Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-10426Y 4kh J-u3-1 v`.i 4/ 181.8a ORDINANCE NG. t��_����� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO, 10273 AND SUBSTITUTING THEREFORE A NEW CHAPTER 54.6 IMPOSING AN "IMPACT FEE" 014 ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS HEREIN DETERMINED IN ORDER TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEMAND FOR WHICH IS CREATED BY SUCH DEVELOPMENT; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AND INTENT; PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY THEREFOR; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SUBAREAS; PROVIDING FOR DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS; PROVIDING FOR CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR BONDING IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN APPELLATE BOARD AND APPELLATE PROCEDURES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABTLITY CLAUSE. WHEREAS, the City of Miami has for the past several years, experienced significant development; and WHEREAS, the amount and concentration of such development has contribut- ed to the need for various capital improvements, including public safety, storm sewers, streets, parks, solid waste collection and other general government services that would not otherwise be necessary; and WHEREAS, new building space growth projections indicate that such development will continue and will place ever-increasing demands on the City to provide necessary capital improvements; and WHEREAS, the City is not desirous of funding all such improvements by general capital improvement funds which are generally allocated to maintaining existing improvements and services; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding said increased development, there exists within the City of Miami a severe shortage of affordable housing for families and individuals of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 87-619 on June 25, 1987, declaring; a housing emergency in the City of Miami relative to said J-88-1313 4/ 18/88 ORDINANCE NO. 1041'1(' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MiIAMI, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 10273 AND SUBSTITUTING THEREFORE A NEW CHAPTER 54.6 IMPOSING AN "IMPACT FEE" ON ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS HEREIN DETERMINED IN ORDER TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEMAND FOR WHICH IS CREATED BY SUCH DEVELOPMENT; SETTI14G FORTH FINDINGS) AND INTENT; PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY THEREFOR; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILI`['Y OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SUBAREAS; PROVIDING FOR DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS; PROVIDING FOR CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR BONDING IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN APPELLATE BOARD AND APPELLATE PROCEDURES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. WHEREAS, the City of Miami has for the past several years, experienced significant development; and WHEREAS, the amount and concentration of such development has contribut- ed to the need for various capital improvements, including public safety, storm sewers, streets, parks, solid waste collection and other general government services that would not otherwise be necessary; and WHEREAS, new building space growth projections indicate that such development will continue and will place ever-increasing demands on the City to provide necessary capital improvements; and WHEREAS, the City is not desirous of funding all such improvements by general capital improvement funds which are generally allocated to maintaining existing improvements and services; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding said increased development, there exists within the City of Miami a severe shortage of affordable housing for families and individuals of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 87-619 on June 25, 1987, declaring a housing emergency in the City of Miami relative to said severe housing; shortage and authorizoyd cE rtain mo;Asures to (`.c)se said shortage; and WHEREAS, because of the benefit, to the general. welfare, it is the intent, of the City of Miami to encourage the construction of all types of housing opportunities within the City, particularly in those areas of the City which warrant special attention because of depressed socio-economic conditions existing therein; and WHEREAS, the City also encourages the construction of housing units in all areas of the City which are priced so as to be affordable by low and/or moderate income families or individuals; and WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of the matter, deems it advisable and in the best interest of they general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to adopt this Ordinance as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. Ordinance No. 10273 of the City of Miami, Florida, adopted the 28th day of May, 1987, and all amendments to Ordinance No. 10273 adopted subsequent thereto, are hereby repealed; and the following Impact Fee Ordinance is substituted therefore. Section 2. The City Code of the City of Miami, Florida, is hereby amended by adding thereto a new Chapter 54.6 to read as follows: "Chapter 54.6 CITY OF MIAMI DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE Sec. 54.6-1. Short Title. This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "City of Miami Development Impact Fee Ordinance." Sec. 54.6-2. Findings. The City Commission of Miami, Florida (hereinafter "Commission") hereby finds and declares that: (a) Development, other than single family residential development and Certain other development as specifically defined herein, imposes excessive remands upon City public facilities and services and requires additional facilities and services; 2 I.LO496 (b) The potential for devclopment or properties is a direct result of City policy as expressed in the City Comprehensive Plan and as implemented via the City Zoning Ordinance and Map; (c) To the extent that such development places demands upon the public facility infrastructure of the City, those demands should be satisfied by shifting the responsibility for fi- nancing the provision of such facilities from the public at - large to the developments actually creating the demands; (d) The amount of the "impact fee" to be imposed shall be deter- mined by the cost of the additional capital improvements needed to support such new development, which public facili- ties shall be identified in a capital improvement program, and by the gross square footage: of development. (e) The City Commission hereby finds and declares that the herein "impact fee" imposed upon all new non-residential and all new residential development as further described below, in order to finance specified public facilities, the demand for which is uniquely created by such new development, is in the best interest of the City and its residents, is equitable, and does not impose an unfair burden on such development. Specif- ically exempted from such imposition and payment of said impact fees are: (1) all single-family residential development; (2) any development of less than 1,000 square feet not resulting in a net increase in the number of residential dwelling units; (3) all duplex and multiple family residential development located in the City's designated Community Development Target Areas; (4) all duplex and multiple family residential development, outside of the Community Development Target Areas, which is certified by the City of Miami Housing Conservation and Development Agency as low and/or moderate income housing; (5) any development which is a non-profit joint venture with the City, a City owned or operated facility, or a development using city owned land; (6) any development for which complete building plans have been filed as prescribed by the City's Zoning Ordinance, as amended, before tale effective date of this Ordinance, provided ghat the building permit for such development is obtained within 45 calendar days from the effective date of this Ordinance; and (7) any Development of Regional Impact; (DRI), (excluding the Downtown DRI and the Southeast Overtown/Park West Areawide DRY) for which Devolo pment Orders havo been issued by the City before the effective date of this Ordinance, provided that the building permit for such DRI is I obtained within 15 months of the effective date of this Ordinance. Sec, 54.6-3. Intent. This Ordinance is intended to impose an "impact fee," payable at the time of building permit issuance, in an amount based upon the gross square footage of development, in order to Finance additional capital improvements provided by the City and the demand for which is uniquely attributable to such new development. Sec. 54.6-4. Authority. The City Commission is authorized to establish and adopt an "impact fee" pursuant to the authority granted by the Florida Constitution, Article VII, §§ 1(f), 1(g) and 2 (b), the Municipal Home Rule Powers Act, Fla. Stat. Ch. 166 (1985), the City of Miami, Florida Charter, and the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Fla. Stat. § 163.3161, amended by Fla. Stat. §§ 163.3177 in 1986). The provisions of this Ordinance shall not be construed to limit the power of the City to adopt such Ordinance pursuant to any other source of local authority not, to utilize any other methods or