandise      %  -22.1   -13.6        8.4   - 40.7  +304.1


Lumber & Building $  - 2.1   - 2.0   +  .7   +   .2  -  1.5
  Materials        %  -21.4   -25.0   +12.6   +  2.4  - 22.2

Misc. Retail        $  +  .1   +  .2   -  .3   +   .4  -   .8
                  %  + 1.4   + 2.7   - 5.0   +  6.6  - 11.4

Misc. Services    $  -  .2   +  .1   +  .02  -   .5  +   .2
                  %  - 6.5   + 3.5   +  .5   - 15.4  +  7.2

Wholesale           $    --       --        --      --       --


Contracting         $  +  .1   -  .6   +  .4   -   .4  -   .2
                  %  + 5.5   -27.0   +26.0   - 20.2  - 11.1

Recreation          $    --       --        --      --       --
  & Amusement      %     --       --        --      --       --

Total Retail        $  -  .4   - 3.5   + 3.4   -  1.6  + 11.3
                  %  - 6.0   - 5.1   + 5.3   -  2.4  + 17.1

      Source:  Mississippi State Tax Commission - Annual
      Report 1991, and Service Bulletins 1986-190.







                           25








U       ~~The following two tables, Tables 16 and 17, depict the major
        manufacturers located in Long Beach and Harrison County
        respectively, along with their total number of employees.

                                  Table 16
                       Major Long Beach Manufacturers

                                                           Number of
              Company                    Product          Employees

I       ~~Regina Corporation        Vacuum Cleaners,          700
                                      Electric Brooms
        Stuffed Shirt, Inc.        Ladies Apparel             160
I     ~~Gulf Coast Apparel          Ladies' and Men's         130
                                      Apparel Corp.
        American Commercial        Hotel & Restaurant          92
*        ~~China                      China
        Planning Systems, Inc.     Electronic Hardware         22
        Dolphin Press, Inc.        Lithographic Printing       21
        High Speed Copy Center      Offset Printing            18
I     ~~Customahufacturing          Rubber Products            12
        TAC Tape Co.                Pressure Sensitive          8
       *                             ~~~~~~~~~Tape

             Source: Harrison County Development Commission -
             Harrison County Manufacturing Directory, 1991.



                                  Table 17
  I            ~~~~Other Major Harrison County Manufacturers
                                                           Number of
I     ~~Company                     Product                Employees
        E.I. DuPont DeNemours      Titanium Dioxide          700
          & Company
        Avondale Industries         Fiberglass marine         380
                                      Vessels
        Avondale Gulfport Marine   Marine Products,           280
       I                            ~~~~~~~~~Hovercraft
        Pass Christian Industries  Women's Apparel            275
        Maybelle Dress Mfg. Co.    Women's Apparel            270
I     ~~Gulf Publishing Co.         Newspapers                262
        Trinity Marine - Gulfport  Container Cranes,         240
                                      Barges, etc.
        Colonial Baking Co.         Bread & Rolls             228
        Indal Aluminum Gulfport    Aluminum Extrusions       210
                                      .& Billets
        Struthers Industries       Heat Exchangers, Pre-    200

                                      ssure Vessels, etc.






                                     26









                         Table 17
        Other Major Harrison County Manufacturers
                        (Continued)

                                                  Number of
Company                    Product                Employees

Biloxi Pre-Stress          Prestressed Concrete      180
  Concrete                   Products
Trinity Marine Group        Shipbuilding &            164
                             Repair

Goldin Industries          Metal Salvage, Wood        156
                             Trusses, Metal
                              Products
Swingster Co.              Baseball Caps              155
C. F. Gollott & Son        Seafood                   125
  Seafood
Teledyne Irby Steel         Pressure Vessels,         120
                              Pipe, etc.
Redman'Homes               Mobile Homes               113
Fleck, Inc.                Automotive Wiring          110
                             Harness
McDermott Inc.             Heavy Steel Fabri-         107
                              cation (Marine)
Turnbull Metal Products    Marine Furnishings         103
R. A. Fayard Co.            Frozen Shrimp             100
Royal Maid                 Coat Liners                 95
Sterling Drug              Phamaceuticals              93
                              & Baby Powder
Allied Enterprises of       Fishing Lures,             92
  Gulfport                   Flounder Lights, etc
Del's Seaway Shrimp        Shrimp & Oysters            90
  & Oyster Co.
Hartson-Kennedy Cabinet    Countertops                 84
  Top Co.
Coast Coca-Cola            Soft Drinks                 83
  Bottling Co.
Heinz Pet Products          Cat Food                   79
Arizona Chemical Co.        Hydrocarbon Resins         73
LaValley Construction Co.  Fiberglass Containers       63
                              & Parts
David Hall Seafood         Shrimp                     60
Golden Gulf Coast Packing  Frozen Shrimp               50
Gulf Pride Enterprises      Frozen Shrimp              50
R. Fournier & Sons          Seafood                    50

    Source:  Harrison County Development Commission -
    Harrison County Manufacturing Directory, 1991.










                             27



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Land Use and Zoning
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I











                          LAND USE AND ZONING

                                Land use
        The study area consists of approximately 192 acres of Long
        Beach's urban waterfront area, including beaches and the
        land area of the harbor.   For the purposes of this study,
        land use has been divided into six categories: commercial;
        government\civic; church property; single-family
I      ~~residential;  multi-family  residential;  and,  undeveloped
        property.
        Approximately 46 acres, just over 29% of the study area
        north of US 90, is occupied by commercial enterprises (see
        Map 2 and Table 18).  This land use category consists of a
        variety of retail establishments, professional offices,
I      ~~restaurants and lounges.   The vast majority of commercial
        acreage is located along and adjacent to US 90 and Jeff
        Davis Avenue, but commercial uses (especially professional
I      ~~offices) are gradually creeping into neighboring residential
        areas.

        There is currently a considerable amount of area available
I      ~~for additional commercial use,  particularly  in existing
        vacant or partially vacant buildings along both US 90 and
        Jeff Davis Avenue. There are two large vacant buildings at
I      ~the  intersection  of  those  two  streets  which  could
        accommodate a variety of commercial activity. There also is
        considerable vacant space available in the Oak Harbor
        shopping center on Us 90.  Additionally, there are several
        vacancies in buildings along Jeff Davis Avenue which could
        accmmdae shops and    offices.
            Whie tereareapproximately 35 acres in the study area
        south of US 90, only six or seven of those are commercially
        usable,  all along the north end of the harbor.   of that
I      ~~acreage, only approximately two acres remain available for
        development, with over half of the developable space
        currently occupied by the Chimneys Restaurant, TL's Harbor
        Shop, C J's Waterfront Landing, the Long Beach Yacht Club
        and the Chamber of Commerce. The remaining acreage south of
        US 90 primarily consists of beaches and public parking
*       ~~areas.

        Governmental and civic uses account for nearly eight acres,
        or just over 5% of the area north of US 90.  Included in

        this category are City Hall, McCaughan Elementary School,






                                   29








U       ~~Long Beach Library,  the Masonic Building,  the Long Beach
        Garden Club, a municipal fire station, and the City Park on
        Church Street.  South of US 90, within the study area, the
        Chamber of Commerce and the Harbormaster account for less
        than one acre of usage between them.

*       ~Church  property  within  the  study  area  consists  of
        approximately 6.3 acres, or 4% of the area north of US 90.
        Most of the property in this use category is owned by the
        First Baptist Church of Long Beach, and is along Fifth
        Street between Jeff Davis and Mason Avenues. The Long Beach
        Presbyterian Church property at the corner of Second Street
*       ~~and Burke Avenue is also included.

        Multi-family residential properties account for just under
        seven acres of land use in the study area, all north of US
        90.    This use represents approximately 4.2% of the study
        area north of the highway, and includes the Longue Vue
        Condominiums, Patio Apartments and a small condominium
        complex between Kerr and Fifth Streets.

        Just over 54 acres, or nearly 35% of the study area north of
        the highway, is used for single-family residences. With the
I      ~~exception of a few parcels near the extreme east end of the
        study area, and a fairly large parcel at the west end of the
        area, single family dwellings within the study area are not
        located along either of the primary commercial
        thoroughfares.   Most of the single-family residences are
        located inland and north of Fifth Street,  and generally
*       ~~along the fringes of the study area.

        Within the study area north of the highway, there are
        approximately 13 acres of undeveloped property, just over 8%
I      ~~of the total area.  Nearly all of that property is inland,
        and very little is immediately adjacent to the primary
        commercial areas.

I       ~~Table 18, on the following page, depicts existing land use
        acreages by use category within the primary Study Area. In
        computing acreages as a percentage of the total, the Study
I      ~~Area was split into two distinct areas - north of US 90, and
        south of US 90.















                                  30










                              I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -  - - --- ---                         F RST                    STREET
                                   I'  _ I                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o 000          \ a                 ,
                                        __                      00      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 o%0 0 0o~~\\


                     ..liL1.2!~'  ~  I                                                                  SREET \ \\ STREET





                                F  i -                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~THIRD   000STREET











         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C

                                        ' 0    000   00000o ,0oo               00   00       000     00   00
                                             0000 C,                                                          0       0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~00    0000  0
                    _____________________~~~~~ 000   000000

                                   - -.--------                                                            oo 0 0 0 0 0
                                                      0 0 0 0  ..  ..........  0   0                0 0 00 0 000 KR
                                                        0         00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~? ..                                                                                        2  D'
                                                                         0 0   a ~  ~    ~ ~ ~ i

                                  EXSTN  LAND USE
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0,0....0..1 00
                                                       DA~~~~~~~~~ - - ,LC DMOERS
   I~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 0  0a0 0                                                                                                                             q-
                                                                       ......~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SNL F..... ,O0Y                 
                                               GULF~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HE0OA    PLNNN    COMS O  0EE'E 0RPEfl3










                        Table 18
     Existing Land Use Acreage by Use Category within
                     the Study Area.

                     North of US 90
Use Cateaorv                   Acreage    % of Total
Commercial                       46.1        29.4
Governmental & Civic              7.8         5.0
Church                            6.3         4.0
Multi-family Residential          6.6         4.2
Single-family Residential        54.2        34.5
Undeveloped                      13.0         8.3
Other (streets, etc.)            23.0        14.6
Total                           157.0       100.0

                    South of US 90 *
Commercial                        4.4        12.6
Governmental & Civic               .4         1.1
Undeveloped                       2.2         6.3
Other (beaches, parking,
   streets, etc.)                28.0        80.0
Total                            35.0       100.0

*Acreages for uses south of US 90 are roughly estimated.

                     Zoning Summary

The study area north of US 90 is all zoned either R-l,
Single-family residential; R-2, Medium density residential;
R-O, Residential  Office;  C-l, Commercial\Central Business
District; or, C-2, Highway Commercial District (see Map 3).

While the R-l, single-family residential district zoning is
the most restrictive for development among the districts,
requiring a minimum of 75' by 100' lots with a maximum of
45% coverage, relatively little of the area (approximately
15%) is zoned R-1.  The areas that are zoned R-l are located
along the outer fringe of the study area,  and, with the
possible exception of a few parcels along US 90 at the east
end of the study area, offer little potential for commercial
use and are best suited for their current residential use at
this  time.   As has been common  in many traditionally
residential areas located along the fringes of downtown
areas, numerous residences are being purchased and renovated
for professional offices. While professional offices can be
an integral part of a viable downtown area, the importance
to an economically viable downtown commercial area of having
nearby resident population is often overlooked. Convenient
accessibility for potential patrons involves more than
merely  widening  roads  and  creating  ample  parking,
particularly for downtown areas, it begins with the
convenient proximity of a resident population.






                           3 9









          Only approximately 5% of the study area north of the highway
          is zoned R-2  for medium density residential use.   This
I        ~~zoning district allows single family residential, duplexes
          on on a minimum 75' by 100' lot, and low rise apartments or
          condominiums with density requirements of 4000 square feet
          of lot area per unit.  The small area zoned R-2 is located
          along Russell Avenue and Magnolia Street, near the western
          extremity of the study area, and not in the immediate
*         ~~vicinity of commercial activity.

          The R-O Residential Office District was created to
          accommodate the previously mentioned trend of purchasing and
I       ~~renovating residences for use   primarily as professional
          offices.   Property zoned R-0 consists of only about 5% of
          the study area north of the highway.   Currently the only
         professional office within the portion of the study area
          zoned R-0 is Dr. Kitchings' office with the rest of the area
         being used as single family residential.

I        ~~Approximately 50% of the study area north of US 90 is zoned
          C-1, Central Business District.   This area consists of the
         downtown core, essentially Jeff Davis Avenue and one block
I       ~~to either side of it from the highway to First Street. The
         C-1 Zone allows for a wide variety of commercial activities
         commonly associated with traditional downtown areas.   The
         use requirements of this zone are generally conducive
         orderly growth and compatibility among businesses in the
         area, and are not too restrictive.

I         ~~Some 50 businesses are located within this district,  of
         which 35 are directly on Jeff Davis Avenue.   Over half of
         the businesses along Jeff Davis Avenue have been in business
          less than five years, indicating a high turnover-rate in the
         area. In fact, nine of those businesses have been open for
          less than one year and only five businesses have been there
*         ~~~for over 20 years.

         Of the study area north of US 90, approximately 25% is zoned
         C-2, Highway Commercial.   The C-2 District is the least
I       ~~~restrictive of the commercial zoning districts.   It allows
         most commercial uses and is generally along the major
         traffic routes.   The specific areas within the study area
          which are zoned C-2 are primarily along the north side of US
         90, and adjacent to the C-1 District on both the east and

I         ~~There are currently 20 businesses operating within the C-2
         District.   Most of the businesses in the C-2 District are
         new to the area and have located along the rapidly
I       ~~developing commercial strip along US 90.  only three of the
         businesses in the C-2 District have been in continuous
         operation for over five years.








          The area south of US 90 consists of sand beaches and the
          Long Beach Harbor area.   There is no zoning for either of
I        ~~these areas.  The sand beach areas of Long Beach, as are all
          such areas in Harrison County, are public lands administered
          by the County through the Harrison County Sand Beach
          Authority.   To date,  the City has not chosen to extend
          zoning to the harbor area.
          In general, current zoning within the study area seems
          appropriate to accommodate the types of new businesses and
          expansion of existing businesses needed for economic growth
          in the area.  The City may wish to consider establishing a
I        ~~special zoning district for the Harbor to set some specific
          guidelines for future development in that area.



















      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3







                                                    /1 /i~~~~I  ~~~I/~~I/   /~~~~~/  / ~~WEST                   R~AILROADSTEET RALROAD                                                      STR                                   EET





                                                                              m  P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INET                                                                                         STREET



I                                                     PINE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A STREE,



             I                                   CAJ(~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~VR S-TREET


                                                                                                                          FOUR~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TRE7MET







             I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FFT










   I                                                            NIGN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~00WAY





    *                                                             ~~~~~~~MISSISSIPPI SOUND









                                                                                          ZONING




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       R -0 RIESIDENTIAL./OVFFEE DfSTMCT



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             DISTRICT
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             KGHWAY COt&EWWI.

                                                           GULF REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION                                                                                              DISTRICT



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I                       Traffic and Parking
I
I
I
I
l
l



I  

I
I
I
I
I
I                              f









                         TRAFFIC AND PARKING SUMMARY

                               Traffic Summnary

          Easy, convenient and safe movement of traffic into and out
          of the study area should be the prime goal of traf fic and
I        ~~~transportation planning.   Generally,  street right-of-ways
          occupy over 75 percent of any developed urban area, and
          often more in downtown business areas such as this. Parking
          also typically occupies a considerable amount of land area.
          Traffic and parking are two aspects critical to the success
          of any proposed or existing development regardless of the
*         ~~~nature or type of that development.

          With the present reconstruction of U.S. Highway 90 underway,
          traffic in Long Beach can be considered anything but normal.
I       ~~Motorists  are experiencing some congestion and periodic
          delays,  but nothing very excessive.   As can be seen in
          Table 19, on the following page, U.S. Highway 90 far and
I        ~~away carries the heaviest average daily traffic (ADT) of the
          streets within the study area.   Jeff Davis Avenue and
          Cleveland Avenue are the two busiest north-south streets,
          stemming from the fact that both offer direct access between
          East Railroad Street and U.S. 90. Both streets have signal
          lights at U.S. 90 which permit safer turning movements at
          those intersections, and at the north end, both have four-
          way stops at their intersections with East Railroad Street.
          With the exception of U.S. 90, east-west movement within the
          study area is not such that any of the east-west streets are
          anywhere nearing their capacity to handle the existing
          traffic.   The one-way couple of Third Street and Fourth
          Street between Jeff Davis Avenue and Burke Avenue, operating
          during morning and evening school hours, does have a
          tendency to slow traffic somewhat. This could be confusing
          to unsuspecting motorists as it is in operation only during
I        ~~~specific times each day to correspond to morning arrival and
          afternoon departure of children attending McCaughan
          Elementary School.  Otherwise, with the system of four-way
I        ~~stops strategically placed, the traffic in the study area
          generally moves fairly well.

          As development in the study area increases, or redevelopment
          to more intense commercial activities occurs, it can be
          expected that there will also be a corresponding increase in
          traffic attracted by these activities. When this occurs the
          City will have to examine the existing roadway conditions
          and capacities and devise programs to upgrade streets and
          traffic control devises to increase capacity for moving
          traffic.   The City may also explore  improving  streets
          outside the study area that would offer motorists, not
          destined to the area, an alternate, more convenient route to
*         ~~~their destination.




                                    -37









          The following table lists the average daily traffic counts
          for selected study area streets. These counts were taken by
          the Gulf Regional Planning Commission in December, 1991,
          with the exception of the US 90 count, which was provided by
          the Mississippi State Highway Department in 1990.
      I                            ~~~~~~~~~Table 19
          Average Daily Traffic on Selected Study Area Streets, 1991.

I         ~~~Location                         Averaae Daily Traffic

          West Third Street                            677

          East Third Street                            885

          West Fourth Street                          1433

          East Fourth Street                          1016

          Jeff Davis Avenue                          15120
             (Between Third & Fourth Streets)
          Burke Avenue                                1165
I         ~~~(Between Second & Third Streets)

          Burke Avenue                                2522
I         ~~~(Between Fifth Street & U.S. 90)

          Cleveland Avenue                            4920
*           ~~~(Between Third & Fourth Streets)
          Cleveland Avenue                            6047
*           ~~~(Between Fifth & Kerr Streets)

          Long Beach Harbor Entrance                  2172

I         ~~~us 90 *  (East of Nicholson Avenue)      21900

                 * 1990 Average daily total.

          Sources: GRPC traffic counts, 1991; and, Mississippi State
          Highway Department, 1990.




           / ///// /i       /   /E~ rTE7                                    
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            77 /         EST  RAILROAD  STE                              LAST -RA.RDAr        STREET

                                                                        FIRST             STREET

                               II~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

                 I  PINE   STREET                                          STREET
                                                        SECOND SREET


                  OA(  STREET       1                                          III



                                                  FOURTH  STRM      ~ - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - --
                                                677  15120  STREE 885\    ~      ~\ \\i~




                                         FlrrM                               STREET
          II _ _
          I                                                            ~~2522 
                                                             P                          Y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ERR                   P



          II ~ 9          HKWWAY go                                                                                                   0
                                                                                 gGKWWA  90                    2
                                                                                      0Li2172



                           MISSISSIPPI SOUND





               AVERAGE  DAILY  TRAFFIC

                              COUNTS 1991                                    1






                      H  GULF REGIONAL PLANNING7 CQOM-MISSION
                                                                                                                             39











     I                          ~~~~~~~~Parking summary

          Parking does not appear to be a major problem at the present
          time.  There seems to be an ample supply of parking spaces
          within  the area  for present demand.   The problem,  as
          perceived by some merchants and residents, is that the
          parking spaces are not always conveniently located.   Some
I        ~~businesses,  such as the Hancock Bank,  may occasionally
          generate more demand than existing parking spaces in the
          immediate area can accommodate.   This can cause congestion
I        ~~and become a hazard to traffic.  Where this occurs, it may
          be advisable for the City and the business to
          collaboratively seek solutions, which may include additional
          of f street parking on interior vacant lots behind existing
          buildings.

          There is ample space for parking in the downtown area,
          perhaps not directly in front of or adjacent to a particular
          business, but generally within a short walk of any of the
          area's businesses.   However,  existing parking spaces and
          areas need to be clearly identified and marked to ensure
          efficient utilization of available parking space.

          A windshield survey of available and potential parking in
          the downtown area identified 125 on-street parking spaces
          along Jeff Davis Avenue, with another 200+ on-street spaces
          within less than half a block of that street. Many of these
I        ~~spaces are not marked or identified as parking spaces, but
          the potential is there. Additionally, over 500 existing or
          potential off-street spaces were identified oh parcels along
          Jeff Davis Avenue, including the over 250 spaces available
          at the K&B shopping center and the old National Food Store
          lot.   Although many of these spaces are not generally
          available to the public, area businesses and property owners
I        ~~should work together to designate as many as possible for
          public parking, and properly identify and mark them for easy
*         ~~~recognition by shoppers.

