Tampa lists Manhattan Avenue Phase 1, Vasconia Street north to Obispo Street, as Construction in Progress. The individual record checked September 21, 2026 gives a $6.8 million estimate and planned dates of August 1, 2025–November 30, 2026. Those are City record fields, not LSL observations of when work began or will finish. Individual project record
The record identifies project 1001585, department ID SW50004 and contract 24-C00039. Use those identifiers when requesting a current traffic notice, cost record or explanation of the schedule.
A corridor project, not a parcel-level promise
The City describes new drainage conveyance, replacement and upsizing of existing stormwater infrastructure, and water-main improvements along the same corridor. Its account attributes street flooding to an old, undersized system. This is the City’s project description, not a diagnosis independently established by LSL. Current scope
The flood-relief index separately lists Phase 2, Obispo to Bay to Bay, in Planning. The September 2025 report used “San Pedro to Bay to Bay” in its Phase 2 title. Do not transfer Phase 1’s dates or cost to that separate phase. Quarterly report, pages 19–20
Each estimate belongs to its own record
| Source | Published estimate | Schedule information in that source |
|---|---|---|
| December 2024 report, Phase 1 sheet, page 21 | $5.0 million | FY2025 label; no March-to-March dates on the project sheet |
| September 2025 report, page 19 | $6.9 million | Projected Q4 2025 start and Q4 2026 end |
| Individual record checked September 21, 2026 | $6.8 million | Planned August 1, 2025–November 30, 2026; Construction phase |
The December report, September report and individual record use different levels of schedule detail. An earlier version of this article assigned exact dates to the September report and a March 2025–March 2026 window to the December sheet. The verified project sheets do not support those attributions; this table corrects them.
LSL reproduced the changes in the displayed estimates:
- $5.0 million to $6.9 million: +$1.9 million, or 38% of the earlier estimate.
- $6.9 million to $6.8 million: −$100,000, or approximately 1.45% of $6.9 million.
- $5.0 million to the current $6.8 million: +$1.8 million, or 36%.
These are nominal estimate comparisons, not inflation-adjusted costs, payments or contract changes. The individual record says the project is funded and lists several funding sources, but it does not provide the authorization or expenditure behind each dollar. A cost-overrun claim would need the relevant scope, award, amendments and expenditure records, not just these three estimates.
What the timeline cannot explain
The sources do not establish why the schedule or estimate fields changed. Do not attribute a change to weather, permitting, utilities or contractor performance without an additional record. Nor does the November 30 planned end date prove that restoration, final acceptance and administrative closeout will all occur that day.
For travel or property access, seek a current notice for the specific block, not a historic quarterly report. For an outcome claim, ask for the actual completion or acceptance record. For a funding question, identify contract 24-C00039 and request the award, amendments and expenditure information relevant to the question. The current record supplies project contacts; no current closure or private-property access condition was verified for this article.
Source comparison and limits
LSL rechecked the individual record and complete flood-relief index on September 21, 2026. For the quarterly comparison, we read the September 2025 project index and Phase 1/Phase 2 sheets (pages 12, 19 and 20), and the December 2024 index and sheets (pages 15, 21 and 22). We did not review every project in either report or interpret graphical phase highlighting as an independently verified status. The reports are identified by their stated month; no unsupported last-day publication date is assigned.
The general City directory previously cited for the $6.8 million figure is replaced by the individual record that actually displays it. No site inspection, staff interview, contract audit, drainage-performance measurement or final-cost verification was performed. The comparison preserves useful history without treating a public estimate as a guarantee to nearby property owners.