powers otherwise available for accomplishing the purposes set forth herein, either in substitution of, or in conjunction with this Ordinance. Sec. 54.6-5. Definitions. As used in this Ordinance, the following words and terms shall have the following meaning, unless another meaning is plainly intended, (a) "Applicant" shall mean an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, two or more 4 - 104 6; persons actin; as cx)-applicants, any County or Statca Agency, any other legal entity, or the authorized representative of any of the aforementioned, signing an application for a building permit. (b) "Appropriation"! shall mean the legal authority to make bn expenditure up to a certain dollar atnount. All appropria- tions must have a viable funding source at the time the appropriation is made. (c) "Building_ Permit" shall mean the permit required for new construction and additions pursuant to Section 2-85 of the City Code. The term "building permit," as used herein, shall not be deemed to include permits required for remodeling, rehabilitation or other improvements to an existing structure or rebuilding a damaged or destroyed structure, provided there is an increase of less than 1,000 square feet in gross floor area resulting therefrom, or demolition permit. (d) "Capital Budget" shall mean the City's current fiscal year capital budget which is the first year of the six -year Capi- tal improvements Program and which identifies all capital projects valued at $5,000 or more that are proposed to be initiated in that fiscal year or to receive any changes in funding in that fiscal year. (e) "Capital Improvements Program" (CIP) shall mean the City's current six -year program of proposed capital improvements which identifies all capital projects valued at $5,000 or more that are proposed to be initiated during the six -year period. (f) "Capital Improvement Projects" shall mean all projects valued at $5,000 or more that are proposed to be initiated during the six -year period of the Capital Improvements Program and may include any or all of the following: acquisition of land, construction, improvements, equipping and installing of same and all other work auxiliary thereto, including adminis- trative, engineering, architectural and legal work performed in connection with a public facilities project: IL042 (1) public safety facilities and equipment, (2) parks and recreation facilities and equipment; (3) streets and highways, including such ancillary facil- ities as sidewalks, street lighting, curbs, gutters, signalization, signage, landscaping and storm sewers; (4) solid waste collection facilities and equipment; (5) other general government facilities and equipment (g) "Community Development_ Target �Area(s)" shall mean those geographical areas of the City designated as such by the City's Department of Community Development or its successor agency or department, using guidelines and criteria established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or its successor department or agency. (h) "City" shall mean the City of Miami, Florida. (i) "Commission" shall mean. the City Corunission of lHiami, Florida. (j) "Comprehensive Plan" shall mean the City's plan for future development adopted by City Ordinance No. 10157, and as may be amended and updated from time to time. (k) "Cost" shall mean amounts spent or authorized to be spent in connection with the planning, financing, acquisition and development of a capital improvement project, including without limitation, the costs of land, construction, engi- neering, legal services, financial services and certain administrative costs. (1) "Development" shall have the meaning given it in §§ 380.04, Florida Statutes, subject to exclusions contained herein. (m) "Development Subareas" shall mean geographically defined areas of the City which conform to the City's established Planning Districts. (n) "Duplex Residential Development" shall have the meaning given it in City Ordinance No. 9500, as amended, the City Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami. 10 (, ) "Gross Floor Area" shall mean the total square footage of a building, excluding parking areas, on a particular site. ( p ) "Impact Fee" shall mean a fee, to be imposed at building permit issuance, and calculated based upon the cost of impact fee -related capital improvements in proportion to new devel- opment creating the need for such facilities. (q) "Im act Fee Coefficient" shall mean ttu2 charge per square foot of development as calculated for each subarea and build- ing type by dividing total impact fee -related capital im- provement project costs by the gross square footage of pro- jected new development starting at time of adoption of this Ordinance through September 31, 2005. (r) "Impact Fee -related Ca ital Improvements" shall mean those Capital Improvements necessary to support and uniquely at- tributable to new development as herein defined and which facilities are identified in the Impact Fee -related Capital Improvement Program to be financed by the imposition of an "impact fee". (s) "impact Fee -related Capital Improvement Program" shall mean the listing of impact fee -related capital improvement projects. (t) "Low and Moderate Income Housing" shall have the meaning given it by the City of Miami Housing Conservation and Development Agency. (u) "Multiple Family Development" shall. have the meaning given it in City Ordinance No. 9500, as amended, the City Zoning Ordi- nance for the City of Miami. (v) "Non -Residential Development" shall mean all development other than residential development as herein defined. (w) "Render" or "Rendition" shall mean the verbal or written announcement of a decision by the Impact Fee Board of Review or City Commission; or the date on a City of Miami Building and 'Zoning Department Impact Fee invoice. 1 (x) "Residential Developmcnt" shall havz the meaning given it in City Ordinance No. 9500, as amended, the City Zoning Ordi- nance for the City of Miami. (y) "lingle-F _Residential" shall have the meaning given it in City Ordinance No. 9500, as amended, the City Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami. (z) "Site" shall mean a legally described parcel of property capable of development pursuant to applicable City ordinances and regulations. (aa) "Zoning Districts" shall mean the classifications as shown on the official schedule of district regulations and as delin- eated on the official zoning atlas. (bb) "Zoning Ordinance" shall mean one of the instruments of implementation of the public purposes and objectives of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, as required by Section 163.3161 et seq; Florida Statutes, as amended. Sec. 54.6-6. Applicability of Impact Fee. This Ordinance shall be uniformly applicable to all new develop- ment, exclusive of single-family, city -owned or operated facilities, and certain other development as specifically defined herein. Specifically exempted from such imposition and payment of said impact fees are: (1) all single-family residential development; (2) any development of less than 1,000 square feet not resulting in a net increase in the number of residential dwelling units; (3) all duplex and multiple family residential development located in the City's designated Community Development Target Areas; (4) all duplex and multiple family residential development, outside of the Community Development Target Areas, which is certified by the City of Miami. Housing Conservation and Development Agency as low and/or moderate income housing; (5) any development which is a non-profit joint venture with the City, a City owned or operated facility, or a development using city -owned land; (6) any development for which complete building plans have been filed as prescribed by the City"s Zoning Ordinance, as amended, before the effective date of this Ordinance, provided that the building permit for such development is - g o 10426 z obtained within 45 calendar days from the effective date of this Ordinance; and (7) any Development of Regional Impact (DRI), (excluding the Downtown DRI and the Southeast Overtown/Park West Areawide DRI), for which a Development Order has been issued by the City before the effective date of nis Ordinance, provided that the building permit for such DRI is obtained within 15 months of the effective date of this Ordinance. Sec. 54.6-7. Imposition oact��ec. Except as set forth in Sec. 54.6-8 below, no building permit shall be issued for a new development as herein defined unless the applicant therefor has paid the "impact fee" imposed by and calculated pursuant to this Ordinance. Sec. 54.6-8. Establishment of Develo ment Subareas. Development Subareas are established as shown on the "City of Miami Planning District Maps" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Appendix A. Sec. 54.6-9. Development Potential by Subarea. PLANNING DISTRICT A. EDISON B. DOWNTOWN C. COCONUT GROVE D. LITTLE HAVANA E. FLAGAMI F. ALLAPATTAH G, VIRGINIA KEY TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE Projected New Develo meat (1988 - 2005)* in ross square foots e) RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL TOTAL 772,320 11289,836 2,062,156 202006,667 10,493,783 30,500,450 3,099,000 11057,868 4,156,868 1,371,840 J1231,166 41603,006 604,800 507,128 1,111,928 6841000 21480,863 ' 3,164,863 0 3101000 310,000 26,538,627 19,370,644 45,909,271 * Projections are for the period April 1, 1988 through March 