          The waterfront commercial area north of the harbor has ample
          parking facilities for the foreseeable future.   Well over
          500 off-street parking spaces are available to shoppers in
          the Harbor Oaks Shopping Center, and other businesses in
          that area appear to have ample parking as well, either on-
*         ~~~or off-street.

          With the recent parking development in the harbor area,
          there seems to be ample parking to meet the areas needs for
          some time to come, unless some major development occurs
          (possibly as a result of dockside gaming ventures).   With






                                    40







I         ~~the completion of the proposed beach/harbor access project
          at Jeff Davis Avenue, another 350-400 parking spaces would
          be added to the over 550 spaces existing within the harbor
I        ~~area.   Additionally,  there are other areas in the harbor
          area that could be improved to accommodate more parking, but
          considering the finite quantity of developable space within
          the area, careful consideration should be given before
          dedicating -more of the harbor area to parking.
          Existing and potential parking areas as identified in the
I        ~~windshield survey are depicted on Map 5 on the following
          page.





                                                            IS
                     */ I! I    I               I      )   i /I     srwr      Iatf;~,
                            / I                                                                                     wl     ~  c~U1 o   I I





                                               _____  '1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,/i/                                                                      2~~~~~~~50 Spaces
                                                                                      __                                                               16J''--~   ~'  = 25  Spaces

                                                       .'                                                  (~)   96~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Spaces
              LL.'                     ' Iii    1'                              , 
                                   -Am\  \ \                                                                                \X \ \isting & Potential








                         *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                                                                         zs  nr~~~~~c!  ~~~~-  nrrrr ~~~~Parking Areas













                                                                         (r~               '~     --                 - -                                6   pc 
                                             II!'t      I                          g2,,I                    \i   \\!\  \         \I  I         I! O~~~~L tl   (  25 Spaces








                                                                                                                                                     *   I250 Spaces
*  ~i'III   *\                                                 ~\\\                 l~        i  i     i H-\  \j                                  ï¿½  l5Spaces

                                                                                         \\ ~\~\                 1                         '-- @0Sae





                                                                                                                                           -No     * 16   Spaces
                                                                                                                                                      215 Spaces
                                                                                                                                                      1296 Spaces
                                                                              ~~~aan  O 15   t    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 160 Spaces







                                                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~L--~.                                                 -Q        
                                                                                                                                                       *7  20 Spaces
                                                                                                                                                         15 Spaces





                                                                                                                                                        130 Spaces



                                 MISSSIO                                                                                                        *20  45 Spaces
                                                                                                                                                     *11  15 Spaces
                                                                                                                                                    *12  24 Spaces        r
                                                                                  O              0.~~~~~~~~U 


                                                                                                                                                         500 Spaces







I~~~~~~~
                                                                                                                                                         57 Spaces        d In
                                                                                                                                                         21 Spaces




                                   I                                                                                                                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~109 Spaces
                                                                                                                          Is~~~~*23  400 Spaces
                                                                                                                                                         180Existing Space
                                 MISSISSIPPI SOUND   -~                          -                                                      d   *20 75 Spaces
                                                                                                           I                                           ~~~~~~~~~~~~~50 Spaces
                                                                                                           \u                          ~     ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~17 Snaces
                                             i                                               t                                                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*23  400 Spaces
                                              I                                                                                                   O  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Existing Snace
                                                                                                 Ir\\~.~
                                                                       ~~~~~~~~~~~PARj~~~~~~~KING                                                  * ~Potential Space

                                                                                                                                                       ON-STREET PARKING
                                II~ -i~'~~~ï¿½                                                                                                     (Designated in quantities,
                                                                                                                                                   by street area, by numbers
                                                                              LIE  wlu   c  U11~--al~  I-,02-B  i/Aa~~~l Hwritten                         in  streets.)
                                             I3) Ic ,    I~il   iNqJ                              ~                                              (Includes paved, unpaved,
                                                                                                                                                   marked and unmarked space
                                 VFA7 T   -     (DFW        T) V   IAk R                                                                       Awhich could be made avail-
                                                                                                                                                    able for parking.)
                           OULF "  O~CNAL -'1JNN1NC, CC'NiM IS -S  N
                                                                                                                                                                 42



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
         I|~ ~Issues and Concerns
I
I

I

I
I
I
I
I
I
              I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I                            I
I
I
I
I
I










    *                        ~~~~~~~~IS SUES AND CONCERNS

          During the course of several Advisory Committee meetings,
          several issues and concerns repeatedly surfaced as topics of
I        ~~discussion.   Interestingly, most of those issues were also
          mentioned by merchants and\or residents of the City in the
          opinion surveys which were conducted.

I         ~~The following listing represents the basic issues facing the
          City of Long Beach as identified during the course of this
*         ~~~study.

          Figure 1. Issues and Concerns Facing the City of Long Beach
          as Identified by the Long Beach Urban Waterfront Advisory
*         ~~~Committee.

             1. The downtown area is decaying, and steps must be take
                 to improve the area's  image.   Buildings in which
 I             ~~~~merchants are located have deteriorated and need to
                 be rennovated to create a more appealing shopping
                 atmosphere.
             2. The are no incentives for either new businesses to
                 locate or for existing businesses to expand in the
                 downtown area.
             3. Inconsistent land use is a hindrance to optimum
 I             ~~~~commercial development in the downtown area.
             4. Streets and sidewalks are not adequately maintained
                 to encourage shopping activity in the downtown area.
I          ~~~5.  The existing mixture of downtown merchants does not
                 offer a diverse enough array of goods and services to
                 attract residents to the area.
             6. Wind damage insurance rates for urban waterfront area
                 businesses are high, and often inaccessible.
             7. Long Beach residents do not sufficiently support Long
                 Beach merchants.
I          ~~~8.  The waterfront commercial area is the most dynamic
                 commercial area in the City, and development must be
                 carefully guided to insure optimum use and protection
 I             ~~~~~of the area.
             9. Growth and development in the waterfront area
                 particularly south of US 90, is limited by elevation,
                 environmental and legal restrictions.
             10. Access to the Long Beach Harbor and surrounding beach
                 areas is inadequate, particularly from the downtown
                 area via Jeff Davis Avenue.
I          ~~~11. There  are vacant buildings  in prime  commercial
                 locations within the urban waterfront area which are
                 capable of accommodating a variety of business
 I             ~~~~enterprises.   Suitable merchant  tenants  must be
                 sought for these locations.






                                      44







I            ~~~12. Long Beach does not currently get its share of the
                County,'s tourism  industry.    The  City  needs  to
                cultivate attractions which will increase tourist
*               ~~~~~activity.
            13. Transportation access to the City is inadequate,
                particularly from the north. Access to the City from
                I-10 is indirect, and along two-laned roads which are
                generally poorly maintained with poor signage.
                Public transit to the City is very limited, and
                primarily serves only the beach area.
I           ~~~14. Sales  tax  revenues  generated  in the  City  are
                relatively low, and ad valorem taxes are high.
            15. Many Long Beach residents must leave the City to find
I              ~~~~~suitable employment.
            16. There is property available for development in the
                Long Beach Industrial Park for which suitable
                industries should be sought.
            17. It is of the utmost importance that the quality of
                life of Long Beach residents be protected and
                enhanced.
I           ~~~18. While citing high taxes, the need for job creation,
                and the need for improving municipal services and
                infrastructure, some residents do not want additional
                businesses or industry in the City.
            19. If dockside gambling is legalized in Harrison County,
                there is considerable potential for the location of
                such activity in the Long Beach Harbor.  Should that
I              ~~~~occur, the area is likely to experience unprecedented
                growth.   If dockside gambling is not approved in
                Harrison County, there will still be the possibility
I              ~~~~that the City could experience increased tourist
                traffic from the casinos slated to be developed in
                Hancock County in the near future.













     I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
   I ~~~~Assets and Constraints
I
I
I
I
I I 
I
I
I
I
I
I









                           ASSETS AND CONSTRAINTS

          Through the group discussions of the Advisory Committee and
          the comments of merchants and residents, several of the
          City's attributes which enhance the quality of life of its
          residents as well as the City's potential for growth and
          development  were  identified.    The  following  listing
          represents those attributes, or assets.

I         ~~~Figure 2. Assets of the City of Long Beach as Identified by
          the Long Beach Urban Waterfront Advisory committee.

*           ~~~1.  The City borders the Mississippi  Sound and has
                beautiful sand beaches extending along its entire
                south  side.      The  beaches  provide  extensive
                recreational opportunities for residents and tourists.
            2. The City has a public harbor which provides access to
                the waters of the Mississippi Sound and the Gulf of
                Mexico for recreational and commercial activities.
                The harbor also has great potential for further
                development for both recreational and tourism-related
                commercial activity.
            3. The City is blessed with a relatively warm sub-
                tropical climate which is very appealing to many
                northern tourists.
            4. The City has a viable waterfront commercial area along
 I             ~~~~US 90, which has great potential for continued growth.
            5. The City has one of the most highly acclaimed public
                school  systems  in  the  State.    Educational
 I             ~~~~opportunities are further enhanced by the presence of
                the University of Southern Mississippi, Gulf Park
                Campus in Long Beach, and the Gulf ,Coast Community
                College in nearby Gulfport.
            6. The City's has a relatively low crime rate.
            7. The City has one of the lowest poverty rates in the
                State.
I           8~~~. The City has an intimate, small town atmosphere which
                fosters a strong sense of community among residents.
            9. The City has an industrial park which has some major
 I             ~~~~centers of employment within it, and has available
                space to accommodate expansion of existing industries
                as well as the development of additional industrial
 *              ~~~~ventures.

          In the Committee's open discussions, in addition to
          identifying some of the City's major assets, several
I        ~~negative factors which are likely to hinder growth in the
          city  were  identified.    These  negative  factors,  or
          constraints are listed in Figure 3, on the following page.







                                    47








I          ~~~Figure 3.  Constraints to Growt h and Development in the City
           of Long Beach as Identified by the Long Beach Urban
*          ~~~Waterfront Advisory Committee.

             1.  The run-down appearance of the downtown area is not
                 conducive to shopping activity.
             2.  Street and sidewalks  in the downtown area are not
                adequately maintained to encourage shopping activity.
             3.  There are no public amenities such as restrooms, water
                 fountains, beaches, waste cans, etc. to accommodate
 I             ~~~~~shoppers.
             4.  Downtown merchants do not offer a wide enough variety
                of goods and services to draw residents into the area
 *              ~~~~~to shop.
             5.  The survival rate of downtown businesses is not good.
             6.  There is little or no cooperation between downtown and
                waterfront businesses to improve the business climate
 I             ~~~~of the area.
             7.  Long Beach residents do not adequately support City
                businesses.
I            8~~~. High ad valorem taxes are a deterrent to both the
                expansion of existing businesses, and the location of
                new businesses in the urban waterfront area.
*           ~~~9.  High wind damage insurance rates are an additional
                burden to area businesses.
             10. Waterfront development, particularly in the harbor
                area, is limited by flood elevation and environmental
 I             ~~~~restrictions.
            11.  Vacant commercial buildings at the intersection of US
                90 and Jeff Davis Avenue do not project the image of a
                viable commercial area to motorists at the primary
            12.  There  is  inadequate  access  to  the  harbor  and
                 surrounding beach areas, particularly from the
                downtown area via Jeff Davis Avenue.
            13.  Transportation access to the City is inadequate,
                particularly from the north.   Access from 1-10 is
 I             ~~~~inconvenient,  following generally poorly maintained
                and signed two-laned roads.
           14.  Public transit to and in the City is very limited, and
 I             ~~~~mainly confined to the waterfront area.   Fixed-route
                transit service consists of a Coast Area Transit
                trolley route along US 90 which only runs a limited
                schedule on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.
           15.  The City has not been able to attract enough business
                and\or industry to provide employment for most of its
                residents, causing many residents to have to commute
 I             ~~~~to other nearby communities to work.   A considerable
                number of the City's young people are moving from the
                City to find suitable employment.







                                     .48



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Opinion Surveys
I
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I







     I                          ~~~~~~~~OPINION SURVEYS

          To obtain insight f rom Long Beach merchants and residents
I        ~~~regarding their opinions of existing conditions in the urban
          waterf ront area of their City, and to acquire their ideas
          pertaining to improving the area, two surveys were
          undertaken. First, a merchant survey was initiated in which
          all merchants in the study area were interviewed and asked
          to respond to the survey questions.  A resident survey was
          then undertaken in which residents were interviewed in their
I        ~~~homes and at local grocery stores, banks, beauty shops and
          other businesses to acquire their perspectives regarding
          existing and potential conditions in the downtown and
I        ~~~waterfront areas of the City.
                                Merchant Survey

I         ~~~The survey f orm used in the merchant survey (see merchant
           survey form in Appendix C) was developed to obtain
           information and opinions from the urban waterfront area
I        ~~merchants,  both for the purposes of this study,  and to
          provide the types of information commonly sought by the
          Mississippi Mainstreet Program for downtown areas.

I         ~~A total of 71 merchants were identified within the study
           area. Each merchant was personally contacted by either GRPC
           staff or Advisory Committee members, and 60 of the 71
          merchants answered the survey questions.
                          Summnary of Survey Findings

           The types of businesses found in the study area included:

              - restaurants (7)               - motels
I           ~~~~- beauty shops (5)            - discount stores
              - medical offices (5)           - drug stores
              - antique shops (4)             - liquor store
U           ~~~~- banks (4)                   - stationery
              - gift shops (3)                - pet store
              - auto repair (3)               - sign shop
              - florist (2)                   - oil exploration
              - insurance agencies (2)        - department store
              - attorneys' offices (2)        - grocery store
              - gas stations (2)              - beauty supplies
 I           ~~~~- fast food restaurants (2)   - boat sales/storage
              - lounges (2)                   - hobby shop
              - women's apparel (2)           - tackle shop
 I           ~~~~- offset printing             - charter boats
              - pawn shop                     - auto parts
              - pool parlor                   - floor covering
              - oriental foods                - barber shop
              - hardware                      - accounting
              - furniture                     - pet grooming
 *~~~~ -cleaners                               - art gallery



                                      50








          Map 6, on the following page, is a directory depicting the
          location of businesses within the study area. The numerical
I        ~~~representations of the businesses on the map correspond with
          the listing in Figure 4 on the page immediately following
          the map.





                     ////                         WEST  RAILROADJ SR                                        EAST    RAILROAD  STREET7

                                                                                          FIRST               STREET

                 /  /i/,/,/i //                          ROAKI  STREET
                 I   I                     iT -  - - -  -- - ----
                                  li~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~




                                                                                               W~~~~i

 HF i_                                                                                                  \\\\h? n  \\ \


                                                     IIH -                                 STREET

                                                                    I                    O0
                                                       e                                                          o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

                                           I                                                                                                              Pl
I~~~~~I  II                                                                      e

                                  RGHWAY 90                                                                                                            Cf
                                                                                                       RGl W7y





                                         MISSISSIPPI  SOUND


                              BUSINESS DIRECTORY





                    I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\
                                GULF REGIONAL PL ANN1\1 INJ G COMMISSION                        Numbers Correspond To The List
                                GULF REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION On The Following Page                                                            52









Figure 4. Urban Waterfront Area Business Listing.
(Map numbers refer to Map 6 on the previous page.)

Map #       Business             Map#        Business

  1  Dr. Kitchings, M.D.          37  Van's Oriental Food
  2  Cleveland Chiropractic       38  One-Stop Auto Parts
     Avon                             Automasters Auto Repair
  3  La Place De La Mer Condos   39  Corner Pocket
  4  California Concepts Hair         Professional Flooring
 5  MS School of Massage             Hitching Post Rest.
     Wellness Therapies Ctr.      40  Long Beach City Park
  6  Indy's                       41  K-Mart
 7  Norm's Hobbies\Raceway       42  Fantastic Sam's
     Bussler International            Sav-A-Center
  8  Barnaby's Restaurant         43  Fast Lane
     The Depression Shop          44  Dr. Rayner
     Dr. Cohen Foot Specialist   45  Hair Effects
     Amelia's Restaurant          46  Merchants Bank
  9  Gulf Coast Yacht Brokerage  47  Riemann's Funeral Home
 10  Long Beach Garden Club       48  Long Beach Chevron
 11  Emerald Coast Youth Center  49  May Wah Restaurant
 12  Tootsie's Beauty Shop        50  Long Beach Car Wash
 13  Hancock Bank                 51  Patio Apartments
 14  Randy Hart Insurance         52  Jeff Davis Auto Sales
 15  Ace Hardware                 53  Heritage House Gifts
     Frank McCreary III, Atty.   54  Fire Station
     Fisher Karate Institute      55  Arrangements By Bobbie
 16  Gedde's Geophysical          56  Treasure Chest Antiques
 17  Presbyterian Church          57  Nationwide Insurance
 18  Oyd W. Davis Accounting          Jo Ann's Salon
 19  Long Beach City Hall             Clothes Out II
     City Hall Annex                     Quality Home Health
20  Long Beach Public Library   58  Dollar General
 21  Dr. M.L. Niolet, Dentist         K & B Drug Store
 22  Faye Spayde, Atty.           59  Oasis Package Store
 23  McCaughan Elementary School 60  Magnolia Federal Bank
 24  Doll Grabbag Antiques        61  First Baptist Church
 25  Happy Pets                   62  Tropical Paradise Rest.
     Jake's Signs & Designs       63  Lighthouse Lounge
     The Letter Limb              64  Longue Vue Condos
 26  BJ's Puzzles                 65  Long Beach Resort Inn
 27  People's Bank                66  Candlelight Gallery
 28  Long Beach Pawn Shop         67  Dorcester Personal Care
 29  Animal House                 68  Coast Women's Health
     Artworks Portraits           69  O'Neal's Restaurant
 30  Long Beach Cleaners          70  Fabian's Ocean Gifts
 31  High Speed Copy Center           Joyce's Casuals
 32  Lois' Flowers                71  McDonald's
     House of Furniture           72  Harbormaster Office
 33  Danny's Fried Chicken        73  CJ's Waterfront Landing
 34  Long Beach Barber Shop       74  Chamber of Commerce
 35  Sr. Citizens' Center         75  Long Beach Yacht Club
 36  Auto Muffler & Pipe          76  The Chimneys Restaurant
                                     TL's Tackle Shop



                           53









The number of employees working in the study area businesses
ranged from one employee at eleven of the area's smaller
businesses, to 200 at K-Mart.  A total of 757 persons were
reportedly employed by businesses within the study area.
Approximately 150 of those persons work in the downtown area
along Jeff Davis Avenue, along with another 70-75 persons
who work at City Hall, Long Beach Library or the McCaughan
Elementary School.   Approximately 570  (75%) of the total
persons employed in the area work in waterfront area
establishments.

The largest employers within the study area were:   K-Mart
(200), Sav-A-Center (137), McDonald's (60), McCaughan
Elementary School (50), The Chimneys Restaurant (40), High
Speed Copy Center (18), K&B Drugs (17), Indy's (17),
Barnaby's Restaurant (15), City Hall (15), and Long Beach
Resort Inn (13).

Forty-four 60% of the businesses employed 4 or less persons,
and eleven  (15%) of the businesses employed 10 or more
persons.

Question I - Does the business own or lease the building?
Over 55% (41) of the businesses in the study area leased
their buildings.   Seventeen  (63%) of the 27 waterfront
businesses in the downtown area leased their space.  Three
of the 12 businesses within the study area which were not
adjacent to the waterfront or the Jeff Davis Avenue area
were leasing their building.

Question 2 - What is the square footage of the building?
Question 3 - How much of that space is occupied by your
business?
Question 4 - Are there other businesses in the building?
            If so, how much space do they occupy?
Question 5 - How much vacant space is there in the building?

Questions 2 through 5, dealing with square footages of the
buildings and businesses within were not uniformly responded
to by survey participants, and are more accurately depicted
in the ownership listing  (see Appendix B).   Businesses
within the study area occupied from less than 500 square
feet (Long Beach Barber Shop and Ideal Clothesout) to 90,000
square feet (K-Mart).

Question 6 - How long have you been in business? How long
at this location?  Seven of the merchants along Jeff davis
Avenue indicated that they have been in business at their
present locations for over 20 years:   Hancock Bank  (40
yrs.); Long Beach Barber Shop (32 yrs.); Lois Flowers (30
yrs.); Merchants Bank (27 yrs.); K&B Drugs (24 yrs.); Long








                          54








Beach Cleaners (22 yrs.); and the Hitching Post (21 yrs.).
Only one waterfront business (other than K&B) indicated that
it had been in business at its present location for over
twenty years, Magnolia Federal Bank.

Five businesses along Jeff Davis Avenue and three waterfront
businesses have been operating in their present locations
for less than one year. Eighteen downtown and 16 waterfront
businesses have been operating for less than five years.

Question 7 - What is your busiest day of the week? Question
8 - What is the busiest part of the day?  Of the 36 downtown
businesses who responded to Questions 7 and 8, eleven (31%)
replied that their busiest day varied, and fourteen (39%)
said that their busiest hours varied.   Nineteen of the
downtown businesses (53%) stated that weekdays were their
busiest days, while seven (19%) replied that Saturdays were
busiest.

Seven downtown businesses (19%) said that morning hours were
their busiest, nine businesses (25%) cited the afternoon
hours and seven (19%) named 11:00 AM - 2:00 PM as their
busiest hours.   Only three businesses  (8%) replied that
evening were their busiest hours.

Of the 21 waterfront businesses responding to Questions 7
and 8, twenty (95%) cited the weekends (Fri. - Sun.) as
their busiest days.   Eleven of those  (52%) specifically
cited Saturdays, six (29%) said Fridays and one (5%) replied
that Sundays were busiest for them.  Only one (5%) stated
that weekdays were busiest.

Seven waterfront businesses (33%) cited the evening hours as
their busiest, six (29%) said afternoon hours were busiest
and two stated that the morning hours were their  busiest.
Six of the businesses (29%) replied that the hours between
11:00 AM - 3:00 PM were their busiest.

Question 9 - How frequently do the majority of your
clientele visit your business?   The 36 downtown merchants
responded as follows: daily, 4 (11%); 3-4 times per week, 2
(6%); 1-2 times per week, 9 (25%); 2-3 times per month, 9
(25%); once per month,  2 (6%); and,  less than once per
month, 10 (28%).

The 27 waterfront merchants responded to Question 9 as
follows:  daily, 0; 3-4 times per week, 4 (15%); 1-2 times
per week, 10 (37%); 2-3 times per month, 5 (19%); once per
month, 3 (11%); and less than once per month, 5 (19%).








I         ~~over 58% of downtown merchants cited their customers as
          typically frequenting their businesses less than once per
          week, while the same was true of 48% of the waterfront
I        ~~businesses'  customers and 82%, of the other study area
          businesses' customers.
          Question 10 - What is your primary method of promoting your
          business and attracting customers?   Fifty-six of the 73
          study area merchants responded to this question.   Their
*         ~~~responses were as follows in Table 19.

                                   Table 20
                      Primary Methods Used for Promoting
    I                      ~~~~~~~Study Area Businesses

                                  Number of Businesses Ranking Each
      I                            ~~~~~~~~~Method in Order of Importance

I         ~~~Method of Promotion    First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth

          Radio Advertisements       2     3     2     2       0     0
          TV Advertisements          2     1     2     3       0     0
          Word of Mouth            40      8     5     2      0      0
          Group Promotions                 1     1222
          Window Displays            3    15     4     2       1     0
          Newspaper Advertisements  7    13      7     2       1     0
          other                      2     5     9     2       0     0
          By far the most widely depended upon method of promotion was
I        ~~"word of mouth",  with over 98%1 of responding businesses
          saying  it was among the top four methods.   Newspaper
          advertisements was the second most popular method with 54%
          of the respondents listing it among their top five. Window
          displays ranked third among the respondents, with 45% of
          them placing it among their top five methods.   The f ourth
          most popularly used category was "other" which included in
I        ~~~descending order of frequency:   Yellow Pages listings/ads;
          sponsoring youth athletics; billboard and bench ads; fashion
          shows;  hair  shows;  and  festivals.    Radio  and  TV
          advertisements, with 16% and 14% of respondents respectively
          listing them among their four most important methods, were
          ranked fifth and sixth.   Group promotions were relatively
*         ~~~seldom used among the businesses.

          Question 12. - What percent of your business is tourist
          related? With all 36 downtown businesses responding to this
I        ~~question, 29 of (81%) them said that less than 5% of their
          business was tourist-related. Among those 29 businesses, 17
          responded that none of their business was tourist-related.
          Seven businesses (19%) stated that tourism accounted for 10%
          or more of their business.   Only three  downtown area
          businesses (8%) said that 25% or more of their business was
          tourist-related.   All three of those were antique or gift
          shops.

       I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5








          As would be expected, waterfront businesses typically
          reported much higher tourist-related business.   Of the 27
          waterfront business responding, seven (26%) said that over
          50% of their business was tourist-related.   Seven more
          businesses cited 25% - 50% tourist-related business.   In
          total, 20 of the 27 waterfront businesses (74%) said that at
          least 10% of their business was tourist-related.
          Of the ten other businesses in the study area who responded,
I        ~~six  (60%) said that none of their business was tourist-
          related. None said that over 5% was tourist-related.

*         ~~Question 12 -Do  you think that business in downtown Long
          Beach has improved, declined or stayed the same over the
          past five years?  Fifty of the 73 businesses (68%) in the
          study area responded to this question.   Twenty-two  (44%)
I        ~~~felt that business had declined; 14 (28%) said business had
          improved; and, 14 others (28%) said business appeared to
          have remained about the same over the past five years in the
I        ~~~downtown area.
          Question 13 - Do you think that business will improve,
          decline or remain the same over the next five years? Forty-
          eight of the businesses (66%) responded to this question.
          Twenty-eight of the respondents (58%) expressed optimism for
          improved business in the next five years.  However, ten of
I        ~~~those respondents were guardedly optimistic, citing hopes of
          improved tourism, which they said could be contingent upon
          the approval of dockside gambling in Harrison County.
I        ~~Twelve of the respondents  (25%) felt that business would
          remain about the same, and eight (17%) expected business to
          decline over the next five years.

I         ~~~Question  14 - If you had the opportunity to move your
          business out of the downtown Long Beach area, would you?  of
          the 34 downtown merchants who responded to this question, 28
           (82%) replied that they would not move from the area, while
          six (18%) said they would move if given the chance.

          While 44% of the businesses said that business has declined
          in the downtown area over the past five years, and 42% did
          not expect improvement during the next five years, it
          appears that area merchants are, by and large, committed to
          the area.
          Question 15 - What types of new businesses would you like to
I        ~~~see in the downtown and waterfront areas?   The responses
          from the downtown merchants to this question were:
          restaurants (16) ; clothing stores (8) ; specialty shops (5) ;
          professional offices (5); recreational businesses (5);







                                     57









department  stores   (4);  movie  theatre   (4);
arts/crafts/antique shops (4); dockside gambling (4); shoe
store (2); hotels (2); anything (2); sporting goods; office
supplies; mini-mall; mini-flea market; vegetable stands;
and, nothing.

The responses from the waterfront merchants were:  dockside
gambling (7); tourist-related (6); hotels (6); restaurants
(5); recreational businesses  (5); clothing stores  (4);
specialty shops (3); movie theatre (2); entertainment (2);
teen center; shoe store; beach vendors; art & crafts; yard
goods; and, mini-mall.

Question 16 - What infrastructure improvements (streets,
sidewalks, medians, etc.) would you like to see in the
downtown and waterfront areas?   Downtown area merchants'
responses to this question included:   street improvements
(14); sidewalk improvements  (13); general; cleanup (11);
renovate buildings/store fronts (9); storefront/sidewalk
planters  (7);  parking  improvements  (6); underground
utilities (5); clean up vacant lots (4); landscaping (4);
street lights (4); plant trees (3); nicer medians on U.S. 90
(3); improve beach/harbor access  (3); street signs  (2);
boardwalk (2); bicycle path (2); teen center (2); no more
building in the harbor (2); playground; walking path;
crosswalk/overpass on U.S. 90; and, none.

Waterfront merchants'  responses to Question  16 were:
improved harbor access (7); street improvements (6) ;
sidewalk improvements  (3); general cleanup (3); renovate
downtown buildings  (3); street lighting on U.S. 90 (3);
boardwalks (3); landscaping (2); parking improvements (2);
garbage collection improvements (2); nicer medians; clean up
vacant lots; street signs; and, drainage improvements.

Question 17 - What other types of improvements would you
suggest to improve the business climate of the area?
Downtown merchants' responses to this question were:  more
cooperation among businesses (4); a business directory sign
at the intersection of U.S. 90 and Jeff Davis Avenue (3);
better government (3); find appropriate use for the old A&P
and National buildings (3); commercial diversification (2);
neater individual business appearances (2); nicer store
signs (2); downtown theme (2); longer business hours
downtown (2); entertainment for teens (2) improved downtown
traffic flow (2); more law enforcement (2); more appealing
entrance from U.S. 90 to Jeff Davis Avenue; trash cleanup on
the waterfront; open air pavilion for music and dances;
lower taxes; and, no change.










                         58







I          ~~Waterfront merchants responded to Question  17 as follows:
          street lighting on U.S. 90 (3); establish a state lottery
           (2); lower speed limit on U.S. 90; create evening hour
           shopping atmosphere; an exclusive RV park; more things to
          do; and, spend tax dollars more wisely.






















      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1










                               Resident Survey


          The resident survey form (see Resident survey Form in
          Appendix C) was developed to gain information relative to
          the shopping habits of Long Beach residents as well as their
          perceptions of existing conditions within the study area.
          Input from the residents was also sought regarding their
          ideas for improving the economic vitality of the area.
          A total of 380 residents throughout the City were surveyed
          by GRPC staff and Advisory Committee members.   Many were
          surveyed at their homes, while numerous others were surveyed
          at shopping centers and various meeting places in the City.
          Additionally, a random telephone survey was conducted which
          accounted for 120 of the resident responses.
          The 380 Long Beach residents who responded to the survey
          were, by and large, enthusiastic at the opportunity to voice
          their opinions and ideas regarding conditions within, and
          future development of their urban waterfront area. They are
          generally very cognizant of the importance of the area and
          its potential as a focal point for future economic
          development in the City.   They are also aware that the
          beaches and waters of the Mississippi Sound which grace the
I        ~~~southern limits of their city are invaluable resources which
          vastly enhance the quality of life within the City, and must
*         ~~~be carefully nurtured and preserved.

          The resident survey, in addition to illuminating various
          shopping habits among the respondents, provided a forum for
          City residents to voice their opinions and concerns about
          existing conditions in the study area as well as their
          preferences for the area's future. The following Exhibits A
          and B are the resident survey forms with the total responses
          indicated numerically and as percentages of the total
          respectively.

                         Summary of Survey Findings

          There are currently no grocery stores operating in the
          downtown area.   Long Beach residents primarily do their
I        ~~grocery shopping in the City, however, with 86% and 78% of
          the respondents at least occasionally shopping in the
          waterfront area and other areas of Long Beach respectively.
I        ~~Although 32% of respondents said they occasionally shopped
          for groceries in the Gulfport or Biloxi areas, approximately
          half of those do so infrequently.  Also, a good portion of
          those who shop in the Gulfport or Biloxi areas more
          frequently, probably do so as a convenience on their way
          home from working in those areas, or are shopping at one of
          the commissaries at either Keesler or the Sea Bee Base.




                                    60









          Long Beach residents, by and large, do their drug store
          shopping  in the City.   While there may have been some
I        ~~confusion among survey participants as to whether the K&B
          Drug Store was considered "downtown" or "waterfront", it is
          evident that at least 29% of respondents shop there since it
          is the only drug store which could be considered in the
          downtown area.   The vast majority of respondents do their
          drug store shopping in the waterfront area (some of which
          probably include K&B as well as the K-Mart pharmacy), and to
          a lesser extent, in other areas of Long Beach.
          For their general shopping needs, 62% and 60% of the
*         ~~respondents shop at least occasionally in the downtown and
          waterfront areas respectively.   However,  the frequency of
          this shopping was considerably higher in the waterfront
          area. While 45% of the respondents patronized merchants in
I        ~~other  areas  of  Long  Beach  for general  shopping,  the
          frequency was considerably lower.   The vast majority of
          respondents shop at least occasionally in the Gulfport or
I        ~~Biloxi  areas,  much  of which  is probably  done  at the
          Edgewater Mall in Biloxi, and in the commercial area along
          Highway 49 north of Gulfport.

I         ~~~For professional services, the vast majority of respondents
          appear to go to the Biloxi or Gulfport areas. Thirty-three
          percent patronize professional offices in downtown Long
          Beach while 34% seek professional services in other areas of

*         ~~Downtown  Long  Beach  is  the  primary  destination  of
          respondents for miscellaneous errands, with 86% going there
          for their banking, dry cleaning or for business at City
*         ~~~Hall.

          While 79% of respondents eat at restaurants in the Gulfport
          and\or Biloxi areas at least occasionally, 70% said that
          they eat at restaurants in the waterfront area of Long
          Beach, and, they do it more frequently.

          For meeting with friends and socializing, respondents most
          often visit in the Gulfport or Biloxi areas, with 72% doing
          so at least occasionally.   However, the waterfront area of
          Long Beach seems to also be a frequent destination for
          social gatherings, with 37% reportedly socializing there
          three or more times per month.

          of the respondents who were employed, 29% worked in Gulfport
          or Biloxi, 22% in other areas of Long Beach, 13% in downtown
          Long Beach, 9% in the waterfront area, and 8% in Pass
*         ~~~Christian or Bay St. Louis.







                                    61









          Over half of the respondents (55%) use the harbor
          recreational facilities at least occasionally.   Twenty-six
I        ~~~percent use the facilities three or more times per -month.
          The vast majority of respondents go downtown mostly on
          weekdays.   Twenty-six percent usually go downtown after
          work, 19% on Saturdays and 11% on Sundays (mostly to
          church).

I         ~~When asked to rate the downtown and waterfront areas for
          attractiveness, 78%1 of the respondents rated the downtown
          from fair to poor, with only 19% rating it good.
          Conversely, 51% rated the waterfront as good, and only 9%
          rated it poor.

          For cleanliness, the downtown was rated generally fair, with
I        ~~~the waterfront being considered somewhat better.

          Regarding parking convenience, respondents had diverse
          opinions, with equal amounts of respondents rating the
U         ~~~downtown area as good and as poor.   The waterfront area
          faired much better, with 62% rating parking convenience as
          good, and only 8% as poor.

          Traffic flow in the downtown area was rated generally fair,
          with that of the waterfront being rated considerably better.
          only 13% of respondents rated traffic flow in the waterfront


          For convenience of shopping hours, the downtown area was
          rated good by 41%, and poor by 25% of respondents.   The
          waterfront area received a good rating by 71%, and a poor
*         ~~~rating by only 3% of the respondents.

          In regard to the friendliness of merchants, both downtown
*         ~~~and waterfront area merchants were generally rated as good.

          Respondents generally considered both the downtown and
          waterfront areas as fairly safe, with only 10%  rating the
I        ~~downtown area and 1% rating the waterfront area as poor for
          safety.

          The variety of goods and services in the downtown area was
I        ~~~rated from fair to poor by 78% of respondents, with only 18%
          rating  it as  good.    The waterfront  area  was  rated
          considerably better in this category, with 38% rating it as
          good, and 42% as fair.
          For cost of goods and services, the downtown area was rated
I        ~~generally  fair,  with  the waterfront  area being rated
          somewhat better.





                                    62










Regarding the quality of goods and services, both the
downtown area and the waterfront area were generally rated
from  fair  to  good  by  82%  and  89%  of  respondents
respectively.

Special events and festivals in the downtown area received
divergent  ratings  from respondents,  with  fairly equal
numbers rating them as good (34%), as fair (32%) and as poor
(27%). The waterfront area was rated similarly, but with a
higher percentage of respondents (40%) rating it as good.

When asked what types of businesses they would like to see
more of in the downtown area, the resident's responses were
as listed below.

    -Restaurants\Cafes (104 responses)
    -Clothing stores (66 responses)
    -Specialty shops (52 responses)
    -Professional offices (38 responses)
    -Movie theatre (30 responses)
    -Shoe store (25 responses)
    -None (18 responses)
    -Mini-mall (17 responses)
    -Wal-Mart (16 responses)
    -Home furnishings (15 responses)
    -Fast food restaurants (14 responses)
    -Fabric store (13 responses)
    -Discount stores (13 responses)
    -Bowling alley (12 responses)
    -Sporting goods (12 responses)
    -Building supplies (10 responses)
    -Craft shops (10 responses)
    -Variety stores (9 responses)
   -Bakery (9 responses)
    -Card shops (9 responses)
    -Factory outlets (8 responses)
   -Coffee shop (8 responses
   -Farmers' market (7 responses)
    -Music store (5 responses)
    -Jewelry store (5 responses
   -School\Office supplies (5 responses)
   -Teen activity center (5 responses)
    -Anything (5 responses)
   -Flea market (5 responses)
   -Electronics store (4 responses)
   -Bingo (4 responses)
   -Locksmith (3 responses)
   -TV repair (3 responses)










                           63









When asked what types of businesses they would like to see
more of in the waterfront area, residents responded as
listed below.

    -Restaurants\Cafes (58 responses)
    -Hotels\Motels (57 responses)
    -General tourist-related (43 responses)
    -Recreational (43 responses)
    -Dockside gambling (30 responses)
    -Clothing stores (27 responses)
    -Movie theatre (26 responses)
    -Bars\Lounges (25 responses)
    -Fast food restaurants (24 responses)
    -None (24 responses)
    -Discount stores (22 responses)
    -General retail (21 responses)
    -Wal-Mart (19 responses)
    -Specialty shops (16 responses)
    -Water park (13 responses)
    -Outdoor pavilion (11 responses)
    -Miniature golf (8 responses)
    -Boating supplies (5 responses)
    -Beach vendors (5 responses)
    -Electronics store (5 responses)
    -Video store (5 responses)
    -Ice cream parlor (4 responses)
    -Home furnishings (3 responses)
    -Sporting goods (3 responses)
    -Oyster bar (3 responses)

When asked what types of businesses they would like to see
more of elsewhere in Long Beach, residents responded as
listed below.

    -General retail (19 responses)
    -Bowling alley (17 responses)
    -Factory outlets (16 responses)
    -Specialty shops (14 responses)
    -None (14 responses)
    -Light industry (13 responses)
    -Building supplies (11 responses)
    -Movie theatre (11 responses)
    -Businesses catering to teens (10 responses)
    -Sporting goods (7 responses)
    -Wal-Mart (7 responses)
    -Video store (6 responses)
    -New car sales (5 responses)
    -Electronics store (5 responses)
    -High tech businesses (4 responses)
    -Fabric store (3 responses)
    -Laundromat (2 responses)







                           64









When asked what types of businesses they would like to see
more of in the waterfront area, residents responded as
listed below.

    -Restaurants\Cafes (58 responses)
    -Hotels\Motels (57 responses)
    -General tourist-related (43 responses)
    -Recreational (43 responses)
    -Dockside gambling (30 responses)
    -Clothing stores (27 responses)
    -Movie theatre (26 responses)
    -Bars\Lounges (25 responses)
    -Fast food restaurants (24 responses)
    -None (24 responses)
    -Discount stores (22 responses)
    -General retail (21 responses)
    -Wal-Mart (19 responses)
    -Specialty shops (16 responses)
    -Water park (13 responses)
    -Outdoor pavilion (11 responses)
    -Miniature golf (8 responses)
    -Boating supplies (5 responses)
    -Beach vendors (5 responses)
    -Electronics store (5 responses)
    -Video store (5 responses)
    -Ice cream parlor (4 responses)
    -Home furnishings (3 responses)
    -Sporting goods (3 responses)
    -Oyster bar (3 responses)

When asked what types of businesses they would like to see
more of elsewhere  in Long Beach,  residents responded as
listed below.

    -General retail (19 responses)
    -Bowling alley (17 responses)
    -Factory outlets (16 responses)
    -Specialty shops (14 responses)
    -None (14 responses)
    -Light industry (13 responses)
    -Building supplies (11 responses)
    -Movie theatre (11 responses)
    -Businesses catering to teens (10 responses)
    -Sporting goods (7 responses)
    -Wal-Mart (7 responses)
    -Video store (6 responses)
    -New car sales (5 responses)
    -Electronics store (5 responses)
    -High tech businesses (4 responses)
    -Fabric store (3 responses)
    -Laundromat (2 responses)







                           64









When asked what businesses, buildings or landmarks first
came to mind when they thought of downtown Long Beach, the
residents responded as follows.

    -City Hall (94 responses)
    -Hancock Bank (70 responses)
    -McCaughan Elementary School (37 responses)
    -Long Beach Library (33 responses)
    -Merchants Bank (32 responses)
    -Magnolia Federal Bank (32 responses)
    -None (31 responses)
    -Masonic Lodge (26 responses)
    -Hitching Post (20 responses)
    -Ace Hardware (20 responses)
    -Antique shops (19 responses)
    -Empty or dilapidated buildings (18 responses)
    -Senior Citizens' Center (17 responses)
    -Old Post Office (15 responses)
    -K-Mart (13 responses)
    -Danny's Fried Chicken (12 responses)
    -Long Beach Barber Shop (12 responses)
    -K&B Drug Store (8 responses)
    -Lois' Flowers (7 responses)
    -High Speed Copy Center (6 responses)
    -Old Sonic Restaurant site (5 responses)
    -Rose garden (4 responses)
    -Sun Dial (4 responses)
    -One-Stop Auto Parts (3 responses)

Long Beach residents, much the same as in other coastal
cities in the region, are fond of their Mardi Gras Parade.
Sixty-four percent of the respondents said they attend that
parade, while the second most frequented special event in
the City was the Radish Festival, with 39% of the
respondents attending.