31, 2005. Note; See Appendix B for a more detailed breakdown. Sec. 54.6-10, Impact,=Iv,eeyrelated Capital Improvement Program by Total project costs by subareas are as follows: ESTIMATED COSTS OF ADD17IONAL FACILITIES - TOTAL FIRE PARKS GENERAL PLANNING AND AND STORM SOLID 'SERVICES OVERALL DISTRICT; POLICE RESCUE RECREATION STREETS SEWERS WASTE ADMINISTRATION COST _-_-6--------------------------------------------=------------------------------------------------------------ EDISOH 3379,398 135,580 1t68,205 5608,613 1304,303 1200,994 5150,732 i1,847,925 DOWNTOWN 31256,425 11019,605 7,375,037 3,597,750 4,298,871 21129,118 1,425,681 28,1329557 COCONUT GROVE 352,578 47,410 539,964 1,862,288 931,141 2779090 169,499 41179,970 LITTLE HAVANA 939,672 68,574 298,781 9599993 479,993 469,284 363,988 3,5301285 FLAGAMI 154,926 0 131,721 603,595 301,794 97,335 66,545 11355,916 ALLAPATTAH 714,410 0 148,970 1,053,562 526,778 337,855 270,536 3,052,111 VIRGINIA KEY 87,635 0 0 0 0 37,019 31,737 1569391 TOTAL COST $5,885,044 41,251,169 18,662,723 113,635,301 $6,842,880 $3,548,715 $2,478,718 142,355,055 RESIDENTIAL - ESTIMATED COSTS OF 7 ------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL FACILITIES FIRE PARKS GENERAL PLANNING AND AND STORM SOLID SERVICES OVERALL DISTRICT: POLICE RESCUE RECREATION STREETS SEWERS WASTE ADMINISTRATION COST --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDISON 19,654 1163,2G5 5227,938 5113,967 i46,964 118,679 1600,174 DOWNTOWN 289,863 394,357 3,137,360 51639,665 29819,831 375,977 351,309 13,508,362 COCONUT GROVE 53,524 209969 531,964 1,388,362 694,179 1509762 61,194 2,908,954 LITTLE HAVANA 26,232 t1,602 298,781 286,107 143,052 33,421 33,178 882,373 FLAGAMI 11,565 0 131,721 328,308 164,153 36,776 14,627 687,150 ALLAPATTAH 13,079 0 148,970 227,698 113,848 41,593 16,543 561,731 VIRGINIA KEY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL COST 1409,030 $436,582 14,425,001 13,0989078 14,049,030 $1,235,493 1495,530 $19,148,744 NON-RESIDENTIAL - ESTIMATED COSTS OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES ---------------------------------------------------------- FIRE PARKS GENERAL PLANNING AND AND STORM SOLID SERVICES OVERALL DISTRICT: POLICE RESCUE RECREATION STREETS SEWERS WASTE ADMINISTRATION COST ----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDISON 1364,631 $25,926 10 $380,675 1190,336 $154,030 $132,053 11,247,651 DOWNTOWN 21966,562 705,248 4,237,727 2,958,085 1,479,040 1,253,161 1,074,372 14,674,195 COCONUT GROVE 299,054 26,441 0 4731926 236,962 126,328 108,305 11271,016 LITTLE HAVANA 913,440 561972 0 673,836 336,941 385,863 330,810 2,697,912 FLAGAMI 143,361 0 0 275,287 137,641 60,559 51,918 6689766 ALLAPATTAH 701,331 0 0 $25,864 412,930 296,262 253,993 21490,350 VIRGINIA KEY 87,635 0 0 0 0 37,019 31,737 156,391 TOTAL COST $5,476,014 1814,587 $4,237,727 $5,537,723 12,793,350 $2,313,222 $1,983,188 $23,206,311 10 - 1L0426 .T sec, 54.6-11, Developtnetit Impact Fee Coefficients RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS BY TYPE OF SERVICE AND PLANNING DISTRICT ttlsq.ft,:� - FIRE PARKS GENERAL - PLAHNING AND AND STORM SOLID SERVICES OVERALL DISTRICT: POLICE RESCUE RECREATION STREETS SEWERS WASTE ADMINISTRATION COST EDISON---------------------------- $0.019 -__-___---_-_______t--__-- $0.013 10.21310.295 O.143 $0,061 __---___-_- $0.024 $0.778 „ - DOWNTOWN 0.014 0.020 0,157 0,282 0,141 0,044 0.018 0.676 COCONUT GROVE 0.017 0.007 0.114 0.448 0.224 0.049 0.020 0.93'9 - LITTLE HAVAHA 01019 0.008 0.218 0.209 0.104 0.061 0.024 0.643 FLAGAMI 0.019 0.000 0.213 0.543 0,271 0.061 0,024 1.136 ALLAPATTAH 0.019 0.000 0,218 0.333 0,166 0,061 0.024 0.821 _ VIRGINIA KEY $0.000 10.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 NON-RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS BY TYPE OF SERVICE AND PLANNING DISTRICT !1lsq.ft.) FIRE PARKS GENERAL PLANNING AND AND STORM SOLID SERVICES OVERALL DISTRICT: POLICE RESCUE RECREATION STREETS SEWERS WASTE ADMINISTRATION COST --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDISON $0.233 $0.020 $0.000 10.295 $0.143 $0.119 $0.102 $0.967 DOWNTOWN 0.283 0.067 0.404 0.282 0.141 0.119 0.102 1.398 t COCONUT GROVE 0.283 0.025 0.000 0.448 0,224 0.119 0.102 1.201 LITTLE HAVAHA 0.283 0.018 0.000 0.209 0.104 01119 0.102 0.835 FLAGAMI 0.233 0.000 0.000 0.543 0.271 0.119 0.102 1.313 ALLAPATTAH 0.283 0.000 0.000 0.333 0.166 0.119 0.102 1.003 VIRGINIA KEY $0.283 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.119 $0,102 $0.504 as follows: The derivation of impact fee coefficients by type of service is a, POLICE - RESIDENTIAL ------------------------ PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY Est isited Cost of Improvetents t14,767 $289,863 153,524 126,232 111,1565 $13,079 $0 Projected Residential 772,320 20,006,667 3,099,000 1,371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq, f t, ) lmpact Fee Coeffir-ient 10,019 $0,014 $0,017 10.019 $0,019 $0.019 01000 11 - 1LO46 r b. POLICE - NON-RESIDEHTIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISIizICT: EDISON bOYNIOIIN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY ------------ Estiaated-CostM of Iaproverents 1364,631 --r------------------- 11219661562 -_----_-_r-_------_ 1299,054 1913,440 --------------------- 1143,361 i701,331 $87,615 Projected Non -Residential 1,299,$36 10,493�783 1,057,868 3,231,166 `07,128 2,480,863 310,000 Growth tsq,ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient 10.283 $0.283 $0.283 $0.283 t0.283 t0.233 10.233 c. FIRE AND RESCUE - RESIDENTIAL -------------------------------- PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOYN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY atedCost-------------------------------------------------------------------- Estia of Ioprovesents 19,654 $394,357 $20,969 i11,602 t0 to t0 Projected Residential 772,320 20,006,667 3,099,000 1,371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq,ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient $0.013 10.020 $0.007 10.008 10.000 $0.000 10.000 (irsq.ft.) d. FIRE AND RESCUE - NON -RESIDENTIAL ------------------------------------ PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOYNTOYN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY --- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Estisated Cost of Icproveaents $25,926 1705,248 $26,441 $56,972 i0 $0 $0 Projected Hon -Residential 1,289,836 10,493,783 1,057,868 31231,166 507,128 2,480,863 310,000 Growth (sq.ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient 10.020 $0.067 $0.025 $0.018 10.000 MOOD t0.000 e. PARKS AND RECREATION - RESIDENTIAL ------------------------------------- PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON D04RIOUH GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY --------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- Estisaked Cost of Itproveaents $169,205 $3,137,360 039,964 $298,781 $131,721 $148,970 10 Projected Residential 772,320 20,0060667 31099,000 11371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq,ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient $0.213 10,157 10,174 10.20 #0 M 10.218 034 R 12 - '10426 "'a • f. PARKS 01) RECREATION - HON-RESIDENTIAL -------------- PLANNINO COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWH GROVE HAVAHA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY __________________________________________________________•-----____�---------_______- Es-tiiated Cast of liproveients 10 t4,237,727 t0 10 10 $0 t0 Projected Non -Residential 11289,836 101493,783 1,OV ,868 31231,166 507,128 2,480,863 310,000 Growth (sq,ft.) Impact fee Coefficient 10.000 10.404 10,000 10.000 10.000 10.000 $0.000 g. STREETS - RESIDENTIAL ------------------------- PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY Esti_at-d Cost------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ of loproverents 1227,938 $5,639,665 111388,362 $286,107 $328,308 1227,698 10 Projected Residential 772,320 20,006,667 3,099,000 1,371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq,ft,) Impact Fee Coefficient $0.295 $0.282 tO.443 10.209 $0.543 $0.333 10.000 (1lsq.ft.) h. STREETS - NON -RESIDENTIAL ------------------------------ PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY Estioated Cost of Isprooesents 1380,675 12,958,085 $473,926 1673,336 1275,287 1325,864 M Projected Non -Residential 1,289,836 10,493,783 1,057,863 3,231,166 507,123 2,480,863 310,000 Growth (sq,ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient $0,295 $0.282 $0.448 $0.209 10.543 $0.333 10.000• (itsq.ft.) i. STORM SEWERS - RESIDENTIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY Estisated Cost of leprovegents 1113,967 1z1819,831 1694,179 1143,052 $164,153 i113,848 10 Projected Residential 772,320 20,006,667 3,099,000 9,371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq,ft,) Impact Fee Coefficient 10,14$ 10,141 $0,224 10.104 10,271 $0.166 10.Oflo W 13 w 104 e j, STORM SEWERS - HON°RESIbENIIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRDINIA DISTRICT; EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY ---------------- Estilated Cost ----------------- ------------ ----------------- ----------------------- Cf IAPI'oveiehts $190,336 11,479,040 1236,962 1336,941 107641 1412,930 10 Projected Non-Residehtial 11289,836 10,493,783 1,057,868 3,2311166 507,128 2,480,863 )10,000 - Growth (sq.ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient t0.143 10.141 t0,224 10,104 $0.271 t0.16o $0.000 (S/sq.ft,) k. SOLID ---------------------------- WASTE - PESIDENTIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA _ DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY EstisatedCost------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- of laproveients 146,964 5375,977 1150,762 183,421 136,776 141,593 30 Projected Residential 7720320 20,006,667 3,099,000 11371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth (sq.ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient $0.061 $0.044 $0.049 $0.061 $0.061 $0.061 10.000 (tlsq,ft.> . SOLID WASTE - NON-RESIDENTIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT: EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY EstiaatedCost------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- of loprovesents 1154,030 11,253,161 S126,328 $385,863 $60,559 $296,262 $37,019 Projected Non-Residentiai 1,289,836 10,493,783 1,057,868 3,231,166 507,128 2,480,863 310,000 Growth (sq.ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient $0.119 $0.119 $0.119 $0.119 10,119 t0,119 t0.119 o. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION - RESIDENTIAL PLANNING COCONUT LITTLE VIRGINIA DISTRICT; EDISON DOWNTOWN GROVE HAVANA FLAGAMI ALLAPATTAH KEY Esti�ated-C------------------ - - ------ -- --- -- -------------------------- ost of Isproments 118,679 $351,309 16l,194 $339178 $14,627 $16,543 10 Projected Residential Z7213N 20,006,667 3,099,000 11371,840 604,800 684,000 0 Growth Impact Fee Coefficient $0,024 0.013 10,020 10,024 $0,024 $0,024 10.000 14 Y n. GENERAL SERVICES ADM1HISf A1I0H NON�RESIDEN 1At rrrrrr rrrrarwrr_rrYY. +1�Y4Yar_wrwlwLrr_riwrrriw rrr+rrr PL44NIHO COCOM LI11LE U1001HIA 61STPICTI EDISOH DOMOWN ONVE HAUAHA FLAGAMI ALLAPAIIAH KEY Esti-aced Cost a----------------------------r-r---r--_---- -------- ---------------------r--_-------- Of Improverents $132,053 1110741372 $108,305 1330,810 151,918 t253,993 011737 Projected Mon -Residential 11289,836 10,493,183 11057,868 31231,166 ''007,128 2,480,863 310,000 Growth (sq.ft.) Impact Fee Coefficient 10.102 $0.102 $0.102 $0.102 10.102 $0.102 $0.102 Wsq.ft.) Sec. 54.6-12. Calculation of Impact Fee. Upon receipt of an application for a building permit for a new development, the Building and Zoning Department shall determine the amount of the "impact fee" due pursuant to the following procedure: (a) determine whether the development is exempt by virtue of the conditions specified in Sec. 54.6-6. (b) identify the property's development subarea (i.e., the Plan- ning District wherein it falls); (c) calculate the gross square Footage of floor area of the building for residential and non-residential; (d) multiply the gross square footage of the development by the appropriate subarea "impact fee" coefficient; (e) review and, if appropriate reduce, upon written request of the applicant and verification by the Planning Department, the amount of impact fee calculated and otherwise due, by the value to the City of any capital improvements provided by the applicant which are listed in the Impact Fee -related Capital Improvement Program. Evidence of capital improvement provi- sion cost shall be submitted by the applicant and shall be subject to review by the City. In no event, however, shall a credit be given for that specific category of projects for more than the amount of the impact fee otherwise due pursuant to this Ordinance. M Prior to making an application for a building permit, an applicant may request a non -binding good faith impact fee 15 -. , 0426 . estimate from the Building and "Zoning Department, The estimate shall be based upon the development potential of the particular site as measured by either 1 the maximum allowable gross square footage permitted by existing zoning, or (2) the total. gross square footage indicated in the applicant's building plan. The Square footage thus determined is then multiplied by the applicable impact fee coorricient. Cleo. 54.6-13. Administration of Impact Fee. (a) Collection of Impact Fee: Impact fees due pursuant to this Ordinance shall be collected by the Building and Zoning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. (b) Transfer, of Funds to Finance Department: Upon receipt of impact fees, the Building and Zoning Depart- ment shall transfer such funds to the City Finance Department which shall be responsible for placement of such funds into separate accounts as hereinafter specified. All such funds shall be deposited in interest -bearing accounts in a bank authorized to receive deposits of City funds. Interest earned by each account shall be credited to that account and shall be used solely for the purposes specified for funds of such account. (c) Establishment and Maintenance of Accounts: The City Finance Department shall establish separate accounts and maintain records for each such account, whereby impact fees collected can be segregated by type of project, planning district and building permit. (d) Maintenance of Records: The City Finance Department shall maintain and keep adequate financial records for each such account which shall show the source and disbursement of all revenues, which shall account for all monies received; and which shall ensure that the disbursement of funds from each account shall be used solely and exclusively for the provision of project�s specified in the Impact Fee -related Capital Improvements Program for the particular subarea, - 16. T 10426 -�� (e\ RefT Lee: (1) The current owner of property on which an impact fee has been paid may apply for a refund of such Pee if -. the City has failed to *noUmbor or spend the collected rees by the ' end or the calendar quarter immediately following six (8) years of the date of payment of the impact fee; or the building permit for which the impact roe has been paid has lapsed for non -commencement or construction; or the project for which e building permit has been issued has been altered resulting in a decrease in the amount of the . impact fee due. ' (2) Only the current owner of property may petition for a refund. & petition for refund shall be filed within One year of any of the above specified events giving rise to the right to claim a refund. (3) The petition for refund shall be submitted to the City Manager or his duly designated agent on a form provided by ' the City for such purpose. The petition shall contain: a notarized affidavit that petitioner is the current owner of the property; a certified copy of latest tax records of � Metropolitan Dade County showing the owner of the suhject ^ ' property; a copy of the dated receipt for payment of the impact fee issued by the Clty~s Department of Building and Zoning; and a statement of the basis upon Wblob the refund . -4 is sought. f � (4) Within one month of the date of receipt of a petition for �+ � refund, the City Manager or his duly designated agent must provide the petitioner, in writing, with o decision on the refund request. The decision must include the reasons for ^ -~ ^ the deulai0P including, as may be appropriate, a determi- nation of whether the collected fees have been encumbered' .� ` or spent in accordance with the requirements of this /.' Chapter. If a refund is due petitioner, the City Manager � or his duly designated agent shall notify the Clty^s ' ° Finance Director and request that a refund payment be made �to petitioner, ." . ` � 17 � � 1LO426 (5) Any money returned pursuant to this subsection shall be returned with interest at the rate of three percent (3%) per annum. (6) petitioner may appeal the determination of the City Manager to the Impact Fee Hoard of Review; (f) Annual Review and Modification: The City shall annually, in conjunction with the annual capital budget and capital improvements prograca adoption process, review Impact Fee Ordinance procedures, assumptions, formulas, zone designations and fee assessments and make such modifications as are deemed necessary as a result of (1) development occurring in the prior year; (2) construction of proposed public facilities; (3) changing facility needs; (4) inflation and other economic factors; (5) revised cost esti= mates for public facilities and/or improvements; (6) changes in the. availability of other funding sources applicable to impact fee -related capital improvements; (7) such other factors as may be relevant. Modifications to the Impact Fee - related Capital Improvement Program shall be recommended for adoption prior to October 1 of each year and shall be effec- tive on October 1. Sec. 54.6-14. Administrative Fees. Expenses to be incurred by the City in connection with the adminis- tration of the Development- Impact Fee Ordinance have been estimated and budgeted and have been determined to be of benefit to the properties therein and shall be reimbursed to Impact Fee Administration Fund of the City out of the revenues accruing through the imposition of a non-refundable service charge in the amount of three percent (3%) of the impact fee due. The non-refundable service charges are in addition to and shall be paid separately from the assessment, but shall be payable at the time of application for the building permit and shall be for the sole purpose of defraying expenses as provided herein, Sec, 54.6-15. Bonder of Capital Improvement Projects, The City may issue bonds, revenue certificates and other obliga- tions of indebtedness in such manner and subject to such limitations as mtiiy be provided by law, in furth(.,ran(,e of the