Forty-six percent of the respondents were male,  and 54%
were female.  The largest age group among the respondents
were those between the ages of 36 and 50. Seventeen percent
were over the age of 65, while less than one percent were
under  the  age  of  18.   Seventy-five  percent  of the
respondents have lived in the City for 11 or more years,
with 54% having lived there for over twenty years.

Approximately 81% of the respondents listed their annual
household  income range in the survey.  Of those, only 23%
listed their household income as less than $20,000 per year,
while 29% said theirs was over $50,000 annually.   Thirty-
seven percent of the respondents lived in two-person
households, while 13% were in one-person households.   Only
8% lived in households with five or more persons.






                          65









The following listing represents the suggestions and
comments of the residents regarding improving the downtown
and\or waterfront areas of Long Beach.

   - General cleanup (73 responses)
   - Renovate downtown buildings\storefronts (68 responses)
   - Improve sidewalks (66 responses)
   - Improve streets (42 responses)
   - Landscaping (36 responses)
   - Plant trees (33 responses)
   - Build flower planters (32 responses)
   - Establish a downtown and\or waterfront theme (30
    responses)
   - Clean beaches better (28 responses)
   - Dockside gambling (26 responses)
   - More attractions (25 responses)
   - Nicer medians along US 90 (21 responses)
   - Find use for vacant buildings at intersection of US 90
    and Jeff Avenue (20 responses)
   - Recreation center for young people (19 responses)
   - Street lighting along US 90 (19 responses)
   - Amusement park (18 responses)
   - Hotels (18 responses)
   - Underground utilities along Jeff Davis Avenue (16
     responses)
   - Beach\harbor access from Jeff Davis Avenue (15
    responses)
   - Establish downtown building design (13 responses)
   - Boardwalks and shops along the south side of US 90 (12
    responses)
   - More beach shelters (10 responses)
   - Biking trail (9 responses)
   - No dockside gambling (9 responses)
   - Widen Jeff Davis Avenue (8 responses)
   - Sidewalks along US 90 (7 responses)
   - Keep bedroom community appeal (7 responses)
   - Factory outlets (6 responses)
   - Farmers' market (6 responses)
   - Each merchant improve and care for property in front of
    business (6 responses)
   - Cooperation between merchants to promote downtown
    district (6 responses)
   - Establish an entertainment\cultural complex at US 90
    and Jeff Davis Avenue (5 responses)
   - Bon-fire pits on the beach (5 responses)
   - Encourage only businesses that will complement the
    waterfront area to locate there (4 responses)
   - Enlarge harbor (4 responses)
   - Pave 28th Street (4 responses)
  - Four-lane Railroad Street (4 responses)
   - Four-lane Beatline Road from 1-10 (3 responses)
   - Lower taxes (3 responses)





                           66








I            ~~~- Eliminate unattractive business signs (3 responses)
             -   Flamarket (2 responses)
             - Turn the old Sonic site into a farmers, craft or flea
I            ~~~~market (2 responses)
             - Enlarge the harbor (2 responses)
             - Do away with tacky car lots (2 responses)
             - Remove stop signs from Jeff Davis Avenue
             - More parking adjacent to the harbor
             - Build a service drive from Russell Avenue to Cleveland
               Avenue, south of US 90
I           ~~~- Dredge the harbor
             - Hire a city planner
             - Develop more space for new businesses adjacent to the
               harbor
             - Build a shelter and benches on the fishing pier
             - Establish a mini-mall in the old A&P building
             - Paint pedestrian crossings
             - Increase police patrol
             - Have people work off municipal fines by cleaning up
               downtown
I           ~~~- Use the waterfront as the City's commercial center
             - Tax "all" beachfront property owners
             - Dredge ten acres of sand east and west of the harbor
               and establish a year-round fun park
             - Allow fuel to be sold at the harbor
             - Clean up the water in the harbor















      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Goals and Objectives
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








    I                          ~~~~~~~~GOALS AND OBJECTIVES


           The underlying goal of this study is, simply put, to suggest
           measures for improving the urban waterfront area, which will
           upon implementation, lead to an enhancement of the quality
           of life of Long Beach residents. The measures are intended
           to  provide    increased  economic  and  recreational
           opportunities for residents, and to increase public revenues
           to enable the City to provide necessary services, facilities
            and infrastructural improvements to make Long Beach an even
           better place in which to live.

*           ~~~The City is faced with several dilemmas which present major
            stumbling blocks to its efforts to provide improved and
            additional services and amenities for its residents.

I           - ~~~The City has relatively little sales tax revenue,  and
            therefore must rely heavily on property taxes to fund basic
*           ~~~municipal services.

             - The City has traditionally been a bedroom community, and
           with its relatively low commercial and industrial activity,
           has been unable to provide sufficient jobs to keep many of
            its residents from having to leave the City to find work.

             - The City's downtown area, once the hub of commercial and
            social activity, has been in a state of physical and
            economic decline for decades.

*            -~~~While the City has a potentially economically dynamic
           waterfront area, it must proceed with caution in its efforts
            to commercialize the area to ensure both optimum development
*           ~~~and protection of the area.

             - Efforts to foster commercial growth in the City are faced
            with the challenge of overcoming the City's relatively poor
            accessibility from other areas of the County.
            After considerable public input via the opinion surveys, and
            several meetings of the Urban Waterfront Advisory Committee,
            four basic goals were established to address these critical
            issues. To facilitate the achievement of these goals,
            several sub-goals were developed for each basic goal.
            objectives, or methods of achieving the desired goals and
            sub-goals were then identified.

I           ~~The  accomplishment  of  the  objectives,  sub-goals  and
            ultimately, the goals presented herein will require a








         concerted effort by the City's business community, civic and
         Governmental leadership and citizenry. The goals are:

           1. Revitalize the downtown central business district;
           2. optimize commercial opportunities in the urban
               waterfront area;
           3. improve public access to harbor and beach areas; and,
           4. Improve access to Long Beach.
         To facilitate the accomplishment of these goals, sub-goals
         were developed for each goal as follows:
         Goal 1. Revitalize the downtown central business district.

U                  ~~~~~- Establish and maintain a downtown theme.
                  - Seek new business ventures and encourage
                    expansion of existing businesses within the
I                  ~~~~~~downtown area.
                  - Improve the overall appearance and image of the
                    downtown area.
                  - Improve pedestrian and vehicular access to the
U                   ~~~~~~downtown area.
                  - Encourage residents to patronize downtown
                    businesses.
                  - Establish a link between the downtown and the
                    waterfront commercial and recreational areas.

         Goal 2. Optimize commercial and recreational opportunities
                 in the urban waterfront area.

                  - Develop additional recreational facilities in and
                    near the harbor area.
                  - Seek new business ventures to locate in existing
                    vacant structures along US 90.
                  - Enhance and protect the aesthetic quality of the
                    waterfront area.
                  - Promote tourism.

         Goal 3. Improve public access to the harbor and beach areas.

                  - Expedite completion of proposed Jeff Davis Avenue
                    beach/harbor access project (see Figure 5).
                  - Promote development of beach access projects in
                    other beach areas in the City as proposed in the
                    Sand Beach Master Plan (see Appendix A).
         Goal 4. Improve access to Long Beach.

                  - Seek improvements to 28th Street.
                  - Seek better and more direct access from I-la,
                     through improvements to either Klondyke Road or
                    to Beatline Road.
                  - Improve signage to the City, and to the downtown
                    and waterfront areas, particularly from the

                    north.



                                    70








           Tasks which could collectively lead to the accomplishment of
            the desired goals and sub-goals were identified and listed.
I          ~~~These  tasks,  for the purposes  of this  study,  will  be
            referred to as objectives. The following pages discuss the
            sub-goals and objectives as developed for each of the goals.
            In discussing the objectives as identified to achieve the
            goals and sub-goals, general recommendations for activities
           which  need  to be undertaken  are provided.   To further
            identify specific courses of action, and to coordinate and
I          ~~~sustain activities critical to the attainment of the goals
           herein, it is recommended that the Long Beach Urban
           Waterfront Advisory remain active in an advisory and
I          ~~~coordinative capacity.



















      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7








I          ~~~Goal 1:  ReVitalize the downtown business district.

           The sub-goals for this goal are:

            1. To establish and maintain a downtown theme.
            2. To seek new business ventures and encourage expansion of
 *             ~~~~existing businesses within the downtown area.
            3. To improve the overall appearance and image of the
               downtown area.
            4. To improve vehicular and pedestrian access to the
 I            ~~~~downtown area.
            5. To encourage residents to patronize downtown businesses.
            6. To establish a link between the downtown and the
 I            ~~~~waterfront commercial and recreational areas.

           Sub-cioal 1: To establish and maintain a downtown theme.
           'The sub-goal of establishing and maintaining a downtown
           theme was discussed on several occasions by Committee
           members, several of whom cited examples of successful theme-
           oriented revitalizations of downtowns in other areas of the
I         ~~nation.    indeed,  there  are  numerous  examples  where
            communities have rejuvenated their ailing traditional
           downtown by creating various theme-oriented downtown
            districts which appeal both to local residents and visitors.
            The concept has been promoted by the national Mainstreet
            Program as an integral part of its downtown revitalization
            efforts. The objectives identified to achieve this sub-goal
            are as-follows.
      *                             ~~~~~~~~~objectives

               - Determine an appropriate theme for the downtown area.
                  The theme may be based on any variety of historical or
                  other cultural characteristics of the City or region.
                  Some of the specific themes suggested by members of
                  the Committee  and/or  residents were:   a fishing
                  village; international or regional food or cultural
 I              ~~~~~theme (i.e. southern, cajun or international foods and
                  gift items); musical entertainment (i.e. develop
                  musical performance facilities at which a variety of
 I              ~~~~~concerts and/or dances could be held) ; an old southern
                  truck farming community with farmers' markets, general
                  stores, country crafts, art, music, etc.; a regional
                  arts and crafts center; and, a tropical resort theme.
               - Establish architectural and design concepts for
                  storefronts, buildings, signs, lighting and other
                  related facilities and amenities in the downtown area,
 I              ~~~~~which will portray and promote the selected theme.
               - Have the ~City provide incentives to business and
                  building owners to make structural and facade
 I              ~~~~improvements consistent with the architectural  and
                  design concepts.   These incentives could be in the
                  form of one-time tax breaks for building and property
 *               ~~~~~improvements consistent with the theme concept.




                                       72








 I             - ~~~Require new construction and development  in the
                 downtown to comply with the architectural and design
 *               ~~~~~standards as established.

            Sub-caoal 2: Seek new business ventures and encourage the
            expansion of existinca businesses within the downtown area.
            Several Committee members stated that the current mix of
           downtown merchants did not present an adequate mixture of
           goods and services to draw residents and visitors to the
            area for their shopping needs. This view was also shared by
I         ~~~numerous residents as evidenced by their survey responses.
           There is considerable vacant commercial space in the
*          ~~~downtown area for which suitable merchants should be sought.

           The City's success in luring new businesses to the downtown
            area will be enhanced by the accomplishment of each of the
            sub-goals and objectives which will both individually and
            collectively improve the business climate of the area,
           making it much more attractive to prospective businesses.

     I                             ~~~~~~~~~obi ectives

                -The City should consider providing incentives for new
                 businesses to locate in the downtown area, and for
                 existing businesses to expand.  The incentives could
                 be various forms of tax breaks or other start-up
                 assistance.    Incentives  could  be provided  for
 I              ~~~~businesses  to  locate  in existing  structures  in
                 particular.
                -The City could work with commercial property owners in
 I              ~~~~the downtown area, offering incentives for them to
                 make improvements to their property and buildings
                 which would make them more attractive to businesses.
                -The  City  could  solicit assistance  from utility
                 companies by their providing breaks on utility bills
                 during the start-up phase for new businesses.
                -The City should consider employing a variety of
 I              ~~~~methods  for  promoting  its  commercial  centers
                 throughout the City, and encourage cooperative
                 promotional programs among existing downtown
 I              ~~~~~merchants.
                -The  City should  maintain  a current  listing  of
                 available vacant buildings and property throughout the
                 City, particularly in the downtown area, for potential
                 business and housing developers.
                -The City should establish a committee to investigate
                 possibilities for obtaining lower commercial insurance
 I              ~~~~~rates for wind and water damage.  The State Insurance
                 Commission, local representatives to the legislature,
                 the Gulf Coast Chamber of Commerce and the Small
 *               ~~~~Business  Administration  should be enlisted  for







                                      73







 I               ~~~~~assistance in this matter.  The committee should also
                  investigate the feasibility of establishing a self-
                  insurance cooperative for Long Beach businesses for
 I              ~~~~~wind and water damage coverage.
                -The City should establish a committee of community and
                  business leaders promote Long Beach and the downtown
                  area to new businesses as well as existing businesses
                  seeking to expand.   The committee should market the
                  attributes of the City and the region and should
                  provide prospective entrepreneurs with information
 I              ~~~~regarding:    zoning;  building  codes  and permits;
                  available property; local banking, insurance, real
                  estate and government contacts; SBA and SCORE
 I              ~~~~~contacts; and, incentives available to businesses from
                  local utility companies and the Mississippi Department
                  of Economic Development.
                -The City should try to enlist the help of the SBA,
 I              ~~~~USM-Gulf  Park,  Mississippi  Gulf  Coast  Community
                  College and other pertinent entities to sponsor
                  workshops an small business development to assist
 I              ~~~~~local residents in starting their own businesses.
                -The City should consider developing a small business
                  incubator in the downtown area.
I           ~~~Sub-croal 3:  To imonrove the overall aopearance and imacfe of
            the downtown area.
            In the resident survey, 78% of residents rated the downtown
I          ~~~area's appearance from fair to poor, with only 19% rating it
            as good.   Merchants,  in their survey, cited the need for
            street and sidewalk improvements, general clean-up, building
I          ~~~renovations/facade  improvements,  landscaping and numerous
            other appearance related   improvements as being primary
            concerns of theirs for improving the business climate of the
            downtown area. The downtown area does not have an image to
            many residents, and when asked what came to mind when they
            thought of the downtown area, numerous residents responded
            with such negative images as dilapidated buildings, vacant
I          ~~~buildings, unkept vacant lots and, "nothing".  In order to
            effectively draw residents and visitors to the downtown
            area, and to encourage businesses to locate and/or expand in
I          ~~~the area,  it is essential  that the area be made more
            aesthetically pleasing and, more "user-friendly" to the
            shopping public.   The following objectives were developed
*           ~~~toward that end.

                                    Objectives
                -Improve maintenance of streets in the downtown area.
                  In addition to more frequent cleaning of the streets,
                  they should be properly striped and marked to clearly
 I              ~~~~~identify lanes, parking spaces and crosswalks.






      I                                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~74







 I           - ~~~Improve maintenance and appearance of sidewalks in the
                downtown area. Merchants should be encouraged to keep
                sidewalks groomed, and to construct and maintain
 I            ~~~~flower planters in front of their businesses.   The
                planters should also be of consistent design. 
              -The City  should work with downtown merchants  to
                establish a general clean-up and maintenance program
                for the area.   The City and merchants should work
                closely in identifying problem areas and in initiating
                activities needed to alleviate the problems.
 I           - ~~~The City should establish and enforce policies to
                maintain property not maintained by private property
                owners.
 *           -~~~~Provide appropriate furnishings to encourage people to
                stroll, -mingle and congregate in the downtown area.
                Benches, waste receptacles, water fountains and street
                lighting should be provided in appropriate areas, and
 I            ~~~~should be of style and design consistent with the
                downtown theme.
              -Decorate  the downtown  area with banners,  street
                downtown theme.
              -Business signs in the downtown area should be required
                to be in conformity with design standards developed to
                promote the theme or desired ambience for the area.
              -The  City  should  investigate  the  feasibility  of
                removing overhead utility wiring in the downtown area.
 I            ~~~This  would  improve  the  area's  appearance  and
                pedestrian appeal considerably.
              -The City should consider developing public restrooms
                in the downtown area for shoppers convenience.
          Sub-croal 4: Improve pedestrian and vehicular access to the
          downtown area.
          The Committee stressed the importance of seeking improved
          access to the City at several of its meetings.   Several
          members repeatedly cited the inadequacy of existing access
I        ~~~to the City from I-10 and areas north of the City.  Access
          to the City in general will be addressed under Goal 4 later
          in this document. This sub-goal is concerned primarily with
I        ~~improving access to the downtown area from within the City.
          The objectives identified to accomplish this sub-goal are as
          follows.

     I                           ~~~~~~~~~Obiecie

              -The City should provide uniform directional  signs
               motorists of the direction and distance to the
                downtown area.   Directional signs should be located
                throughout the downtown area, leading people to
               various businesses, amenities and points of interest.





                                    75







 I           - ~~A downtown  business  directory  sign  should  be
                strategically placed at the intersection of US 90 and
               Jeff Davis Avenue. The sign should be constructed in
 I            ~~~~the motif of the downtown theme.
              -Streets  in the downtown area should be properly
                striped and marked to clearly identify lanes, parking
                spaces and crosswalks.
              -The City should consider the possibility of extending
               Jeff Davis Avenue northward to intersect with Klondyke
               Road in order to alleviate the existing traffic
 I            ~~~~bottleneck at the intersection of Jef f Davis Avenue
                and Railroad  Street.   This would  facilitate the
               movement of traffic in and through the downtown area.
 I           - ~~~Available on-street and off-street parking should be
               marked to be clearly identifiable by motorists in the
                downtown area.
              -Wider, more accessible sidewalks should be constructed
 I            ~~~~in the downtown area.   Wheel chair ramps should be
                constructed to provide handicapped accessibility
                throughout the area.
 I           - ~~~Pedestrian amenities such as benches, water fountains
                and waste receptacles should be provided in selected
                areas.
              -Covered walkways, as well as awnings and overhangs on
                downtown buildings should be given consideration to
                provide relief from the elements for pedestrians.
              -The City should continue to push for the completion of
 I            ~~~the proposed beach/harbor access  from Jeff  Davis
                Avenue project which will make access from the harbor
 *              ~~~~and beach areas to the downtown much more convenient.

          Sub-croal 5:   Encouracre residents to Patronize downtown
          businesses.
          Several business owners expressed concern, in the merchant
          survey, that Long Beach residents do not seem to support the
          City's merchants. Many residents (78%), however, responded
          in the resident survey that the variety of goods and
I        ~~services offered by downtown merchants was fair to poor.
          Some of the merchants also mentioned that they felt that the
          current mix of merchants in the downtown area did not offer
*         ~~a wide enough variety of goods and services to promote
          viable commercial activity in the area.

          While the resident survey indicated that residents, in
I        ~~general, thought that the quality and prices of goods and
          services offered by downtown merchants were reasonable, it
          appears that the downtown commercial area does not offer a
I        ~~large enough variety of the goods and services needed to
          draw residents to the area for their shopping needs. While
          other factors including parking convenience, traffic flow
I        ~~problems,  safety,  friendliness  of merchants,  etc. were






                                     76







I         ~~occasionally cited as deterrents to shopping downtown by
          residents, those comments were few in number, and heavily
          overshadowed by factors pertaining to aesthetic qualities
I        ~~and the variety  of goods and services offered  in the
          downtown area. Previously discussed objectives toward
          providing improvements to the downtown area's appearance
          will greatly enhance the accomplishment of this sub-goal The
          following objectives were developed to further encourage
          increased patronage of downtown businesses by residents and
*         ~~~visitors.
                                 objectives
                The City should begin a campaign to encourage Long
                Beach residents to shop in Long Beach.   Residents
                should be educated as to the importance of shopping in
                their  city.   A Welcome  Wagon  program  could  be
 I            ~~~~established for new residents,  featuring merchandise
                and services provided by downtown merchants.
                Additionally, periodic mailouts to residents could
 I            ~~~~provide information about downtown merchants and the
                goods and services they offer.
             -  Businesses providing a variety of goods and services
                needed by residents should be recruited for the
                downtown  area.    Restaurants,, clothing  stores,
                specialty shops and professional offices were
                indicated in the resident survey as the kinds of
 I            ~~~~businesses most likely to be patronized downtown by
                residents.   Encourage the establishment of specialty
                shops offering a variety of unique merchandise which
 I            ~~~~may appeal to residents and visitors alike.
             - The City should establish a farmers' market at which
                regional  farmers could sell their produce.   This
                concept could be expanded to include flowers and
                plants, arts and crafts, baked or canned goods, etc.
                One site with particular potential for such a market
                is the old Sonic Restaurant location on Jeff Davis
 I            ~~~~Avenue.
             -  Promote tourism.   Most of the previously mentioned
                objectives will likely encourage increased tourism to
                varying degrees. Encourage the development of hotels,
                motels, guest houses, bed and breakfast
                establishments, etc. to bring people to Long Beach.
             - The City should work closely with Coast Area Transit
 I            ~~~~to expand public transit services in and to the City.
                With the opening of the Senior Citizens' Activity
                Center on Jeff Davis Avenue, there may now be more of
 I            ~~~~a demand for bus service to the downtown area.  As new
                merchants are added to the existing downtown commerce,
                the demand for bus service to the area may continue to
 *             ~~~~grow.






      I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~77








 I            -~~~The  City should continue to sponsor and promote
                festivals, parades, fairs and other community
                gatherings in the downtown and waterfront areas to
 I             ~~~~reinforce the City's sense of community.  Downtown and
               waterfront merchants should be involved in the
                planning and promotion of festivals.   The merchants
                could sponsor festival advertisements which could
                include listings of area merchants, information on
                their goods and services, and special promotions.
                During these community gatherings, merchants should
 I             ~~~encourage  people  to  browse  with  a variety  of
                promotional measures including announcements, hand-
                outs, signs and banners bringing attention to their
 I             ~~~~products and/or special sales.   Merchants may also
                want to consider staying open later to accommodate
                shopping.

I         ~~~Sub-aoal 6:  Establish a link between the downtown and the
          waterfront recreation and commercial areas.
          The downtown and the adjacent commercial waterfront area
I        ~~collectively  offer  residents  a variety  of goods  and
          services. By establishing a link between the two areas, it
          is likely that commercial activity in both areas would be
          enhanced.   The two areas should be both symbolically and
          physically unified to create a more viable commercial
          attraction.   The following objectives were developed to
*         ~~~accomplish this sub-goal.

             - The City should consider developing a theme for the
                downtown area which could be carried into the
 I             ~~~~waterfront area.
             - As previously mentioned, existing plans to provide
                access to the harbor and beach from Jeff Davis Avenue
                should be carried forth.   Those plans, as currently
                drawn, will provide much needed access to beach and
                harbor facilities, and convenient parking which could
                benefit both the downtown and the harbor area.
I           ~~~- The  City  should  work  closely  with  the  Highway
                Department and the County to develop safe crosswalks,
                particularly at the intersections of Jeff Davis and
 I             ~~~~Cleveland Avenues with US 90.   Safe and convenient
                pedestrian crossings from beach and harbor areas to
                downtown and waterfront commercial areas north of the
                highway will be vital to promote recreational and
                commercial interaction between the two areas.
             - As commercial and recreational activity increases in
                the urban waterfront area, it may be feasible to
 I             ~~~~establish some sort of shuttle service to transport
                people between the two areas.







                                    78








I         ~~~Goal 2:  optimize commercial and recreational opportunities
          in the waterfront area.

*        ~~The sub-goals for this goal are:
             1. To develop additional recreational facilities in and
               near the harbor area.
             2. To seek new business ventures to locate in existing
               vacant structures along US 90.
             3. To enhance and protect the aesthetic quality of the
               waterfront area.
             4. To promote tourism.
          Sub-aoal 1:  To develop additional recreational facilities
*         ~~in and near the harbor area.
         The harbor and the beaches on either side of it offer the
          greatest potential for recreational use of any area of the
          city.  While there are-some recreational facilities in the
I       ~~area currently,  there  is great potential  for increased
          recreational activity in the area.   Numerous suggestions
         were made at Committee meetings and in resident and merchant
I       ~~surveys regarding the potential for development of various
          recreational  facilities  in the  area.   The  following
          objectives were developed for this sub-goal.

     I                           ~~~~~~~~~Objectives

             - Encourage the development of recreational businesses
                in the waterfront area.   Some of the recreational
               businesses mentioned a number of times in Committee
               meetings and/or the resident and merchant surveys were
               core      ate   rerainleupetrnaswater park,  an amusement park,  a miniature golf
               bowling alley and movie theatres.   Bowling alley and
               movie theatre developments do not necessarily need
               waterfront exposure and would possibly be better
               suited for off-beach sites, rather than have them
               occupy prime waterfront property.
I          ~~~- Investigate the feasibility of a harbor expansion
               program to include dredging and filling to the south
               of the existing facility.   By expanding the harbor
 I            ~~~~southward,  additional  commercial  and recreational
                facilities  could be developed.   The  City  could
               consider relocating existing leases to the expansion
               area to allow for the development of a major
 I            ~~~~attraction such as a resort hotel,  or theme park.
               Prior to embarking on such an ambitious project,
               careful consideration should be given to determine the
               most desirable character and uses of the harbor, and
               whether such activities would be complimentary.
             - Consider building a public pavillion over the water in
               the harbor.   Such a facility could provide a place
                from which to stage numerous public events.





                                    79







 I           - ~~~Build a public fishing pier at the harbor.  The City
               should seek funding assistance to develop a fully
                functional fishing pier with covered shelter, lighting
 I            ~~~~and benches.
              -Work with  the  Sand  Beach  Authority  to develop
               permanent volleyball courts on the sand beach near the
               existing comfort station, and to build shelters on the
               sand beach on both sides of the harbor.
              -Provide a launch facility for small catamarans and
               other small non-motorized vessels, preferably on the
 I            ~~~~west side of the harbor.
              -Consider developing a public green space near the
               harbor from which people could view water activities
 I            ~~~~and events in the harbor.   Playground equipment for
               children could be included in the development.
          Sub-croal 2:   Seek new business ventures to locate  in
          existincr vacant structures aloncr US 90.
         Existing vacant and partially vacant commercial structures
          along US 90 in the urban waterfront area could accommodate a
          wide array of new business ventures.   If suitable new
         businesses were recruited and established at these sites,
         the entire area would be favorably impacted.

I        ~~The two large buildings formerly inhabited by the National
         and A&P food stores are of particular importance to the
         entire area.  The vacant status of these two buildings at
I       ~~the primary entrance to the downtown area create a negative
          image to passers-by and potential shoppers.   If businesses
         with substantial appeal and drawing capacity could be
I       ~~established in those two buildings, considerable spillover
         shopping activity may be experienced by the adjacent
         downtown area.

I        ~~Another building with considerable vacant comme rcial space
          is the Harbor Oaks Shopping Center directly across the
         highway from the harbor. This shopping center is currently
I       ~~the most dynamic commercial location in the City, and is
         anchored by the K-Mart department store and the Say-A-Center
          food store.  The available vacant space at this site could
I       ~~accommodate a variety of businesses which could, in turn,
         provide additional drawing power to the area.

         The following objectives were developed from discussions
I       ~~held a the Committee meetings,  and from comments derived
          from the merchant and resident surveys to accomplish this
*        ~~~sub-goal.









      U                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~80







    I                           ~~~~~~~~~Obiectives
             -The City should establish a committee of community and
              business leaders to promote the urban waterfront area
              to new potential new businesses.   This could be the
              same committee as recommended. previously for the
              downtown  area.   The committee  should market the
              attributes of the urban waterfront area of Long Beach
              and provide information to prospective businesses
              regarding:   zoning:  building  codes and permits;
I            ~~~~specific waterfront development  restrictions  and
              requirements; available properties; local banking,
              insurance, real estate, and government contacts; and
I            ~~~~any incentives available to businesses from local
              government, utility companies and the Mississippi
              Department of Economic Development.
             -The City should consider providing incentives for new
              businesses to locate in existing structures along the
              waterfront, as previously mentioned for the downtown
              area.
I           - ~~~The City should work with the owners of existing
              vacant structures, offering them incentives to make
              improvements to their buildings and property which
              would make them more attractive to prospective new
              businesses.   The City should strongly encourage the
              owners to follow design and style criteria consistent
              with the theme or image chosen for the downtown and/or
I            ~~~~waterfront area.  The City may also consider offering
              the same or similar incentives to other commercial
              property owners in the area to encourage the
I            ~~~~consistency of design needed to develop a unified
              image and establish an identity for the area.
             -As mentioned previously, the City should establish a
              committee to investigate possibilities for obtaining
              lower rates for wind and water damage insurance.
             -The City should consider promoting the development of
              some type of entertainment complex using available
I            ~~~~commercial property at the intersection of Jeff Davis
              Avenue and US 90.   Some of the ideas mentioned by
              Committee members for such a development included: a
I            ~~~~musical/theatrical complex in which a variety of
              musical and theatrical performances could be held; an
              international food and merchandise center at which
              numerous foods and various other products (arts,
              crafts, clothing, and other items of interest) could
              be offered from nations across the world; and, an
              open-air pavillion at which dances and a variety of
I            ~~~~other events could be staged to draw people to the
              area.  The facility should be designed and decorated
              to create a festive atmosphere.






     U                              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~81









          Sub-aoal 3:  Enhance and Drotect the aesthetic cfualitv of
          the waterfront area.
          The waterfront area is far and away the most prominent and
          important physical feature of the City of Long Beach and
          provides the residents and visitors of the City with
          numerous benefits.  In addition to providing its beautiful
I       ~~views and many recreational opportunities to residents and
         visitors alike, and lovely homesites to those fortunate
          enough to afford them, the area is also the City's strongest
         attraction  for commercial  activity.   While  the area
U         ~~currently generates considerable property and sales tax
         dollars to fund public improvement projects throughout the
          City, there is tremendous potential for increasing
         commercial activity in the area.

         Increases in recreational and commercial activity in the
         waterfront area will be encouraged by implementing a variety
         of beautification measures in the waterfront area.
         Increased activity in the area will in turn magnify the
          importance of maintaining and protecting the aesthetic and
         environmental quality of the area. The following objectives
         were developed to accomplish this sub-goal.

     I                           ~~~~~~~~Obecive

            - Develop architectural and design criteria for all new
               development  in the harbor.   Adherence  to these
               standards should be uniformly enforced, and the
               eventual conformance to them should be encouraged
 *             ~~~~among existing establishments at the harbor.
            - The City should establish and enforce policies to
               maintain properties not maintained by their owners.
            - An urban waterfront beautification committee should be
 I            ~~~~established to recruit volunteers and resources to
               maintain and beautify properties with absentee
               ownership and other key properties as needed.   This
               committee should also work with property owners at key
               locations to beautify and create focal points on
               frontage property along US 90.
            - Attractive, low ground cover plants should be planted
               in the medians along US 90 to catch sand which escapes
               from the beach.
            - Work with the Highway Department to establish a
 I            ~~~~specific work plan to maintain medians on US 90.
            - Landscape and beautify parking areas and other common
               areas within the harbor.
I         ~~~- The City should consider either removing the metal
               structure located east of the harbor entrance, or at
               least take measures to improve its appearance.








                                   82








 I           -~~~Work  with the Sand Beach Authority to develop a
               maintenance  plan  for Long  Beach  beaches.    city
               officials should meet with the Sand Beach Authority's
 I            ~~~~Technical Committee and develop a plan which addresses
               daily grooming and emergency related issues. The plan
               should include methods for the City to monitor both
 *             ~~~the  schedule  and  quality  of  the  maintenance
               operations.
              -Work with the Sand Beach Authority and the sheriff's
               department to increase awareness and enforcement of
 I            ~~~~existing beach ordinances.
              -Support the efforts of the Mississippi Marine Trash
               Task Force to reduce marine litter. Encourage boaters
 I            ~~~~at the harbor to conscientiously dispose of their oil,
               trash and by-catch properly, and recruit volunteers to
               periodically remove trash and debris from the
 *             ~~~~shoreline and near-shore waters.

         Sub-croal 4: Promote tourism.
         Tourism has been a primary industry and a vital part of
I       ~~Mississippi's  coastal  area's  economy  for well  over a
         century. The City of Long Beach, despite having some of the
         most beautiful beach areas on the Coast, has historically
         not gotten its share of the area's tourism.   With the
         current national economic recession from which the City has,
         unfortunately not been immune, and the reductions in federal
         funding available for local public improvement projects, it
          is essential that the city maximize opportunities for
         tourism  related economic development.         The need  for
          increased tourism and associated job development is further
I       ~~magnified by proposed significant decreases  in federal
         defense spending, which is likely to result in a
         considerable reduction in related jobs locally.

U        ~~Many of the recommendations mentioned in previous sub-goals
         and objectives will encourage tourism in the Long Beach
          area.  obviously, previously mentioned improvements in the
          appearance of the area, and the development of additional
         things to do and places to stay will increase Long Beach's
          appeal to potential tourists.   other objectives pertaining
          to increasing accessibility to and throughout the area will
          likewise contribute to the City's attractiveness to tourism.
         The following objectives, along with numerous objectives
          that have been or will be mentioned in this study have been
          developed to accomplish the sub-goal of promoting tourism in
          the City of Long Beach.











                                    83







    I                            ~~~~~~~~~obiectives
             -Encourage development of businesses which typically
I             ~~~~have high appeal to tourist (restaurants, hotels and
               recreational businesses) in the urban waterfront area.
             -The  City  should  actively  seek  to  lure popular
               organized recreational activities to Long Beach.  The
               City should attempt to hold events which may generate
               regional appeal such as fishing rodeos, boat racing,
              volleyball tournaments, softball tournaments in all
I             ~~~age  groups,  kite  flying  and  sand  sculpturing
               competitions, etc.
             -City leaders should stay actively involved with the
               Harrison County Tourism Commission, making sure that
              the Commission stays abreast of attractions and events
               in the City, and that they are actively promoted.
             -The City may wish to develop a tourism task force to
I             ~~~~interact with the Harrison County Tourism Task Force
               and the Harrison County Tourism Commission in
               addressing issues related to the City's tourism goals.
I           - ~~~The City should encourage area merchants to work with
               Coast Area Transit in taking steps to lure tourists to
               local restaurants and shops via the weekend trolleys.
*              ~~~~Promotions providing tourist  incentives should be
               developed.
             -The City should work with State and local agencies to
              provide street lighting along US 90 in the urban
I             ~~~~waterfront area.
             -The  City  should  investigate  the  feasibility  of
               lowering the speed limit along US 90 through the urban
I             ~~~~waterfront area to create a safer, more leisurely and
               less stressful environment.   Lower speed limits and
              the provision of safe, well-identified crosswalks
              would benefit both residents and visitors wishing to
               enjoy the area, and would promote pedestrian
               interaction between the beach and harbor areas and the
               commercial areas north of US 90.
I           - ~~The  City  should  investigate  the  feasibility  of
               allowing dockside gaming vessels in its harbor if it
               is legalized within Harrison County.  The City should
               push for legislation which would provide fair taxation
               of gaming operations and that revenues generated
               through the taxation are allocated so as to ensure
               adequate compensation to the City.
I           - ~~~If dockside gaming is not legalized in the County, the
               City should investigate various measures to capitalize
               on projected increased tourist traffic to be generated
I            ~~~~by proposed dockside gaming operations in neighboring
              Hancock County (i.e. recruit additional hotel/motel
               facilities, restaurants, and recreational
*              ~~~~attractions).






                                   84









          Goal 3:   Improve public access to the harbor and beach
*         ~~~areas.

         To attain many of the objectives previously mentioned
         pertaining to providing additional commercial and
          recreational opportunities, attracting more people and
         generating additional commercial activity, the provision of
          additional and improved access to the harbor and beach areas
          can be of enormous benefit. While the City is fortunate to
I       ~~have a fine small craft harbor and miles of beautiful
         beaches, access to those resources is rather limited, which
         has both restricted recreational opportunities for residents
*         ~~and likely caused many tourists to pass through the City to
         get to more accessible recreational areas along the Coast.

         Access to beach areas near the downtown area and to the
         harbor has been particularly inadequate. There is virtually
          no parking along the south side of US 90 in the urban
         waterfront area to allow access to the beaches. The harbor
          currently has only one entrance, and it is not convenient to
          the downtown area. Recent parking lot development near the
          entrance of the harbor has Considerably improved access to
          the east side of the harbor and the adjacent beach area, but
         more parking is needed to provide access to the west side of
          the harbor and to the beaches directly south of the downtown
*         ~~~area.

         To provide improved public access to the harbor and beach
          areas, the following sub-goals and objectives were
          developed.
          Sub-aoal 1: Provide improved access to the west side of the
         harbor, and to the adiacent beach area.
         With access to the harbor currently limited to the entrance
          near the harbor area's northeast corner at the intersection
          of US 90 and Cleveland Avenue, during hours of peak usage,
I        ~~traffic  flow  is occasionally  congested  with boaters
          launching and parking their trailers, hindering the flow of
          of other motorists attempting to get to other areas of the
*         ~~~harbor.

         The beach area west of the harbor has historically been
          little used due to its inaccessibility, and, with improved
I        ~~access, could become one of the higher used beaches on the
          Coast.   Access to this beach area, and to the harbor from
         Jeff Davis Avenue could essentially open a whole new area
          for the public's recreational enjoyment.
          The existing lack of convenient access to the harbor from
I       ~~the downtown area minimizes the potential for commercial
          interaction between the two areas.





                                     85








                                 Objective
 *           -~~~The  City  should  expedite the completion  of the
               proposed Jeff Davis Avenue beach/harbor access project
                (see Figure  5).   This project,  as proposed will
               significantly increase accessibility to the harbor and
 I            ~~~~adjacent beach areas, and is likely to promote major
                increases in commercial and recreational activity in
               those areas.   Additionally,  the convenient access
 I            ~~~~which will be provided to and from the downtown area
               will vastly increase the potential for residents and
               tourists using beach and harbor facilities to
 *             ~~~~patronize businesses in the downtown area.
          Sub-cqoal  2:   Increase vublic use and enioyment  of the
         harbor.
I       ~~The harbor has many fine facilities to provide for the use
          and enjoyment of the boating public. Additional facilities
          and amenities should be developed to increase accessibility
I       ~~to and enjoyment of the harbor by the non-boating public as
         well  as boaters.   In order to increase public use and
          enjoyment of the harbor, the following objectives were
*         ~~~developed.

                                 Obj ectives
 I           -~~~Consider providing a green space/park area in the
               harbor area from which to view harbor activities.
               This could increase access to the harbor, and allow
 I            ~~~~greater enjoyment of the area for the non-boating
               public as well as for boaters.
              -Consider constructing a pavillion over the water in
 I            ~~~~the harbor.  Such a facility could be used to stage a
               variety of public events, and could greatly enhance
 *             ~~~~public access to and enjoyment of the harbor.

              -The completion of the above-mentioned beach/harbor
               access project at the west side of the harbor area
 I            ~~~~will greatly facilitate public access and enjoyment of
               the harbor.
         Sub-croal 3: Increase public access to other beach areas of
         Loncr Beach.
         while, as previously mentioned, Long Beach has approximately
          four miles of sand beaches along its southern border, the
          beach areas of primary concentration during this study have
         been those along the approximately one mile waterfront area
         adjacent to the downtown and to the nearby commercial area
         along US 90, defined earlier in this study as the Study
         Area.





                                    86







                                                I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






                                                                      cow~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- ee-,



                                                                                                                                                                  4'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
                                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fil                                                                             -Wb




                                                                                                                                                                  - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -cl  -Am
                                                                                                                                                                                                            x\










                                    I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5A





U                             ~~~~~~~~~~~PHASE 2             PHASE  I                                                                --                            5. 11--

















                                                 A1t0' B-1   33 S      t 00.,  $107 365I 0.00
                                                   k             34.'0.n95 SY  20.0
                                                      8' Astor l~~~~ ~ ~~~~1.n340 IF  50.00  1,7(0.00
                                                  8'5... d Fo.IC  0.i  8950 IF  Itoo                                                                -7-
                                                         TOTAL OS6TR1~~~~~~~T106 COST,01D  007,1. 00


                                                                                  M. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'- --_  I,700

                                                      TrOIIIC S1'.olnO  ~~~~~~~~3405 IF  00.0



                                                TOTAL COTRtWTI COS  T,    0172,415.00
                                                          CONSRMION CMI~GEMIS,  4200                                                                             O N

                                                TOTAL  PRJEfCT COT,   PHASE 11,  210,3474.00                                                    sS  S P






                                                                  C.,b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~UTLT    PLA                                                                                           106 1  0. 0
                                                                                                        0.00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~GRE  RUSEL & SOITS0NC108017


                            LOKIG ~~~~~~~~P~~~L.M  IC ITUCIO                                                                        CONSUTING ENCINERS, 901 "6-06                         -8









          The beaches within the Study Area generally fall within the
          waterfront area previously identified in the Sand Beach
I        ~~~Master Plan* as the waterfront area within the City with the
          highest potential for public usage.   In that plan, beach
          areas throughout Harrison and Hancock Counties were
          categorized regarding their potential and suitability for
          varying levels of public usage.   The primary Study Area
          beaches fall within the Harbor Planning Unit of the Sand
          Beach Master Plan, which is designated as a Category I area.
I        ~~~Category I areas in the plan are selected areas judged to be
          suitable for high intensity usage by the public, and for new
          facility development.   The suggested activities discussed
          previously in this study are consistent with the
          recommendations of that plan. (* The Sand Beach Master Plan
          was prepared in 1985-86 through the collaborative efforts of
          the Sand Beach Planning Team.  The planning team consisted
          of:   Ralph M. Field Associates,  Inc. ; Design Consortium,
          Ltd. ; Gulf Coast Research Laboratory; Robert G. Dean, Sc.
          D.; Mississippi Law Research Institute; and, Southern
I        ~~~Mississippi  Planning and Development  District.   Major
          funding for the study was provided by a grant to Harrison
          County from the Mississippi Department of Wildlife
I        ~~~Conservation through its Bureau of Marine Resources.)
          Beaches along the remaining three miles of Long Beach
          waterfront were generally classified as Category III areas,
I        ~~or areas for which increased used should not be encouraged
          by the development of new user facilities. The area between
          the seawall and US 90 between Runnels Avenue and Girard
I        ~~Avenue,  however  was  classified  as  a  Category  II
          "opportunity" area for new facility development.  That area
          is one of only a few areas in the entire two-county planning
          area with enough open space between the highway and the
          seawall to allow for the development of beach-related
          parking and facilities.   It is recommended that the City
          develop facilities to improve access to beach areas
I        ~~throughout the City in accordance with the principles and
          concepts brought forth in the Sand Beach Master Plan.  An
          except from the Sand Beach Master Plan which identifies
I        ~~~recommended use levels and developments along Long Beach's
          beaches included herein as Attachment A.

          In order to provide access to other beach areas of the City,
I        ~~~the following objective was developed.







     I                            ~~~~~~~~~objective
              -Work with the Harrison County Board of Supervisors and
 I             ~~~~the Sand Beach Authority to obtain the necessary
                funding to implement the development of beach-user
                facilities in the area between the seawall and US 90
                between Runnels and Girard Avenues as recommended in
                the Sand Beach Master Plan.  Care should be taken in
                the design phase of the project to blend the facility
                development inobtrusively with the existing character
 I             ~~~~of the area.   Specifically,  parking and other user
                facilities should be designed in harmony with existing
                vegetation, particularly trees.  Character and visual
 I             ~~~~appeal need not be sacrificed for functionality.