provision of impact fee - related projects. Funds pledged toward retirement of bonds) revenue eertiricates or other obligations of indebtedness for such projects may include impact fees and other City revenues as may be allocated by the City Commission. Imptsct fees paid pursuant to this urd1nance, however) shall be restricted to use solely and exclusively for .financing, direct- ly, or as a pledge against bonds, revenuo certificat-t}s and other obiiCa- tions of indebtedness for) the cost of additional facilities projects. Sec, 54.6 -16 . Establishment of _ impact Fee _ Board of Review L Appeal (a) Impact Fee Board of Review. There is hereby established an Impact Fee Board of Review ("Board") which shall consist of the directors, or their designees, from the City departments of: Planning; Public Works; Parks, Recreation and Public Facilities; Building and Zoning; Fire, Rescue and Inspection Services; General Services Administration; Solid Waste; and Police. Said board shall be responsible for hearing the initial appeal by applicants for building permits ("applicant") aggrieved by decisions of the Building.and Zoning Department made pursuant to this Chapter. (b) Appeal Procedures. After determination by the Building and Zoning Department of the amount of the development impact fee or credit due, an aggrieved applicant or any officer, department, board, commission or agency of the City of Miami (collectively referred to as City "entities") may request a review of such fee or credit due *by appealing to the Impact Fee Board of Review pursuant to the following procedures: The aggrieved applicant or above authorized City entity shall file a written Notice of Appeal with the Director of the City's Department of Building and Zoning within fifteen (15) days following the rendition of the applicable development impact fee or credit due. If the Notice of Appeal is accompanied by a bond or other sufficient surety satisfactory to the City Attorney, in an amount equal to the applicable development impact fee as 19 - 0426 rJ calculated by the Building and "'oni.ng Department, the vui.lfling and Zoning Department shall issue the building permit, T h c riling of an appeal at rrly point in time: shall not stay the: collection of the Development i►hpact Fee unloss a bond or other surety satisfactory to the City Attorney has been filled. Said Dond or Surety is not required when the appellant is a unit of government. (c) Tftx for kPpeals to Iripact Foe Board of Revicy. An appeal to the 'impact F(re Board of Review shall be made within fifteen (15) days after rendition of the subject Building* and Zoning Department Impact Fee invoice by filing a Notice of Appeal or Letter of Appeal with the Dir(:ctor of the Department of Building and Zoning stating therein the basis for such appeal. (d) Failure to File on Time. No hearing shall be heard by the Impact Fee Board of Review unless the respective appeals have been filed within the time and at tale place, provided in this Chapter. (e) All Decisions Final. All decisions of the Impact Fee Board of Review, made under this Chapter, shall be deemed final unless properly instituted appeals are filed pursuant to this Chapter. (f) Disclosure Requirements. All such requests for review by the City under this Chapter shall be subject to the disclosure requirements of Section 2- 308, as amended, of the Code of the City of Miami.; (g) Fee Required for Review. All requests for review of decisions of the Building and Zoning Department by the Impact Fee Board of Review shall be accompanied by a fee of $500.00. The City entities specified in paragraph (b) of this section shall not be require to pay said fee. (h) Notice of Hearing; Scheduling. The time of the hearing before the Impact Fee Board of Review shall be no more than forty-five (45) days after receipt of ti1e Letter or Notice of Appeal.; provided, that the time limitations set out in this section shall not apply during the thirty-one (31) days of the month of August. Appeals filed under this chapter shall be received by the Director of the Building and Zoning Department at least ten (10) days prior to a scheduled meeting of the Impact Fee Board of Review to be heard at that particular meeting. Request for review not satisfying the provisions of this paragraph shall be heard at the next subsequently scheduled meetings of the Impact Fee Board of Review. The Director of the Department of Building and Zoning shall give the appealing party at least ten (10) days notice of the time and place of such hearing. The notice shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. No Public Notice is required. (1) Hearings; Additional Evidence; and Decision. At the time and place set for the hearing the Impact Fee Board of Review shall give the appealing party a reasonable opportu- nity to be heard. Parties may present additional evidence to support their position, however no economic or teennleai reports or studies, real estate appraisals or reports, and/or written reports of consultants shall be considered by the Impact Fee Board of Review unless the same shall have been filed with the Department of Building and Zoning: at least ten (10) days prior to that hearing. All Exhibits presented to the Board shall become part of the record and shall remain so until the expiration of the administrative appeal period or final judicial determination. Sec. 54.6-17. City Commission Review. A decision by the Impact Fee Board of Review shall be final unless a request for review is filed with the Director of the Department of Building and Zoning within fifteen (15) days of rendition by that Board, together with payment of a $500.00 fee. Such request may be filed by the aggrieved building permit applicant, or by any officer, department, board, commission or agency of the City of Miami. All such requests for review by the City Commission shall be subject to the disclosure require-- meats of Section 2-308 of the Code of the City of Miami.. The above specified City entities shall not be required to pay said fee. Sec: 511.6-15, Procedures, The Director of Building and Zoning shall then certify such re- quests through the Office or the City Manager. Tile procedures set forth in Section 5.6-16, above, shall also apply to hearings by the City Commission on Impact Fee appeals. Sec. 54.6=19. City_ Connis,sion Powers on Review. The City Commission on review shall have full power to affirm, reverse, or modify the action of the Impact Fee Board of Review. Said decision shall be made on the record not more than 45 days after the request for review by same is made by the aggrieved applicant. Sec. 54.6-20. Judicial Review. Any request for review of a decision by the City Commission under this Chapter shall be made by filing an appeal within 30 days of said decision with the Circuit Court in accordance with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Sec. 54.6-21. Effect of Impact Fee on Planning, Zonin Subdivision, and other Reuiations. This Ordinance shall not effect, in any manner, the permissible use of property, density of development, design and improvement standards and requirements or any other aspect of the development of land or provision of public improvements subject to the City's Comprehensive Plan, zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, or other regulations of the City, all of which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect without limitation with respect to all such development. Sec. 54.6-22. Impact Fee As Additional and Supplemental Requirement. The City of Miami Development Impact Fee is additional and supple- mental to and not in substitution of any other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the issuance of building permits. It is intended to be consistent with and to further the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning Ordinance, and to be coordinated with the City's Capital Improvement Program and other City policies, ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of public facility improvements in conjunction with the development of land. In no event shall a property owner be obligated to �22- 1.0426 pay for the same iroprovement(s) in an amount in excess of the> amount calculated pursuant to this Chapter; provided, however, that a property owner, may be required to pay, pursuant to Metropolitan Dade County, State of Florida, and/or City regulations, for other public facility improvements in addition to the impact fee -related improvements as specified herein." Section 3. All ordinances, code sections, or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 4. Should any part or provision of this Ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole. Section 5. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble of this Ordinance are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Section. PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 25th day of February , 1988. PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY this 28th day of April 1988. ATTEST:.- XAVIER L. SUAREZ, t R -Zo— e tz;4�, MATTY HIRIF City Clerk REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ,/ � �a l ,r zl , 0 L E. MAXWELL �A sistant City Attorney JEM/db/ke APPROVE AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: City Attorney I, Nfiltty lfiroi, ("It— ; of III, , ('it of ' ilmi, I'fur �ti v of :�u:! � t't",•i����, � . si:�, ;,r a• �, ;� . t.a ,• 14;.•''i,�es41 l);.,,tr u-` t°t. I1:Mtii+, �, :n.aitt l� .:rt i i• ., tr _�! t1... �;;_! �: f�i';»`it�k'ii. ,or u;►Liw: a alld 11 "I"i ltt •11's h �t1t'1�i�l;i;, �.aiCl x dl�)�' 10 Itlt pLi'v teri 13 Pt-1 CITY OF `.11AM1. FLORIDA INTEROFFICE MEMORANOUM Honorable Mayor and Members 2-ATE -,LE of the City Commission suelEc_ City of Miami Development Impact Fee Ordinance Second Reading room Cesar H • Odi O 4EFERENCES City Manager ENCLOSURES RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the- City Commission adopt the attached Ordinance repealing an existing impact fee ordinance and establishing a new impact fee on all new development, exclusive. of City -owned and operated facilities, single-family residential development, low and moderate income housing and certain other categories of new development, in order to finance major public facilities and equipment, the demand for which'is created by such development. BACKGROUND: Following the directions of the City Commission at the meeting of February 25, 1988 the Planning Department has revised the existing Miami Development Impact Fee Ordinance to exclude City -owned and operated facilities, single-family _ residential development, low and moderate income housing and certain other categories of new development. Impact fees are but one,means of producing revenue for infrastructure improve- ments in the City. Other means include city bonds, special assessments and developer exactions. City bonds and special assessments are used to finance both existing and future infrastructure needs, while impact fees and developer exactions are used to neet the special and separate needs created by new development, The Development Impact Fee Ordinance is an attempt to insure that specifically needed infrastructure would be financed by requiring affect- ing developments to pay their fair share of the cost for the- particular infrastructure need they are creating. In the Spring of 1982, the City of Miami Law Department contracted with the firm of Freilich & leitner, P.C. (now Herrick, Feinstein), to develop an impact fee ordinance for the City of Miami, In March 1983, the firm outlined an Ordinance targeting only that oeveiopment exceeuing gross FAR 1.72. The Planning Department then prepared the required demographic studies and met with all appropriate City departments to develop the necessary project cost data, On May 7, 1086 the Planninq Department presented the resulting Inten. sive Development Impact Fee )r1inance �o the Commission for first reading, t the request of the City Commission, the Planning Department, in consultation Page 1 of 8 04 1C, Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission with the Departments of Finance, Management and Budget, Police, Fire, Rescue and Inspection Services, Public Works, Parks, Recreation and Public Facili- ties, General Services Administration.(GSA) and Solid Waste, expanded the scope of the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance to include all new develop- ment, with the specific exclusion of City -owned and operated facilities and single-family residential development. On July 24, 1986 the City Commission approved a concept outline detailing the policy decisions involved in this revised Ordinance. During subsequent meetings between the Planning Department and the departments of Public Works; Parks, Recreation and Public Facilities; Police; Fire, Rescue and Inspection Services; Solid Waste; and the General Services Administration; several of these departments expressed the desire to have City-wide growth projections upon which to base their capital facility and equipment related needs -for future growth. These projections were provided to the departments and attached thereto were questionnaires requesting specific information as to the departments' future capital infrastructure projects, estimated cost and location of the projects and justification for inclusion of the projects in their impact fee -related capital program. The information received from all of the above mentioned departments pursuant to this questionnaire was incorpo- rated in the Ordinance and is reflected in the resulting impact fee coeffi- cients. On January 22, 1987 the City Commission approved on first,reading the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance and requested that the Ordinance return for second reading on March 26, 1987 (meeting date subsequently changed to March 31, 1987 and subsequent to that, April 9, 1987). Because changes made to the Ordi- nance in the interim were substantial, the Law Department requested that the Impact Fee Ordinance return to the City Commission for a first reading. On April 9, 1987, the City Commission again deferred consideration of the Ordi- nance until .May 14, 1987 pending an adjustment of Solid Waste impact fees, Police impact fees and the inclusion of General Services Administration impact fees. On May 14, 1987, the City Commission- approved on first reading the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance and requested that the Ordinance return for second reading on May 28, 1987. The Ordinance wa-s adopted on May 28, 1987 and became effective as of June 28, 1987. On September 22, 1987 an emergency ordinance was adopted establishing a 30-day moratorium on the collection of impact fees to provide time for the Planning Department to consider the Ordinance's impact upon the construction of low and moderate income multi -family housing and charitable, non-profit development. The City Commission directed the Planning Department to study the feasibility of exempting these additional categories of development from payment of impact fees, On uczoper 22, 19V the moratorium was extended for 90 Jays until January 28, 1987 in order to give the Planning Department sufficient time to prepare a revised ordinance, Because a first reading of the ordinance was deferred Until February 25, 1988, the moratorium was again extended on January 14, 19BB to last until April 30, 1988. Page 2 of 8 042V Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission The City Commission, furthermore, requested the Planning Department to examine the possibility of establishing a reasonable "threshold" above which impact fees would be charged. The Planning Department presently uses a threshold of 200,000 square feet for Major Use Special Permit review. Fees of S.01 per square foot of new development are assessed under such permits to cover administrative costs of processing the application. The Planning Department investigated the possibility of creating a "Minor Use Special Permit" review for. new developren,.s between 20,000 and 200,000 square feet in size and setting a permit fee of $1.00 per square foot. The Law Department indicated, however, that such a fee,. covering more than administrative costs might not satisfy state statutory requirements under Section 380 for development exac- tions. By limiting the fee to S.01 per -square foot, the Minor Use Special Permit review would, however, set special conditions required of the develop- ment, to satisfy capital infrastructure needs created by that development and the City Commission would have the opportunity to impose these conditions on all minor use development. At the City Commission meeting of February 25, 1988 the City Commission was presented with a revised impact fee ordinance and a proposal for a minor use special permit. The Planning staff presented the minor use proposal as one of several possible alternatives including: (1) exemption of the additional categories of new development from payment of impact fees, (2) reinstitution of the original exemptions only, (3) removal of all exemptions, (4) dispensing with impact fees altogether and/or (5) substitution of the proposed Minor Use Special Permit review. The Commission was advised by the Planning Department that implicit in the decision to exempt certain categories of development from payment of impact fees is a legal obligation upon the City to assume the costs incurred by the City because of such development. The staff explained that through the proposed exemptions potential revenues from the impact fee would decrease by more than 50 percent from what they would have been without any exemptions, the result being that the costs of these exemptions would have to be absorbed by other City revenues. The City Commission thereupon adopted on first reading the proposed impact fee ordinance with the following exemptions: all single family residential devel- opment; city owned and/or operated facilities and joint ventures with the City; low and moderate income housing (defined as duplex and multiple family housing within the City's Community Development Target Areas and any duplex and multiple family housing outside the Target Areas certified by the City's Housing Conservation and Development Agency. as low and/or moderate income); DRls having an approved Development Order before the effective date of the Ordinance (excluding the Downtown DRI and the Southeast Overtown/Park West Areawide ORI), provided that the building permit is obtained within 15 months of the effective date of this Ordinance; and developments filing complete building plans, as defined by the City's Zoning Ordinance, as amended, before the effective date of this Ordinance, providing that the building permit is obtained within 45 calendar days from the effective date of this Ordinance, Page 3 of 0 104c, i Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission Other non -target area and non -low and moderate income duplex and multiple family residential development, non-profit corporations and charitable organi- zations were not -to be exempted from payment of impact fees. Also, not to be exempted from payment of impact fees is the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact and the Southeast Overtown-Park West Areawide Development of Regional Impact. The attached Ordinance reflects the City Commission's provisos and was submitted upon second reading at the City Commission meeting of March. 