*         ~~~Goal 4.  Improve access to the City of Long Beach.
          It is vital for the accomplishment of each of the goals
          mentioned in this study, that access to the City of Long
          Beach be improved.
          While access from neighboring cities from the east and west
          is provided by US 90, access from more inland areas of the
U         ~~~County is relatively inconvenient.   Access from Gulfport,
            otherthan via US 90, is provided primarily by Railroad
          Street,  Old Pass Road and 28th Street.   Railroad Street
I        ~~~provides fairly convenient access to the commercial areas of
          the City from the extreme western portion of Gulfport. Old
          Pass Road also provides limited access to the City from the
          west Gulfport area, but travels through primarily
          residential areas and is inconvenient to the commercial
          areas of the City.   The primary access route to the City
          from other major residential areas of the County from the
          northeast is along 28th Street and Klondyke.   This route
          follows two-laned roads which are often in disrepair,
          inadequately marked and signed, and not conducive to popular
          use  as major  thoroughfares.   This  route  is also  not
          convenient to the commercial areas of Long Beach.

*         ~~Access to the City from residential areas in the western
          portion of the County, other than via US 90, is even more
          limited - primarily to Pineville Road, which provides
          limited access from nearby areas northwest of the City, and
I        ~~to Beatline Road,  which provides access from more remote
          areas north of the City, and to motorists traveling 1-10.
          Pineville Road is a narrow two-laned road which winds
I        ~~~through several residential and minor commercial areas, and
          is inadequately marked and signed, with no shoulders in most
          areas.   Beatline Road also is a two-laned road, with no
I        ~~shoulders in many areas, which is also inadequately marked
          and signed.





                                    89









          There are two exits on 1-10 available to travelers to the
          City of Long Beach, the Long Beach/Pass Christian Exit
I        ~~~northwest of the City, and the Canal Road Exit northeast of
          the City.  Access from these exits is limited to one route
          originating at each of those exits.   Access from the Long
          Beach/Pass Christian Exit is along Beatline Road, which
          provides fairly direct access to the extreme western portion
          of the City, but is not convenient to the commercial areas.
          To get to the City f rom the Canal Road Exit, the motorist
I        ~~must follow Canal Road south to 28th Street, then travel
          west along 28th Street to Klondyke Road, which will
          eventually deliver the traveler fairly close to the major
          commercial areas of the City.
          In essence, while there are routes to the City from the
          inland areas of the County, and from 1-10, they do not offer
          convenient enough access to encourage potential shoppers and
          visitors to make the trek to Long Beach commercial areas in
          sufficient numbers to substantially contribute to the City's
          economy.
          Public transportation to and in the City of Long Beach is
          very limited, with regular fixed-route trolley service
          provided along US 90 only on Fridays through Sundays during
          the summer months. Additionally, there is demand-responsive
          transit service available to the handicapped and elderly by
I        ~~~calling in their request a day in advance.  Also, there is
          another very limited public transit service being offered on
          an experimental basis. That service is primarily geared to
I        ~~Jefferson Davis Jr. College students, but is available to
          the public as well, providing round-trip transit from Pass
          Christian to the college campus and Edgewater Mall.

U         ~~To  improve  the City's  accessibility  both  in terms  of
          vehicular traffic and the availability of public transit,
*         ~~~the following sub-goals were developed.

          Sub-croal 1: Provide more convenient access from 1-10.
          As discussed earlier, access from 1-10, particularly to the
I        ~~urban waterfront area, is indirect and inconvenient.  it is
          important that the City becomes more accessible to
          interstate travelers to increase its tourism potential. The
          following objectives were developed to improve the City's
          accessibility from 1-10.












                                     90








     I                            ~~~~~~~~~obiectives

              -Approach the Highway Department to either rename the
                Canal Road Exit or modify its name to include "Long
                Beach".
              -Encourage  the  County  to  expedite  proposed
                improvements, including widening, of Canal Road south
                of 1-10, and to provide signage along that road to
                direct motorists to Long Beach.
              -Work with the Harrison County Board of Supervisors,
 I             ~~~the  City  of  Gulfport,  and  the  Harrison  County
                Development Commission to implement improvements to
                28th Street.   The street desperately needs to be
 I             ~~~widened,  have  shoulders  constructed,  have proper
                striping installed and to be provided with directional
                signs.
              -Provide directional signs along Klondyke Road to the
                downtown and waterfront areas.
              -The City should encourage the County to initiate a
                project, as proposed in the Harrison County Major
 I             ~~~Thoroughfare  Plan,  to  extend  Airport  Boulevard
                westward, running south of the DuPont rail spur to
                Canal Road.   Such a project would provide another
 I             ~~~major  east-west  arterial  which  would  allow
                considerably more convenient access to Long Beach from
                Highway 49.
              -The  City  should  investigate  the  feasibility  of
 I             ~~~~extending Klondyke Road northward to intersect either
                with Canal Road south of 1-10, or with a possible
                extension of the above-mentioned project.  This would
                greatly improve the City's accessibility from 1-10,
                and should be considered in the near future while
                there is still relatively little development through
                the area in which property for right-of-way would have
                to be acquired.
              -The City should encourage the County to implement a
                project to widen and make other improvements to
 I             ~~~~Beatline Road from I-10 to the City.  Proper striping,
                shoulders and directional signage are much needed
 *              ~~~~along this road.

          Sub-aoal 2: Imnrove access to the City from other areas of
          the Countv.
          While it is important to improve access to the City for 1-10
          travelers, it is even more important to make Long Beach
          accessible to residents of other areas of the County. While
          the I-10 access improvements suggested earlier will also
I        ~~increase accessibility to the City for residents of other
          cities and outlying areas of the County, it is important
          that other arterials for local traffic be developed and\or
I        ~~upgraded.   The  following objectives were developed  to
          accomplish this sub-goal.





                                     91








                                 Obl ectives
              -The City should support the proposed development of a
                major east-west arterial parallel with the CSX
                railroad from Biloxi through Pass Christian.   Such a
                project would provide badly needed relief to US 90,
                and would greatly facilitate traffic movement among
                all four affected cities.
              -The City should work with the City of Gulfport and
 I             ~~~~Harrison  County to implement  improvements  to 28th
                Street, as discussed earlier.
              -The City should encourage the County to initiate the
 I             ~~~~previously mentioned project to build a new major
                arterial extending Airport Road from Highway 49 to
                Canal Road along the DuPont rail spur.
              -The City should stress the maintenance of all major
                thoroughfares  entering  the  City.    While  major
                improvements to those streets will often be limited by
                municipal budgetary constraints,  some of the lower
 I             ~~~~cost  improvements  such  as signage, striping  and
                cleaning should be undertaken and maintained.
              -The City should work closely with Coast Area Transit
                to increase the availability of public transit to and
                in the City.
              -The City should endorse and support the proposed
 *              ~~~~revival of passenger rail service to the area.

          As mentioned earlier, it is recommended that the Long Beach
          Urban Waterfront Advisory Committee should continue meeting
I        ~~regularly promote and sustain the activities necessary to
          accomplish the goals and objectives set forth herein.












      I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9



I
I
I
I
I
I
I                             APPENDIX A
I                     Excerpt from the Sand Beach Masterplan
I
I
I


IX
I
I

I
I

I




















CHAPTER FOUR: LONG BEACH



This chapter includes recommended management policies and development
concepts for each of the following planning units in the City of Long
Beach:


ï¿½   Long Beach West Planning Unit
I   Long Beach Harbor Planning Unit
*   Long Beach East Planning Unit


New facilities including a pavilion/restroom/shower/concession area plus
an organized parking area are recommended south of the highway
between Runnels and Girard Ave.  New facility development designed
to enhance existing harbor facilities and create a high use recreational
activity center is recommended for the Long Beach small craft harbor
and adjacent beach areas.




















                                     94+










                                  LONG BEACH WEST PLANNING UNIT


                                         Management Categories:
                                New Facility Development (Activity Center)
                                           Beach Conservation


U          ~~~This planning unit extends from the western corporate limits of Long Beach to Girard
           Avenue which is just west of the Ramada Inn. The beach supports a low to moderate

           intensity of use.

I          ~~~The beachfront development north of Highway 90 includes single and multiple-family
           residences. Most of the shorefront in this area - from White Harbor Road to West
           Avenue - is zoned for multiple-family development.   Some relatively large tracts of
           undeveloped land currently zoned for multiple-family use are also found along the
           shorefront, particularly in the area between Marcie Drive and Runnels Avenue.  The
           westernmost section of the planning unit (between the corporate limits and Markham
           Road) is also largely undeveloped and a section of this area is zoned "Neighborhood
           Commercial".


I          ~~~Between Runnels Avenue and Girard Avenue there is a wide unpaved area between the
           highway and the seawall which is currently used for beach parking.  Across Highway
I          ~~~90 from this area are single family homes and condominiums.  The shorefront zoning
           here includes both "medium density" and "multiple-family" residential districts.   The
           State Highway Department, as it proceeds with its plans to improve Highway 90, has
           identified the wide area between the highway and seawall as an opportunity area for
            adding new, paved parking space.


            Management Policies


            Two separate management categories are designated in this area. (See Figure 15.) The
I           ~~~area between the highway and seawall between Runnels Avenue and Girard Avenue
            should be considered an "opportunity area" for Category If new facility development.
*           ~~~This "opportunity area" is one of only a few such sites in the entire planning area
            which provide an open space between Highway 90 and the seawall wide enough to
            accommodate new beach-related facilities and parking space. New facility development
            here should include a pavilion/restroom/shower/concession area plus an organized parking


                                                95





I



             area. (See Figure 26.) Preparation of detailed development plans for this area should
             precede and be coordinated with future State Highway Department plans to construct
             paved parking space here.



             The area west of Runnels Avenue, extending to the western Corporate limits, is
             designated Category III.  Erosion control and beach stabilization measures to control
             wind-blown sand in both the Category II and III areas should consist of vegetated dunes.





















                            "Opportunity Area" Between the Highway and Seawall



















                                                   96




















OAK TREE PLANTING                                     PEwodETrIAN WALKWA

           I                                                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PINE TREES

                  SHRUB PLANTING it ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PARKING AREA
           U                                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~VEGETATED DUNE






       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i

             FLOWERING ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~* TR  ETOMISOE  OCSIN







            I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E*











FIGURE 26: OPPORTUNITY AREA DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF SEAWALL (CATEGORY Hl)












                                         97











                     LONG BEACH HARBOR PLANNING UNIT


                              Management Category:
               New Facility Development (High Use Activity Center)


This planning unit includes the Long Beach Small Craft Harbor as well as the beach
areas adjacent to the west and east sides of the harbor.   The current intensity of
beach use in these areas is moderate.  The planning unit is bounded on the west by
Girard Avenue and on the east by Nicholson Street.  The beachfront development along
Highway 90 is primarily highway commercial-type development and includes the Ramada
Inn. The shorefront zoning is "Highway Commercial".


The small craft harbor provides a public boat launch and fishing pier as well as harbor
facilities for commercial  fishing and pleasure craft.   Some limited parking space is
available within the harbor and along the shoulder of the highway east of the harbor.
In the stretch of highway near the harbor between Jeff Davis Avenue and Cleveland
Avenue, the seawall is adjacent to, and higher than the roadway and therefore no
parking is possible here.  There is a small parking bay across the highway from the
Ramada Inn.





                                                     :1















                           Long Beach Small Craft Harbor






                                      98









Management Policies


Similar to the Pass Christian Harbor planning unit, this planning unit presents an
opportunity for new facility development and the establishment of a focal area for
higher intensity recreational activities. The extension of the harbor into the Mississippi
Sound acts as a littoral blockage and stabilizing influence on the beach to the updrift
or eastern side. The beach in this area should be utilized to accommodate both new
facility development as well as 'expanded parking. New facilities to be developed should
include restrooms, showers, a concession area and small picnic pavilions. (See Figure 27.)


Due to the high-intensity use anticipated for this area, biennial sand relocation and
recontouring of the beach profile should be used to control wind-blown sand.


















I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9










                    - OAK TREE PLANTING

                         --BEACH CONCESSION

                              -VEGETATED DUNE

                                  -RESTROOM / SHOWER / CONCESSION

                                                 YACHT CLUB COMPLEX

                                                           PARKING AREAS

                                                                      CHAMBER BUILDING














                "I;r',/  _________    ________   _ _       -RESTROOM/PN    STRUCTURE




               IMPROVED BOAT LAUNCH -----B--A---H C..N

      HARBOR MASTER & FUEL DOCK                                                  --

FISHING PIER





 FIGURE 27: LONG BEACH HARBOR AND BEACH DEVELOPMENT (CATEGORY D)










                                  LONG BEACH EAST PLANNING UNIT


                                          Management Category:
        I                                   ~~~~~~~~~~Beach Conservation


          This planning unit includes the beachfront extending from Nicholson Street to the eastern
          corporate limits of Long Beach. Moving from west to east, the shorefront development
          north of Highway 90 includes some highway commercial development, the University of
          Southern Mississippi's Gulf Park Campus, and single family homes. With the exception of
          a small "Highway-Commercial" zone, the zoning is "Residential - Single Family".


          The intensity of beach use ranges from low to moderate. The university does maintain
I         ~~~a large private pier, but the campus is not a residential campus and, since courses are
          held in the evening, the beach is not well-used by students during, the day. There are
          a few small parking bays in the planning unit, and beach users also park between the
          parking bays on the sand between the highway and the, seawall.

















       I                               ~ ~~~~~~~~USM Gulf Park Campus Pier


I         ~~Management Policies


I         ~~~This area is not designated for new  recreational facility development  or increased
           recreational use.  Erosion control and beach stabilization measures to control wind-
*         ~~~blown sand should consist of vegetated dunes.



                                                   101



I
I
I
I
I
I
     I ~~~~APPENDIX B
I

I

I
I
                       It .'{I0 . 
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I



OWNERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION IUNBERS    SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE NUMBER: 1

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2  SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3  MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5= STORAGE,  6  CITY,  7  COUNTY,  8  STATE,  9  FEDERAL,  10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12  VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14   NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18   FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMNUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22  FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                PRIMARY          SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING    PARKING        EACH BLOCK



612A-03-0O1.000   OSGOOD GUY & WF                2              1000          0          0
 612A-03-002.OWO   ALLEN JAMES R SR & DI          2              1200          0          0
 612A-03-003.000   HAVERSTROH BESSIE F            2              1000          0          0
 612A-03-004.000   JAMES MYRL 1                   2              1000          0          0
 612A-03-005.000   TAYLOR AGNESS B                2              1400          0          0
 612A-03-007.000   SCLAFANI GEO J & WF           16               175         10          0
 612A-03-008.000   RAFKIN M DAVID & MARY          2              2500          0          0
 612A-03-008.000                                  2              1700          0          0
 612A-03-010.000   MILLARD JAN1ET                 2              1500          0          0
 612A-03-011.000   HENDERSON CHARLES K &          2              3000          0          0
 612A-03-014.000   MACKAY JOHN D & JOANN          2              1600          0          0
 612A-03-015.000 HANDAL EDITH E                   2              1700          0          0
 612A-03-016.000  TROESCHER WM G JR & W           2              1000          0          0
 612A-03-017.000   HADEN G K & WF                 2              1200          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       10          0           10

 612A-03-018.000   MAXWELL J 1 JR & WF            2              1400          0          0
 612A-03-019.000   PIPER HAROLD E & JACQ          2              1100          0          0
 612A-03-020.000  WILLIAMS PAUL A & WF            2              1600          0          0
 612A-03-021.000   GOOLSBY MARY TRUAX             2              3000          0          0
 612A-03-022.000   GRIFFITH CLAYTON C 6           2              3000          0          0
 612A-03-023.000  SCHIRO GEORGE L & LOR           2              2600          0          0
 612A-03-024,000   FIORE THOMAS & CHEMAN          2              2100          0          0
 612A-03-025.000   GROVE KENNETH                  2              1800          0          0
 612A-03-026.000   BERRY E 0 & THEDA P            2              3500          0          0
 612A-03-027.000  WARD WAYNE N & WF               2              3100          0          0
 612A-03-028.O00   GODFREY GERALD & WF           12             23900          0          0
 612A-03-029.000  ROSEMEIER VERNON L              2              1800          0          0
 612A-03-030.000   MITCH HANS J & WF              2              1800          0          0
 612A-03-031.000  CHARTER BANK FSB                2              1600          0          0
 612A-03-033.000   GETMAR CHARLES & WF            2              2800          0          0
 612A-03-034.000   PERSON VELMA 5                 2              1600          0          0
 612A-03-034.001   PEARSON JOHN H                12             16800          0          0
 612A-03-034.002   PEARSON JOHN E                 2              1200          0          0
 612A-03-035.000   JOHNSON R H & WF               2              1600          0          0
 612A-03-036.000   LISHEN R E & WF                2              1100          0          0
 612A-03-037.000   FERNANDEZ  E J                 2              1100          0          0
 612A-03-038.000   LEHMAN GERRE E                 2               800          0          0
 612A-03-039.000   SHERIDAN GEORGE J JR           2              1300          0          0
 612A-03-040.000   CUEVAS CAROL                   2              1800          0          0
 612A-03-041.000   FAYARD HELEN                   2              2500          0          0
 612A-03-042.000   NIOLET DOUGLAS F & VI          2              1500          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0            0



                                                  104



OIbï¿½ERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS    SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991              PAGE NUMBER: 2

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2  SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                   5  STORAGE,  6  CITY,  7 COUNTY,  8   STATE,  9 = FEDERAL,  10  HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14  NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LUIGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18   FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19  TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20  STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21  ATTORNEYS
                   22  FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                PRIMARY          SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING     PARKING       EACH BLOCK


 612A-03-043.000   FRERICHS HARRY J               2              1200          0          0
 612A-03-043. 000                                 2               800          0          0
 612A-03-044.000   KELANDER DENNIS & KAT          2              1200          0          0
 612A-03-045.00O   RAMEY MICHAEL A & KAR          2              1100          0          0
 612A-03-046.000   THOMPSON WM & NANCY            2              2000          0          0
 612A-03-047.000   DICKENS CARROL L & WF          2              2200          0          0

                                              TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0            0

 612A-03-048.000   MCCURRY KATIE W ETAL          12             12400          0          0
 612A-03-049.000  KITCHINGS B J 6 WF              1              2000         10          0
 612A-03-050.000   STEEN THOMAS E & WF            2              1900          0          0
 612A-03-051.000   ALLEN CORRINE Y                2              2600          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       10          0           10

 612A-03-052.000  MITCHELL LOUIS A & WF           2              2400          0          0
 612A-03-053.000   BORDLEE JOYCE 5                2              1900          0          0
 612A-03-054.000   GIUFFRIA SALVADOR & W          2              3200          0          0
 612A-03-055.000   LUMPKIN L C & WF               2              1500          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0            0

 612A-03-056.000   SATCHFIELD BLDRS INC           1              4410         25          0
 612A-03-059.001   BUGUOI D JOYCE                 2              1500          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       25          0           25

 612A-03-060.000   HARE ROBERT E                  2              1800          0          0
 612A-03-061.O00   LA PLACE DE LA HER TO          3                 0         40          0
 612A-03-061.001   TOOP EILEEN J                  3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.002   PILCHER JERALD W 4 WF          3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.003   ARKANINI MARIO L & WF          3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.004   MALLETTE MILBUIRN R            3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.005   9OLSTROH ERIK K                3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.006   GIANI MARIO P                  3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.007   SIMMONS BOBBY H                3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.008   FOWLER BARBARA E               3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.009   EVANS KATHERINE R              3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.010   HART ELIZABETH J               3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.O11   WOLLSCHLAGER GENEVA K          3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.012   DUGAS DONALD L & MAE           3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.013   WOODARD EVEL P                 3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.014   SOUBIE MARK A ETAL             3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.015  ERADAR PHILIP H                 3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.016  SMITH STANLEY                   3              1500          0          0
 612A-03-061.017   NELSON FRED L JR & HF          3              1500          0          0


                                                 105



OWNERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS      SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE NUMBER: 3

PRIMARY USE CODES: 1 = OFFICE, 2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, 3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING, 4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5  STORAGE,  6  CITY,  7  COUNTY,  8 = STATE,  9   FEDERAL,  10  IIOTEL/HOTEL
                   11= SCHOOLS,  12   VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14   NOT FOR PROFIT,  15  = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16=  VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEHI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19=  TRANSPORTATION, aN4NUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20   STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21  - ATTORNEYS
                   22 FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY          SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                 USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING     PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612A-03-063.000   FLEMING PAUL A WV               4              2000          5          0
 612A-03-064.O0W   CAYLOR EUGENE D                12             11250          0          0
 612A-03-064.001   BRIGHT JAMES L & WAND           2              3000          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       45          0            45

 612A-03-065.000   MOORE JOE A & KATHY             2               800          0          0
 612A-03-066.000   STEELMAN LAWRENCE E -          15               900         10          0
 612A-03-067.000   MANNER WM  G & WF               3              2300          4          0
 612A-03-068.000 MITCH HANS J                      4              2200         10          0
 612A-03-069.000   HERRINGTON DAVID & WF          12             15500          0          0
 612A-03-069.001   POILLION MARIE G               16              2000          5          0
 612A-03-069.002   COHEN, SUZETTE S                4             10500         40          0
 612A-03-069.002   COHEN SUZETTE                   4              4500         50           0
 612A-03-069.003   POILLION MARIE G                4              1500         15           0
 612A-03-070.000   POILLION A P & WF               4              6200          0          0
 612A-03-071.000   JACKSON GERALDINE D             2              1700          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK      134          0           134

 612B-02-056.000   HOLLIDAY JOHN R                 2              1800          0          0
 612B-02-057.000   LEATHERWOOD LYNN E &            2              1300          0           0
 612B-02-058.000   PINNIX JOHN F & WF              2              1700          0          0
 612B-02-059.000  HART STEPHEN R N MART            2              2100          0          0
 612B-02-060.000  WARRINGTON JAMES & BE            2                 0          0          0
 612B-02-061.000   YEOMANS KENNETH H & P           2              1800          0          0
 612B-02-062.000   HANMONS FAIRREL D & W           2              1300          0          0
 612B-02-063.000   WYLIE MARY C                    2               900          0          0
 612B-02-064.000   CREEL W F & WF                  2              1200          0          0
 612B-02-065.000   PATTERSON EDGAR J & W           2              2200          0          0
 612B-02-066.000   BROWN DONALD S & JEAN           2              2100          0          0
 612B-02-067.000   MCDONALD JOSIE P                2              1900          0           0
 612B-02-068.000   WARRINGTON J R                  2              1800          0          0
 612B-02-069.000   LADNER CATHERINE S              2              1800          0          0
 612B-02-070.000   HERTZ PEGGY L                   2              1900          0          0
 612B-02-071.000   BROWN ANY JOHANSEN              2              2000          0          0
 612B-02-072.000   ANDERSON THOMAS L & W           2              1000          0          0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0             0

 612B-02-073.000   LONG BEACH GARDEN CLU          14              1500         10          0
 612B-02-075.000   LOGAN FLOYD J & BERIN           4             15000         30          0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       40          0            40

  612B-03-001.000   BORZIK THERESA ANN              2              1000          0          0
  612B-03-002.000  SPABN LAWRENCE 3RD ,             2               680          0          0


                                                 106



OWNIERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS     SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE NUMBER: 4

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE,  6 = CITY,  7 = COUNTY,  8 = STATE,  9 = FEDERAL,  10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NION-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY          SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                 USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING     PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612B-03-003.000   BARROW ELSIE B                  4              1600         15          0
 612B-03-004.000   HANCOCK BANK                   18              1400         25          0
 612B-03-005.000   HART STEPHEN R & HART          18               800          6          0
 612B-03-006.000   GAY NW R                        4             10000          8          6
 612B-03-007.000   LADNER WAYNE & SUSAN           16              3000         10          2
 612B-03-007.001   BROWN WAYNE & IRENIE            3              1600          0           2
 612B-03-008.000   BAKER H J JR                    2               900          0           2
 612B-03-009.000   LESTER WALTER G & WF            2              1050          0           2
 612B-03-010.000   SNEED JEAN G                   12             13500          0           2
 612B-03-012.000   MISSISSIPPI POWER CO           19             37500          0           2
 612B-03-013.000   GEDDES WILBURT H & WF           1              1200          3           1
 612B-03-014.000   HARRIS LEONARD B ETAL           2              2100          0           2
 612B-03-014.001   HARRIS LEONARD B ETAL           2               900          0           2

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       67          23           90

 612B-03-015,000   PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH            17              5400          0           8
 612B-03-016.000   HOLLAND CHARLES E & H           2              1000          0          0
 612B-03-017.000   BOOKSH NT JR & WF               2               600          0          0
 612B-03-018.000   ENGLISH JAMES C JR              2              1050          0          0
 612B-03-019.000   DAVIS OYD W & WF              18                600          0          0
 612B-03-020.000   CITY OF LONG BEACH             6               5000        100          0
 612B-03-022.000   CITY OF LONG BEACH              6              5000         16          0
 612B-03-023.000   FILLINGIH DAVID ETAL            2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-024.000   BARNES JOHN R & WF              2              1300          0          0
 612B-03-025.000   NIOLET MICHAEL L & WF           1              1500          3          0
 612B-03-026.000   GEDDES GLENN E & DIAN           2               800          0          0
 612B-03-027.000   SPAYDE FAYE                    21              1200          3          0
 612B-03-028.000   MCCOOL JOHN H & WF              2              1000          0          0
 612B-03-029.000   SPAYDE FAYE                     2                 0          0          0
 612B-03-029.001   SPAYDE FAYE                     2              1000          0          0
 612B-03-030.000   SPAYDE BARBARA F                2              1200          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK      122          8           130

 612B-03-031.000   TOWNI OF LONG BEACH            11             13000         52          0
 612B-03-032.000   MASON MILDRED H                 2              2000          0          0
 612B-03-033.000   ALQUIRE DAVID T & CON           2               800          0          0
 612B-03-033,001   MCMICHAEL SARA                  2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-034.000   FLEMING ETHEL H                 2               800          0          0
 612B-03-035.000   PARKER JOYCE C                  2               800          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       52          0            52

 612B-03-036.000   HEROLD MERLIN C & WF            2              1400          0          0
 612B-03-037.000   DAVID RONALD T & WF             2              1300          0          0
 612B-03-038.000   BENJAMIN MARY D                 2              1600          0          0


                                                    107



OWNERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION hNUBERS       SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE NUMBER: 5

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FkMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE, 6 = CITY, 7 = COUNTY, 8 = STATE, 9 = FEDERAL, 10 = HOTEL/HOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING, ï¿½14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                  USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING      PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612B-03-039.000   GREGORY CHARLES E & W          12               7950           0          0
 612B-03-040.000   BARNETT LUCILLE B               2               1700           0          0
 612B-03-041.000   BATES ROBERT H JR & J           2               3000           0          0
 612B-03-041.001   BATES BATES BATES PAR          12               8000           0          0
 612B-03-042.000   BATES ROBERT H JR               2               1350           0          0
 612B-03-043.000   DEEGEN UWE F                    2               2000           0          0
 612B-03-044.000   JOHNSON L J & WF                2               1100           0          0
 612B-03-045.000   KLEIN HERBERT H JR              2                600           0          0
 612B-03-046.000   VERDIGETS J J & WF              2               2500           0          0
 612B-03-047.000   HORSE JEFFERY K                  2              1100           0          0
 612B-03-048.000   ROBERSON PEGGY H                2               1100           0          0
 612B-03-049.000   COATS S LLOYD & WF               4              1200           2          1
 612B-03-050.000   ROBERTSON JAMES A SR            2               1400           0          0
 612B-03-051.000   MEEK GEORGE W                   2                700           0          0
 612B-03-051.001   BARRALE ROSE                    2                700           0          0
 612B-03-052.000   SPAYDE FAYE                     3               2500           2          0
 612B-03-053.000   WILSON HAROLD E & JAM           4               7500          14          0
 612B-03-054.000   SWENSON JEAN ANNE              16               2000           4          0
 612B-03-055.000   PINE BELT SERV INC             18               2700          22          0
 612B-03-055.001   RILEY JACK & WF                  4              2100           4          0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        48          1            49

 612B-03-056.000   ELIAS LILLIE K                   4              2000           6          4
 612B-03-057.000   MAGEE T B & WF                   4              7500           5          0
 612B-03-058.000   CARPENTER MARVIN L &             4              8250          13          2
 612B-03-058.001   GIUFFRIA S F & WF               4              12050           0          4

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        24         10            34

 612B-03-059.000   HARDY COURT SHOPPING           15               1575          15          0
 612B-03-060.000   ILLICH R J & WF                  4               800           1          0
 612B-03-061.000   PEDEN R L & ALVA               17               7200         30           0
 612B-03-062.000   SKELLIE WM D G SR              12               6000          0           0
 612B-03-063.000   TOWN OF LONG BEACH              6               2200          0           0
 612B-03-064.000   SKELLIE WN D G                  4               4450           6          0
 612B-03-065.000   SOUTHERN STAR LODGE            16               8100           0          3
 612B-03-066.000   PHAN DONG & LIEN TRIN           4               6100           3          0
 612B-03-067.000   PHAM DONG & LEIN TRIN          12               3420           0          0
 612B-03-068.000   ASHCRAFT JOHN D JR &           16               1000          25          2
 612B-03-070-000   LACOSTE STEVE                   4               1250           6          0
 612B-03-071-000   ENGLISH JAMES C                 4               2500         10           0
 612B-03-071.001   CTY DEVELOPMENT                 4               9000           8          0
 612B-03-072-000   SIKHONS ROBERT L ETAL          12              78408          0           0
 612B-03-073-000   SIMMONS ROBERT L & WF           2               1200          0           0
 612B-03-074-000   TOWN OF LONG BEACH             17              69696          0           0
 612B-03-075-000   PYBASS LAURA CAMPBELL           2                800          0           0


                                                    108



OWINERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS     SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE IUMBER: 6

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE, 6 = CITY, 7 = COUNTY, 8 = STATE, 9 = FEDERAL, 10 = HOTEL/HOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE IlON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                 USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING     PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612B-03-076-000   PATTERSON ROBERT A              2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-077-000   BRUWBELOW MARY V HERR           2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-078-000   MESSER LOUIS L & WF             2               800          0          0
 612B-03-079-000   NAZARETIAN GEO L                2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-080-000   COBB HAROLD C & LANNE           2              2000          0          0
 612B-03-080.001   COBB HAROLD C & LANNE           2              2500          0          0
 612B-03-081-000   LANCASTER EDITH DAVIS           2              2500          0          0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK      104           5          109

 612B-03-082-000   TRIPLETT HARTHA & PAR           2              2400          0          0
 612B-03-083-000   CULLINAN WH C                   2               900          0          0
 612B-03-084-000   PLATTS CHRISTINE N              2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-085-000   PLATTS CHRISTINE N              2               375          0          0
 612B-03-086-000   REILLY J P & WP                 2              1500          0          0
 612B-03-087-000   LEWIS WENDALL C & ETl           2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-088-000   FENNELL GERALD 0                2              1000          0          0
 612B-03-091-000   BOGAN JEAN                      2              1750          0          0
 612B-03-092-000   DAUTO PAUL G & WF               2              1200          0          0
 612B-03-093-000   LEHBRIGHT CHARLES F &           2              2000          0          0
 612B-03-094-000   CUEVAS BRUCE W ETAL             2               600          0          0
 612B-03-095-000  HERSHBERGER JACK R &             2              2000          0          0
 612B-03-096-000   RYAN PATRICIA A                 2              1200          0          0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0             0

 612F-02-001-000   TERRY BILLIE JOE                2               800          0          0
 612F-02-002-000   BERGENHAGEN ROBERT &            2              1800          0          0
 612F-02-003-000   BYRNE PETE J                    2              1800          0          0
 612F-02-004-000   POWELL B F & WF                 2               600          0          0
 612F-02-005-000   COSPELICH DEIDRE MARI           2               750          0          0
 612F-02-006-000   KOENENN ALFRED ETAL            12            113256          0          0
 612P-02-007-000   HOWELL BRETT A & SOND           2              1350          0          0
 612F-02-008.000   WINK ROBERT S & MI SU           2              1800          0          0
 612F-02-009.000   BENTON JIMMIE E & WF            2              1350          0          0
 612F-02-010.000   POWELL B F & WF                 2              1200          0          0
 612F-02-011.000   SWANIER OLIVER G & PA           2              2000          0          0
 612F-02-012.000   CLARK BERT E & WF               2              1350          0          0
 612F-02-013.000   MAGEE TROY B & WF               2              1600          0          0
 612F-02-014.000   COTTEN ENILY (EKMI)             2               640          0          0
  612F-02-015.000   HOLZWEISSIG ARTHUR C            2              1050          0          0
  612F-02-016.000   LONG BEACH OAKS PARTN           3            100500          0          0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        0          0             0

  612G-01-001.000   BRESLIN LONG BEACH AS           4             71500        315          0
  612G-01-001.000   BRESLIN LONG BEACH AS           4             16000          0          0


                                                   109



OWNIERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS     SURVEY COlNDUCTED = JUL 1991               PAGE NUMBER: 7

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE,  6 =CITY,  7 = COUNTY,  8 = STATE,  9 = FEDERAL,  10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                  USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING      PARKING        EACH BLOCK



                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       315          0           315

 612G-01-003.000   RR MORRISON & SON INC           4               1800          30          0
 612G-01-004.000   MITCH HANS J                    1               1400          10          0
 612G-01-005.000   BROWN HP JR ETAL                4                600          0           0
612G-01-006.000   NEBLETT G RIVES                12              13830           0          0
 612G-01-007.000   BEARD GRADY L JR & NA            4              1200           8          0
 612G-01-008.000   BROWN DANNY R 6 JANIS           3               3000           0          0
 612G-01-009.000   CRESSY ANN P                    2               1300          0           0
 612G-01-010.000   MARTIN RONALD S & DEC           2               1500           0          0
 612G-01-011.001   WILSON LLOYD & ELEANO          12               3600          0           0
 612G-01-012.000   BAIRD KAREN                     2               1100           0          0
 612G-01-013.000   MITCHELL GERALD G & R           2               1200          0           0
 612G-01-014.000   MITCHELL G G & WF               2               1200           0          0
 612G-01-015.000   MERCHANTS BANK & TRUS          18               1500         30           0
 612G-01-016.000   RIEMANN RH ETAL                 4               1600         22           0
 612G-01-017.000   MITHCELL GERALD G & D           2               1100          0           0
 612G-01-018.000   MITCHELL MILDRED ETAL          16              19500         72           0
 612G-01-018.001   MITCHELL MILDRED ETAL           4               1000          10          0
 612G-01-019.000   COMMERCIAL PROP DEV C          15              10000         20           0
 612G-01-019.001   MITCHELL GERALD G & R          12              25500          0           0
 612G-01-019.002   L B C INC                       4                600          10          0
 612G-01-020.000   MC RAE RICHARD D                3              39906        200           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       412          0           412

 612G-02-001.000   ELIAS MRS LILLIE K             12                400           3          0
 612G-02-002.000   DUBUISSON MARGARET E            4               1200           3          0
 612G-02-003.000   WATTS EDW & WF                  2               1250          0           0
 612G-02-004.000   GIRARD MELVILLE R JR            2                900          0           0
 612G-02-005.000   REAVES JAMES E ETAL             3               1200          0           0
 612G-02-006.000   CITY OF LONG BEACH              6               1000           3          0
 612G-02-009.000   FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH           17               1350           2          0
 612G-02-010.000   1ST BAPTIST CHURCH OF          17               2100          6           0
 612G-02-011.000   WARD WAYNE K & WF              12              11250          0           0
 612G-02-012.000   ELIAS LILLIE K                  4               2000           3          0
 612G-02-013.000   WARD WAYNE M & WF               4               4100           6          0
 612G-02-014.000   ELIAS LILLIE K ETAL             4               5000          9           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        35          0            35

 612G-02-016.000   SALLOUM MITCHELL JR E           4              37000        150           0
 612G-02-017.000   ENGLISH JAMES C                 4                960          8           0
 612G-02-018.000   FIRST MAGNOLIA FED SA          18               1200         72           0
 612G-02-020.000   FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH           17              30000        100           0
 612G-02-022.000   S S RESTAURANT CORP            15               2450         90           0


                                                      110



O0IJERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION 1NUMBERS    SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991                PAGE NUMBER: 8

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE, 6 = CITY, 7 = COUNTY, 8 = STATE, 9 = FEDERAL, 10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                  USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING      PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612G-02-025.000   FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH           12              11700          0           0
 612G-02-026.000   FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH           12              11700          0           0
 612G-02-027.000   MILLER MINNIE ELLEN T          12              11700          0           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       420          0           420

 612G-02-029.000   FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH           12              47916          0           0
 612G-02-029.001   MAXWELL CAROLYN K               2               2000          0           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK         0          0             0

 612G-02-030.000   VIDACOVICH MARCELLE R           2               1200          0           0
 612G-02-031.000   KUNZ MARY K                     2               1200          0           0
 612G-02-032.000   LANCASTER J R & SHIRL           2                600          0           0
 612G-02-033.000   BARNETT S W & WF                2               1200          0           0
 612G-02-034.000   ZOCH JUNE J                     2               1000          0           0
 612G-02-035.000   WEILBACHER ARMlND E &          12              47900          0           0
 612G-02-038.000   AULTMAN MICHAEL D & W          15               1400         40           0
 612G-02-040.000   LONGUE VUE TOWNHOUSES           3                  0        100           0
 612G-02-040.001   MULLINS E C & CARLOTT           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.002   BATTY GEORGE B & EVEL           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.003   THOMPSON NORMA JEAN             3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.004   DEL VECCHIO MIRIAM H            3               1186          0           0
 6126-02-040.005   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.006   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.007   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.008   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.009   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.010   KNIFFEN ARTHUR LRE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.011   MCCOLLUM CHARLES J &            3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.012   TAFF THOMAS G JR                3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.013   CHANDLER GARVIN L & W           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.014   LANCASTER JOH R & SHI           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.015   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.016   CULP PATRICIA J                 3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.017   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.018   LOIIGUE VUE VENTURE IN          3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.019   PENO ROBERT & MYRNA G           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.020   LONGUE  WE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 6126-02-040.021   RIBSON GARY & MARGARE           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.022   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.023   HOSEY VICTOR & BETTY            3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.024   LONGUE VWE VENTURE IN           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.025   VAN ELSWYK THOMAS J &           3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.026   DELVECCHIO MIRIAM H             3               1186          0           0
 612G-02-040.027   STEVENSON JOEL 4                3                893          0           0
 6126-02-040.028   RUSSELL WILLIAM E & L           3                893          0           0



OWNERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS      SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991                PAGE NUMBER: 9

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 = STORAGE, 6 = CITY, 7 = COUNTY, 8 = STATE, 9 = FEDERAL, 10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOU]NGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEHI-PUBLIC,  18 F= INANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 = STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                  USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING      PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612G-02-040.029   NULLINS CHARLOTTE C             3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.030   EDGAR ALLAN G & ROBER           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.031   HOEY GRANT ETAL                 3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.032   GRAVES JAMES W & ANN            3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.033   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.034   KNIFFEN ARTHUR L                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.035   JOHNSON PATRICIA                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.036   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.037   LONGUE WUE VENTURE IN           3                893           0          0
 612G-02-040.038   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.039   DANIELS WILLIAM ROBER           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.040   BOLEJACK CHARLES D &            3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.041   EDWARDS BRIAN & REGIN           3                893           0          0
 612G-02-040.042   BURTON ORLIS L & SHEA           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.043   DYESS JOHN & PATRICIA           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.044   KNIFFEN ARTHUR L                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.045   JOHNSON PATRICIA                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.046   LONGUE VWE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.047   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.048   MARKS HELEN M                   3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.049   LONGUE VUE VENTURE IN           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.050   VANDERMARK MARK S & J           3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.051   REID NAOMI H                    3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.052   GERALD ROBERT M                 3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.053   JOHNSON PATRICIA                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-040.054   JOHNSON PATRICIA                3                893          0           0
 612G-02-042.000   LONG BEACH ASSOC               10              48000        140           0
 612G-02-042.001   KOENENN ALFRED R ETAL          12             126000          0           0
 612G-02-044.000   SIMS ELLEN A                    2               1000          0           0
 612G-02-045.000   SCAFIDE ARTHUR A JR &           2               2400          0           0
 612G-02-046.000   NAZARETIAN EDMOND & W           4               5600         15           0
 612G-02-047.000   WILSON LARRY L & KATH           2               1000          0           0
 612G-02-048.000   ANDERSON STANLEY & WF           2               1350          0           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       295          0           295

 612G-02-049.000   DORCESTER WEST INC              3              10000         30           0
 612G-02-049.001   LEVENS JAMES E JR & H          16               3500         10           0
 612G-02-050.000   JOHNSON THEODORE S              1              31450          0           0
 612G-02-050.001   SALISBURY HOYT S & VI           2               1200          0           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        40          0            40

 612H-01-002.000   SAVARESE JEFFREY L &            4               1600         15           0

                                                TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        15          0            15




                                                    112



6ONERS REPORT BY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS      SURVEY CONDUCTED = JUL 1991                PAGE INUBER: 10

PRIMARY USE CODES:  1 = OFFICE,  2 = SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING,  3 = MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING,  4 = RETAIL SALES
                    5 =STORAGE,  6 =CITY,  7 = COUNTY,  8 = STATE,  9 = FEDERAL,  10 = HOTEL/MOTEL
                   11 = SCHOOLS,  12 = VACANT LOT,  13 = PARKING,  14 = NOT FOR PROFIT,  15 = RESTAURANT/LOUNGE
                   16 = VACANT BUILDING,  17 = PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC,  18 = FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                   19 = TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, UTILITIES,  20 =STORAGE NON-ESSENTIAL,  21 = ATTORNEYS
                   22 = FRATERNAL



PARCEL ID NO              OWNER                 PRIMARY           SQUARE    OFF STREET  ON STREET    TOTAL PARKING
                                                 USE            FOOTAGE    PARKING      PARKING        EACH BLOCK


 612H-01-003.000   BUQUOI F E & WF                 4              21000         15           0
 612H-01-004.000   MCDONALD'S CORP                15               2500         50           0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK        65          0            65

 612H-02-001.000   CITY OF LONG BEACH -           17            1501200        400           0
 612H-02-001.001   GULF COAST CHAMBER OF          17               1500          7           0
 612H-02-001.002   LONG BEACH YACHT CLUB          15               2300         25           0
 612tt-02-001.003   TRAVROU INC                   15               5880         50           0

                                               TOTAL PARKING THIS BLOCK       482          0           482

TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS THIS REPORT:                            346
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS IN USE:                                 322
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS LISTED AS VACANT LOTS:                   24





































                                                     113






                             SYNOPSIS OF TE LONG BEACH URBAN WATERFRONT STUDY AREA

                                                           SURVEY CONDUCTED: Jul 1991

PARCL USE STATUS

   TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS IN STUDY AREA:                  346
   TOTAL NUMOBER OF PARCELS IN USE:                        322
   TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS LISTED AS VACANT LOTS:           24

PARKING STATUS

   TOTAL NUMBER OF ON STREET PARKING:                47
  'TOTAL NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING:            2760

                                  INCLUDING THE HARBOR                              EXCLUDING THE HARBOR
                                          AND                                               AND
                                      BEACH AREAS                                       BEACH AREAS

      USE TYPE              SQUARE FOOTAGE           PERCENT                  SQUARE FOOTAGE        PERCENT
                                                        OF                                             OF
                                                      TOTAL                                          TOTAL

  OFFICE                          43710                 1.7%                         43710              4.2% -
  SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING         238545                 9.1%                        238545            22.7%
  MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING          242346                 9.3%                        242346             23.1%
  RETAIL SALES                   245440                 9.4%                        245440             23.4%
  CITY GOVERNMENT                 11000                 0.4%                         11000              1.0%
  HOTEL/HOTEL                     48000                 1.8%                         48000              4.6%
  SCHOOLS                         13000                 0.5%                         13000              1.2%
  NOT FOR PROFIT                   1500                 0.1%                          1500              0.1%
  RESTAURANT/LOUNGE               36425                 1.4%                         36425              3.5%
  VACANT BUILDING                 71775                 2.7%                         71775              0.0%
  PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC            1616946                61.7%                         47250              4.5%
  FIN./INSUR./REAL ESTATE          9450                 0.4%                          9450              0.9%
  TRANS./COMH./UTILITIES          37500                 1.4%                         37500              3.6%
  ATTORNEYS                        3700                 0.1%                         ï¿½ 3700             0.4%
  FRATERNAL                           0                 0.0%                             0              0.0%

  TOTAL                         2619337               100.0%                       1049641            100.0%























                                                   114





                        I  I                                                                                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FIRST  STREET





           II  I        ~~~~PINE       STREET\\\\
                                            I                                                                                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~STREET





 *~~         ~     ~~~~~~~A ' H  TREET                                    86 8
                                                                        THZO   67                                        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~STREET




                   I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I -cl 6



                            -    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:  I




                           *  I               :      ~    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ So44?~~~~~~S6                                                     6l~~~~~S~~~ 6%    L A~~~~~~     5%~~~~2~~   -.   11 ~669    ---1-L
                                2~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                                                                                                                           ~~~~~~~~~ -~-L  -  .6




 I                                    H!GI~~~~~iWAVp                                                                                             7 T - 