24, 1988. Without a quorum and on a vote of two in favor s^d two opposed, the Ordinance was tabled until the April 28, 1988 Commission meeting at which time it will be reconsidered on second reading. Anticipated impact fee revenues, before and after exemptions, are shown in the tables on the following page. - While Florida courts are generally sympathetic to the philosophy of impact fees, (i.e., that new development pay its own way) an impact fee ordinance should conform as closely as possible to the judicial guidelines set forth in the case law. The following are the minimum requirements for a constitution- ally valid impact fee: LEGAL REQUIREMEENTS FOR A VALID IMPACT FEE: 1. Only capital improvements (not services) can be financed by the impact fee; 2. The need for the capital improvement must be demonstrated; 3. The capital improvement must be identified as specifically serving or benefiting those upon whom the fee will be assessed; 4. The fee must be allocated proportionately among different classes of users in an equitable, non-discriminatory manner; 5. The capital improvement cannot serve the public -at -large, but must serve those in a specific geographic area or subarea; 6. The impact fee must be based upon the cost of the capital improvement to be provided; 7. The total of fees may not exceed the cost of the capital improvement; 8. The funds collected must be specifically "earmarked" for the capital improvement; 9. The ordinance should specify a time frame for ;he capital improvement to be provided following payment of the impact fee, in response to and in addition to the above legal requirements, the City has made the following poiicy decisions in the development of an ordinance; Page 4 of 8 .: .042C 2 0 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission POTENTIAL IMPACT FEE REVENUES: 1188 - 2005 1988-90 ------------------------------------------------------------ 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison $216,810 $570,073 $528,462 $532,480 il,847,825 Dovntovn 7,075,314 7,113,079 61753,604 71240,060 22,1829557 Coconut Grove 436,987 1,387,117 1,045,195 1,310,511 41179,970 Little Havana 460,821 1,270,306 1,002,911 $46,247 3,580,285 F1agali 155,051 455,646 341,071 404,148 1,355,916 Allapattah 406,333 1,018,177 344,081 7839520 3,052,111 Virginia Key 36,268 126,123 0 0 156,391 Total $8,782,084 $11,940,601 S10,515,324 $11,117,046 $42,355,055 EXEMPTED IMPACT FEE REVENUES: 1988 - 2005 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 114,944 $151,307 1137,325 $194,431 $498,508 Oovntovn 41486,997 51696,133 3,596,576 31830,059 17,609,765 Coconut Grove 93,850 737,278 461,617 - 649,056 1,941,800 Little Havana 31,454 254,187 189,760 214,354 689,756 Flagabi 27,946 135,638 103,603 142,454 409,642 Allapattah 7,682 202,404 152,291 319,050 631,426 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 14,662,873 17,176,149 $4,641,672 $5,349,404 i21,330,898 ACTUAL ANTICIPATED IMPACT FEE REVENUES: 1988 - 2005 1988.90 1990.95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 5201,366 $410,766 $390,637 $333,049 $1,349,317 00rntoon 2,583,317 1,416,146 3,157, 029 :, 410, 001 10, 572, 792 Coconut Grove 343,137 649,919 533,573 ^61,535 041t Havana 429,367 1,016,119 313,151 631,893 2,390,529 Flagaes 127,105 1120,003 137,468 ;61,614 146,2$4 Allapattah 398,651 $15, 773 591,190 464,470 , 370, 685 ')irginia Key 30,263 Toti l 14,119, 211 14, 763, 662 15, 873, 65Z 15, 767, 642 RQ, 524,157 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission CITY OF MIAMI POLICY DECISIONS: 1. The fee would apply to all new development in the City, excluding single family residential development and City owned and operated facilities, which results in a net increase in either the number of residential dwelling units, or square footage in either residential or non-residential in excess of 1000 square feet. County and State agencies are not exclud- ed. In addition, the fee would neither apply to arty dupl cx or MRU I . i pl e family residential development located in the City's designated Community Development Target Areas nor to duplex or multiple family' residential development, outside of the Target Areas, which is certified by the City of Miami Housing Conservation and Development Agency as low and/or moderate income housing. Also exempt are non-profit, joint ventures with the City, developments using City owned land, and City owned and/or operated facilities. 2. Grandfathered in under the Ordinance and thus exempt from payment of impact fees are: (1) developments filing complete building plans, as defined by the City's Zoning Ordinance, as amended, before the effective date of the Ordinance, providing that the building permit is obtained within 45 calendar days from the effective date of the Ordinance; and (2) Developments of Regional Impact (DRIB), specifically excluding the Down- town Miami Development of DRI and the Southeast Overtown-Park West DRI, for which a Development Order has been approved by the City before the effective date of the Ordinance, providing that the building permit is obtained within 15 months of the effective date of this Ordinance. 3. Fees would be determined for only two (2) land use categories - residen- tial and non-residential. Even when non-residential will include all different types of this use, it will 'not be broken down into subcategories of retail, office, etc. 4. The City would be divided into distinct geographic areas ( initially, the seven Planning Districts) in order that provided capital improvements reasonably relate to new development in that geographic area and thereby rt meet the legal requirement of a rational nexus test. 5. The amount of the fee could differ across the different designated areas of the City to reflect different capital needs in each district and the associated cost of meeting those needs, 6, The amount of the fee would be determined by estimating the cost of providing capital improvements to new development through the year 2005, of the following types; street improvements, storm sewer improvements, parks and recreation facilities, fire -rescue facilities and equipment, police facilities and equipment, solid waste collection facilities and equipment, and other general government capital improvements. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission 7. Capital improvement costs would be determined by applying relevant stan- dards and cost estimates. Costs could be based on specific capital im- provements programmed to accommodate projected future growth in specific areas. 8. An "existing needs assessment" would not be made. All existing and already programmed facilities in all areas are satisfying existing needs, and impact fee -funded improvements benefit additional growth only. Existing standards would serve as impact fee standards. 9. Any fees to be charged by the City to finance State and County -owned and provided capital improvements and facilities would need to be submitted by these entities and need to be acceptable to the City. 10. The fee in its entirety would be charged at the time of building permit issuance and kept in escrow for the financing of programmed capital im- provements. 11. Fees collected would go into special capital improvements funds set up for impact -fee-related capital improvements for each specific geographic area. 12. The assessment of an impact fee on a development does not preclude the possibility of additional assessments for a development -specific located facility or for capital improvement needs not included in the impact fee - supported Capital Improvement Program; at the same time developments must not be charged separately for facilities or capital improvements already covered in the impact fee -supported Capital Improvement Program. 13. Developers. would be allowed credits, off -setting a portion or all of the assessed fee, for providing improvements to infrastructure or providing facilities in the geographic area serving the purposes specifically intended by the Impact Fee Ordinance. 14. After the City's determination of the amount of the development impact fee or credit due, an applicant may request a review of such fee. 15. The City shall annually, in conjunction with the annual capital -budget and capital improvements program adoption process, review Impact Fee Ordinance procedures, assumptions, formulas, zone designations and fee -assessments and make such modifications as are deemed necessary. 