~~~~~~~~~~rnIt





                     I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A.

              I     L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~H~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~    ~ ~~~~~~7


       *    I  GULF  REO~~~~ONA!_ RLANN~~~NG  COMM sSO16



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
     I ~~~APPENDIX C


I
I
      |                        ~~~~~~~~~Survey Forms



I
I
     ~~~~~'I 

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
!
!








            LONG BEACH URBAN WATERFRONT STUDY
                     MERCHANT SURVEY

          (See merchant survey summary in text)

Name of Business
Address
Type of Business
Number of Employees

1.  Does business own or lease building?
2. What is the square footage of the building?
3.  How much of that space is occupied by your business
4.  Are there other businesses in the building?
       If so, how much space do they occupy?
5. How much vacant space is there in the building?
6. How long have you been in business?:
       How long at this location?
7. What is your busiest day of the week?
8. What is the busiest part of the day?
9.  How frequently do the majority of your clientele visit your
    business?
      (a) daily                    __(d) 2-3 times/month
       (b) 3-4 times/week             (e) once/month
    - (c) 1-2 times/week             (f) less than once/month
10. What is your primary method of promoting your business and
    attracting customers?  (Rank in order of importance)
    -_(a)-Radio advertisements   __(d) Group promotions
    __(b) TV advertisements         - (e) Window displays
       (c) Word of mouth          __(f) Newspaper advertisements
    __(g) Other
11. What percent of your business is tourist related?
12. Do you think that business in Downtown Long Beach has
    improved, declined or stayed the same over the past five
    years?
13. Do you think that business will improve, decline or remain
    the same over the next five years?
14. If you had the opportunity to move your business out of the
    Downtown Long Beach area, would you?
    Why?

15. What types of new businesses would you like to see in the
    Downtown and waterfront areas?


16. What infrastructure improvements (streets, sidewalks,
    medians, etc.) would you like to see in the Downtown and
    waterfront areas?


17. What other types of improvements would you suggest to improve
    the business climate of the area?









                 LONG BEACH URBAN WATERFRONT STUDY
                          RESIDENT SURVEY

           (Total responses for each question are shown)

For the purposes of this study, the downtown area is defined as the
area within one block on either side of Jeff Davis Avenue, south of
the railroad.   The waterfront area is defined as the area between
Nicholson Avenue  and Russell  Avenue within one block of US 90
including the harbor area.

I. How often do you or your mate do the following?

                              3+     1-2       3+     1    <1
                              times/ times/ times/ time/ time/
                               wk.   wk.    mo.    mo.   mo.  Never
   A. Grocery shopping in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach       No arocerv stores in business
      2. The waterfront area   78       130    73      36    10    52
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                50       19    73      40    33    85
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        3    10      26    26   311
5. Gulfport or Biloxi             5       26    31      21    36   260

   B. Drug store shopping in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach    5        16    16      47    26   271
      2. The waterfront area   21        68    52      62    42   135
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                16       26    42      47    68   182
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        0     5      26    16   333
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi       0       0    21       5    47   307

   C. General shopping in:
      (clothing, gifts,
      hardware, etc.)
      1. Downtown Long Beach   10        62    21      62    78   146
      2. The waterfront area   26        73    47      52    18   151
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                10        5    26      62    68   208
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        0     0      26    10   344
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    10        47    94    104    26    99

   D. Seek professional ser-
      vices in: (medical,
      legal, accounting, etc.)
      1. Downtown Long Beach    0         0      5     68    52   255
      2. The waterfront area    0         0      0      5    36   338
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                 0        5    10      42    73   250
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        0     5       0    10   364
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    10        16    21    104   115   115









                                3+   1-2       3+     1    <1
                              times/ times/ times/ time/ time/
                               wk.     wk.   mo.    mo.   mo.  Never

   E. Miscellaneous errands in:
      (banking, dry cleaners,
      City Hall, etc.)
      1. D[5-town Long Beach   57       104    78      57    31    52
      2. The waterfront area   10        26    31      10    16   286
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                10       21    16      42    31   260
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        0    10      10    11   349
5. Gulfport or Biloxi            26       21    31      31    42   229

   F. Patronize restaurants in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   26        21    20      42    52   219
      2. The waterfront area   42        57    52      62    52   115
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                16        5    36      57    37   229
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         0        5    10      47    31   287
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi       5      32    68    120    77    78

 G. Meet friends or socialize in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   46         5    32      22    25   250
      2. The waterfront area   47        51    43      37    30   172
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                41       16    15      27    21   260
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis         5        1    20      21    26   307
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    32        22    48    101    68   108

 H. Work in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   48
      2. The waterfront area   33
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                83
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        31
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi   109

  I. Use harbor recreational
     facilities (boat launching,
     fishing, sight-seeing,
     etc.)                       26      26      47    31    78   172

II. When do you usually go downtown? (check one)
    196 1 Weekdays      99 2 After work    73 3 Saturdays
     42 4 Sundays       26 5 Never









                              120









III. How would you rate the downtown and waterfront areas of Long
     Beach for the following:
                          Downtown Area         Waterfront Area
                                      Don't                   Don't
                       Good Fair Poor Know    Good Fair Poor Know
  A. Attractiveness       74  131  169      6    192  150   32       6
   B. Cleanliness         89  196   89       6    158  180   35       7
   C. Parking
        convenience      134  106  133      7    235   94   30    21
   D. Traffic flow       126  124  111    18    183  120   48    29
   E. Convenience of
        shopping hours  155  100   96    29    269   84   11    16
   F. Friendliness of
        merchants/
        salespeople      214  101   38    27    245  102   14    19
   G. Safety             178  144   39    19    185  171    4    20
   H. Variety of goods
        /services         68  117  180    15    145  160   60    15
   I. Cost of goods/
        services          85  190   84    21    148  201   21    10
   J. Quality of goods
        /services        152  161   47    20    191  150   27    12
   K. Special events/
        festivals        130  123  103    24    153  111   89    27

IV. What types of businesses would you like to see more of in:
    A. Downtown Long Beach             (see survey summarv)

    B. Long Beach waterfront area   (see survey summary)

    C. Elsewhere in Long Beach        (see survey summarv)


V.  When you think of downtown Long Beach, what businesses,
    buildings or landmarks first come to mind?
                                     (see survev summary)

VI. What festivals and special events do you attend in the downtown
    Long Beach area? (check all that apply)
    243 A. Mardi Gras parade    109 C. Christmas parade
    149 B. Radish Festival         87 D. Other

VII. Are you (check one) 173 Male or 207 Female?

VIII. What is your age? (check one)
       5 under 18      123 36 - 50      65 over 65
      94 18 - 35        93 51 - 65

IX.  How long have you lived in Long Beach? (check one)
      25 less than 1 year        75 11 - 20 years
      40 1 - 5 years            136 21 - 40 years
      30 6 - 10 years            74 over 40 years







                              121









X.  What is the total yearly income of your household? (check one)
     13 under $5,000            58 $20,000 - $30,000
     32 $5,000 - $10,000        71 $30,000 - $40,000
     26 $10,000 - $15,000       52 $40,000 - $50,000
     19 $15,000 - $20,000      109 over $50,000

XI. How many people are in your household? (check one)
     48 One           75 Four
    139 Two           27 Five
     86 Three          5 Six or more

Please give us any suggestions or comments you have regarding
improving the downtown and/or waterfront areas of Long Beach.

                      (see survev summarvy)













































                             122









                 LONG BEACH URBAN WATERFRONT STUDY
                          RESIDENT SURVEY

       (Responses for each question indicated by percentage)

For the purposes of this study, the downtown area is defined as the
area within one block on either side of Jeff Davis Avenue, south of
the railroad.   The waterfront area is defined as the area between
Nicholson Avenue and Russell Avenue within one block of US 90
including the harbor area.

I. How often do you or your mate do the following?

                             3+     1-2       3+     1    <1
                             times/ times/ times/ time/ time/
                               wk.   wk.    mo.    mo.   mo.  Never
   A. Grocery shopping in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   No arocerv stores in business
      2. The waterfront area  21%    34%    19%        9%    3%   14%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach               13%    26%    19%    11%    9%   22%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      1%     3%      7%    7%   82%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    1%       7%      8%     5%   10%   68%

   B. Drug store shopping in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   1%       4%      4%    12%    7%   71%
      2. The waterfront area   5%    18%    14%    16%   11%   36%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                4%      7%    11%    12%   18%   48%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      0%     1%      7%    4%   88%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    0%       0%      5%     1%   12%   81%

   C. General shopping in:
      (clothing, gifts,
      hardware, etc.)
      1. Downtown Long Beach   3%    16%        5%    16%   21%   38%
      2. The waterfront area   7%    19%    12%    14%    8%   40%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                3%      1%     7%    16%   18%   55%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      0%     0%      7%    3%   90%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    3%    12%    25%    27%    7%   26%

   D. Seek professional ser-
      vices in: (medical,
      legal, accounting, etc.)
      1. Downtown Long Beach   0%       0%      1%    18%   14%   67%
      2. The waterfront area   0%       0%      0%     1%   10%   89%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                0%      1%     3%    11%   19%   66%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      0%     1%      0%    3%   96%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    3%       4%      5%    27%   30%   30%



                              123









                                3+   1-2       3+     1    <1
                             tims/       /         time  time/ time/
                              wk.     wk.   mo.    mo.   mo.  Never

   E. Miscellaneous errands in:
      (banking, dry cleaners,
      City Hall, etc.)
      1. Downtown Long Beach  15%    27%    21%    15%    8%   14%
      2. The waterfront area   3%       7%      8%     3%    4%   75%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                3%      5%     4%    11%    8%   68%
4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      0%     3%      3%    3%   91%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    7%       5%      8%     8%   11%   60%

   F. Patronize restaurants in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach   7%       5%      5%    11%   14%   58%
      2. The waterfront area  11%    15%    14%    16%   14%   30%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach                4%      1%    10%    15%   10%   60%
4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        0%      1%     3%    12%    8%   75%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    1%       8%    18%    32%   21%   21%

  G. Meet friends or socialize in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach  12%       1%      8%     5%    7%   66%
      2. The waterfront area  12%    14%    11%    10%    8%   45%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach               11%      4%     4%      7%    5%   68%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        1%      0%     5%      5%    7%   81%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi    8%       5%    12%    26%   18%   28%

  H. Work in:
      1. Downtown Long Beach  13%
      2. The waterfront area   9%
      3. Other areas of Long
           Beach               22%
      4. Pass Christian or
           Bay St. Louis        8%
      5. Gulfport or Biloxi   29%

  I. Use harbor recreational
     facilities (boat launching,
     fishing, sight-seeing,
     etc.)                       7%     7%    12%      8%   21%   45%

II. When do you usually go downtown? (check one)
    62% 1 Weekdays    26% 2 After work   19% 3 Saturdays
    11% 4 Sundays       7% 5 Never









                              124









III. How would you rate the downtown and waterfront areas of Long
     Beach for the following:
                          Downtown Area         Waterfront Area
                                      Don't                   Don't
                       Good Fair Poor Know    Good Fair Poor Know
  A. Attractiveness    19%  34%  44%   2%    51%   39%   9%   2%
   B. Cleanliness        23%  52%  23%   2%    42%   47%  10%   2%
   C. Parking
        convenience      35%  28%  35%   2%    62%   25%   8%   5%
   D. Traffic flow       33%  33%  29%   5%    48%   32%  13%   8%
   E. Convenience of
        shopping hours  41%  26%  25%   8%    71%   22%   3%   4%
   F. Friendliness of
        merchants/
        salespeople      56%  27%  10%   7%    64%   27%   4%   5%
   G. Safety             47%  38%  10%   5%    49%   45%   1%   5%
   H. Variety of goods
        /services        18%  31%  47%   4%    38%   42%  16%   4%
   I. Cost of goods/
        services         22%  50%  22%   6%    39%   53%   6%   3%
   J. Quality of goods
        /services        40%  42%  12%   5%    50%   39%   7%   3%
   K. Special events/
        festivals        34%  32%  27%   6%    40%   29%  23%   7%

IV. What types of businesses would you like to see more of in:
    A. Downtown Long Beach       (see survey summary)

    B. Long Beach waterfront area

    C. Elsewhere in Long Beach


V.  When you think of downtown Long Beach, what businesses,
    buildings or landmarks first come to mind?
                                (see survev summarv)

VI. What festivals and special events do you attend in the downtown
    Long Beach area? (check all that apply)
    64% A. Mardi Gras parade    29% C. Christmas parade
    39% B. Radish Festival        23% D. Other

VII. Are you (check one) 46% Male or 54% Female

VIII. What is your age (check one)
      1% under 18      32% 36 - 50    17% over 65
     25% 18 - 35       25% 51 - 65

IX.  How long have you lived in Long Beach? (check one)
      7% less than 1 year      20% 11 - 20 years
     11% 1 - 5 years           36% 21 - 40 years
      8% 6 - 10 years          19% over 40 years






                              125









X.  What is the total yearly income of your household? (check one)
     3% under $5,000           15% $20,000 - $30,000
     8% $5,000 - $10,000       19% $30,000 - $40,000
     7% $10,000 - $15,000      14% $40,000 - $50,000
     5% $15,000 - $20,000      29% over $50,000

XI. How many people are in your household? (check one)
    13% One          20% Four
    37% Two           7% Five
    22% Three         1% Six or more

Please give us any suggestions or comments you have regarding
improving the downtown and/or waterfront areas of Long Beach.
                   (see survev summarv)














































                             126



I
I
I
I
II
I
I  APNI 
                        Long Beach Urban Waterfront
I                               Advisory Committee
I
I
I
I
         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~II
I
I
I
I
I
I








      LONG BEACH URBAN WATERFRONT ADVISORY COMMITTEE



Ms. Jackie Bates                 Mr. Butch Litton
Mr. Larry Bates                  Ms. Karen Livengood
Mr. Guy Bussler                  Mr. Donald Logan, Alderman
Mr. Jack Case                    Mr. Travis Lott
Mr. Louis Elias                  Mr. Gerald Mitchell
Mr. W. G. Fennel                 Mr. Jeff Morse
Mr. Donnie Hammons, Alderman    Mr. Peter Nord
Mr. Ronnie Hammons               Mr. Barnett Ratcliff
Mr. Earl Hudson                  Mayor Glenn Rishel
Mr. Danny Kaletch                Mr. Danny Satchield
Mr. Ken Collins                  Ms. Carolyn Scarborough
Mr. Howard Kapp                  Mr. Donald Sigworth
Mr. Phil Kies                    Mr. Billie Skellie
Mr. Ernie Ladner                 Mr. Tony Van Court
Mr. Allen Lantz                  Mr. Wayne Ward
Mr. Dennis Laubmeier             Ms. Dolly Williamson

                         Officers

                Mr. Phil Kies, Co-Chairman
               Mr. Allen Lantz, Co-Chairman
           Mrs. Karen Livengood, Vice-Chairman

                  Committee Coordinator

                       David Taylor




























                           128