16. An administrative fee in the amount of three percent•(3%) of the impact fee due would be imposed, payable at the time of application for building permit, 17, Using the proceeds of the impact fees, the City may issue bonds, revenue certificates and other obligations of indebtedness in such manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by low, l8, In the event that a fee collected has not been spent or encumbered by the end of the calendar quarter immediately following six (6') years from the Page 7 of 8 1 042 CITY OF MIAM1. FLORIOA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANOUM Cesar H. Odio :ATE April 18, 1988 r._E City Manager 3UBJEC_ City of Miami 9eve1 opment Impact Fee Ordinance r40M �'• i C4 , ?.EFERENCES Join ph `CAI. McManus, Assistant Director Planning Department S NCLv SUf7E5 Attached for inclusion on the* April 28, 1988 City Commission Meeting Agenda is the City of Miami Development Impact Fee Ordinance. SR/ADW/KC/kc cc: Law Department Approved By: Sao o riguez s s nt City Manager X04 P. 1046 Elm :71 ..... .z 0v wit I Quo .olil�s III mobilraw it Imam, .:1a MO11111MUIX4m and to On m ... Iiln � � ocie� am 1��. Rae In= 1 mobil" on Pw—i 11�.� i tors wwllrl■ar Rs■ I� I �I�r�,.� .=�7:� 7ir� w.•r■pw�w�� ■sFilling ®�11E: _ sma IRIRR= « DEVELOPMENT, �� ITARGET E .■r m 1 mmm■oill ■mowiir •'e' now . CODE NOWBORHOOD .RNam3 , Ill LIFTIL RIVER s mom o ff- 1■.r F- ;WINE■ ■I■ •.R� � I�� i e w iiiies i ��� _ Y ` � •soon ■■ ■■■■ �■�i� w..■� �i.■lii~� 11aR.■■�w �w� r !rLl3l�� \\awo>�Rs�lit OCCUR PEAK -�Ill MTN PICNIC IUMOS 11 i PLANNING DISTRICT . N.W. 29 ST. AVAINNOOD N.W. 20 ST 11 ► — > _ o 3 N.W. 14 ST. N.W. 6 S . 6 N � FLAGLER ST. S.W. S ST. — CL UGHION i a-=JIIIIA fill ILE CSWY ISLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TARGET AREA CODE NEIOIISONHOOD 2V DMEVAID 20 EOUVAIiR pia 251 . OvI llom i- 252 SP1146 6AWKS 261 [[rIAAI ROrMIOmt 264 Unwis PARR 291 111E)ill 1ESI J� 292 I111CUL 801111 211 OIAMI AKIrE HICKENSACKER CSWY v�1�♦tv m /Aalla1SW06to 296 VAISM IS0110 OP�G 292 1`011 Of AIAIII bi mi 21b 30. 4K 49 49 31i 46 3i CMAL WAY &W. 22 T. sum w &W. 40 ST. POINCIANA AVE. fli3s HARDU AVE— ]A�] ED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TARGET AREA CODE NEIGHBORIJOOD 131 11SI 6104 191 UWAS PAN III SItKt KIFF "I somill Om 194 (AS[ 6W4 SIS Soul" 611m 1% Elftf MOVIE ISIANS D 11 PLANNING DISTRICT p N.W. I ST. yr. s x — a ar9 W. FI.ADLEB ST. r.. r a S.W..a lT . ,.. P: . ... .... t. .r •, S.W. is ST. £ � v { •� �,��� •• , . ���T-ZI _ {7 _ _ ate• ,� CORAL WAY +1.W.22ST. _ — ,,� � i%•+ - LEGEND < EMS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TARGET AREA dCODE NEIO118011000 -" Yil 11Si Cliffs CA9si. oil Alit elms _ 1 411 word IASI tlltit HAV"A . ! 491 At1ulACNE '�yjr CAW CAI( 99r SxEWi00W -L ' III : l/l LAST Cn tAD9E m -Dort tn K m 'imisre tAIK -It 119 MM Aril KMIit. 19IA11t -. lis -.119161E ' iIf tU19 X1141111 ' 77C IAst RIBA M6u i PLANNING DISTRICT E s N.W. /1 S T. s �J U U N.W. 7 9T. ui FLAMER ST. S.W. a ST. < > A bi ; 3 ` t LEGEND CODE NEIOH80RHOOD � S91 MSf flw.ml SM FAMIA•At S!! 914(a P419 S!� UXUIE Gumns 0 PLANNING DISTRICT F �. ; ;... AIRPORT EXPRESSWAY. = ". ... N.W. 2li St.' ri N.W. 2S ST .. MUA 3 «.. ... .. M.W. 20 ST.7. y1r _ _ _ '��' ifr Y•� M.W. it ST. s. LEGEND C06YiUNITY DEVELOPMENT TARGET f AREA 4► ; 1 --� •^:. S $ '�i� ' 31 CODE NEIGHBORHOOD " M.W. 7 iT. Ql f[Mp tUb - ill tontoct - : Rt CfE.. .14 WHO tag . ti5 CIVIC OWN i91 will 694MI MB 0116"% 692 will *kill FAW ..� 611 :':. Wtll MMIG M144 " 691 S olll t14CSC ►S[[ 695 SmtOU10ftWAIVAIS O LEGEND CODE NEIaHBORIiOOD 171 V116111A try SECTION I - CITY DEN002APHICS Projected Increase in Residential Poouiat:on: 1988-90■ ----------------------------------------------------------- 1990-95 IM-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 56 419 471 663 10609 Downtown 5,599 7,146 3,375 3,810 30,010 Coconut Grove 252 11888 19257 11768 51165 Little Havana 140 1,049 795 884 2,858 Flagal: 84 420 314 442 1,260 Allaoattah 28 420 314 663 1,425 Virginia Key 0 ------------------------------------------------------------ 0 0 0 0 Total 6,159 11,342 11,516 13,310 42,327 Projected Increase in Total Gveiling UnitsAA 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------ Edison 22 168 188 265 643 Dovntom 31111 3,970 41653 4,939 16,673 Coconut Grove 126 944 628 884 2,582 Little Havana 56 420 314 354 1,144 Flaga�: 34 166 126 174 500 Allapattah 11 169 126 268 574 Virginia Key 0 0 0 6 0 -------------------------------------------------------- Total 3,360 5,837 61035 6,884 22,116 Projected Increase in Total Residential Square Footage; (at 1,200 square feet per avelling unit) 1968-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL - Edison 26,400 201,600 225,600 318,000 771,600 Downtown 31733,200 4,764,000 ,583,600 5,926,800 20,007,600 Coconut Grove 151,200 191329800 753,600 1,060,800 3,098,400 Little Havana 67,200 504,000 376,800 424,800 1,372,800 Flagaei 40,800 199,200 151,200 208180Q 6109040 Allapattah 13,200 202,800 151,200 321,600 6889809 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 4,032,000 '1004,400 7,242,000 8,260,800 26,539,200 v 1988.90 projections are for the period April 1, 1988 through Aargn 31, 1990 Only, "Itsldentlal population to Wiling units conversions art as Follovf: Downtown; 14 persons per gweil.irn0 unit Coconut Groves a,0 persona per 4pelling vn:t All Other Districts; ,5 persons per arelling unit 1 42 j Mew 2esidential Units Projected Increase in Single Fasily Residential Units: 1988-90 1990-95 11995-2000 MO -05 `OTAL ----------------------------------------------------- Edison 3 26 28 40 97 Downtown 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 32 236 157 221 646 Little Havana 6 42 31 36 115 Flagaai 7 33 26 35 101 Allapatt-ah 1 17 12 27 57 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 -------------------------------------------------•--- Total 49 354 254 359 1,016 Projected Increase in Duplex Residential Units: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 6 42 47 66 161 Downtown 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 32 236 157 221 646 Little Havana 17 126 94 106 343 F.1gas1 7 33 26 35 101 Allapattah 4 67 51_ 116 223 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 66 504 375 534 1,479 Projected Increase in Multi-Fasily Residential Units: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 13 100 113 159 385 Downtown 3,111 3,970 4,653 4,939 16,673 Coconut Grove 62 472 314 442 11290 Little Havana 33 252 189 212 686' Flagaiiii 20 100 74 104 298 Allapattah 6 85 63 135 289 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 3,245 41979 5,406 51991 19,621 Projected Increase in Total Residential Units; 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ..wf!}!}...! Edison 22 168 lab 265 643 Downtown 31111 39970 49653 41939 16,673 Coconut Grove 126 944 628 864 21582 Little Havana 56 4Z0 314 354 1,144 F 1 aga�a 34 166 IN 174 500 atlapaFtah 11 169 126 R68 S74 Virginia +coy 0 0 0 1 0 •w►l+ewwwrwwwi+.wwwewewwswwwlwel:eewwwwwww:wwwwswwwssww Total 3,360 5,831 035 6,884 12,116 10426 i t Hew Residential Some Footage Projected Increase :n Single FaW Y Residential Square Footage: 1988.40 1910-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ----------------------------------------------------------- 31600 31,200 33,600 48,000 1169400 Dovntown 0 0 0 0 1 Coconut Grove 32,400 283,200 188,440 265,200 775,200 Little Havana 71200 S01400 37,200 43,200 138,000 flags i 81400 39,600 31,206 42,000 121,200 Allapattah 1,200 20,400 14,400 32,400 68,400 Virginia Key 1 1 1 1 1 Total 58,800 424,800 30 4,806 430,800 1,219,200 Projected Increase in Duplex Residential Square Footage: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL. Edison 7,200 50,400 -56,400 '9,200 113,200 Dovntom 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut.Grove 38,400 293,200 188,400 265,200 ?75,200 Little Havana 20,400 151,200 112,800 127,200 411,6u0 flaga�: 8,400 39,600 31,200 42,000 121,200 A1lapactah 4,800 30,400 6 1, 200 127,200 273,660 Virginia Key 0, 0 0 _.,, 0 0 Total ----------------------------------------------------------- 79,200 604,800 454,000 641,800 1,774,800 Projected Increase in Multi -Family Residential Square Footage: 1968-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 ----------------- TOTAL Edison ----------------------------- 15,600 120,000 135,600 110,808 462,000 Dovntovn 3,733,200 4,764,040 5,583,600 5,926,300 20,007,600 Coconut Grove 74,400 566,400 376,800 530,400 11548,000 Little Havana 39,600 302,400 2261,800 254,400 $239200 Flaga�: 24,000 120,001 08,800 124,800 157,600 Allapattah. 7,200 102,000 759600 162,000 146,800 Virginia Key 1 0 1 0 0 Total 31894,000 5,974,000 6,467,200 71189,200 23,545,200 Projected Increase in Total Residential Sgwt Footages 1908-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000 -05 TOTAL ♦R#l�+wrwwewww#w+wo.ww+wwwP•www�.+www ww+:w eT+ww ww ww�r ........... Edison 26,401 201,600 225,600 318,000 1171160Q ?90ntoyn 3,733,200 4,764,000 1,583,600 5,926,000 e0,007,600 Coconut Grove 151,200 1113001 753,600 1,0601000 3,010,400 little Havana 67,200 50l,000 376,800 424,800 1,372,800 Flagali 41,800 199,200 151,901 208,000 000,000 pllapactan 13,200 402400 151120Q '.21,600 008,600 Virgin)# Key 0 0 0 0 0 ' •#wpR}##w#RwRw#R+#RRR'fR##R##/!�#fRRRRwRR+#ww#R Rw wRwwwRRRwRww Total 410324000 1,001,400 7419,000 01260,800 26,539400 104 �' <M Projected Increase in Total Eiployeent: 3ffite Esolovient t'?88-?0 1910-95 1115-2000 2000.05 70TAL Edison y - 95r 150 115 126 486 Dovntovn 71294 71120 61462 4,723 25,599 Coconut Grove 346 738 648 442 29014 Little Havana 656 19396 11154 764 3,170 FTagasi 113 2l5 170 110 648 Ailapattah 715 11518 11241 823 4,296 Virginia Key 133 0 0 0 133 lotil 9,352 11,137 90749 6,948 37,186 Retail Eiployeent 1989-90 1910-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------ .139 - 307 2 64 215 ?25 Dovntown 3,241 31360 2,512 21451 11,564 Coconut Grove 243 592 443 365 1,643 Little Havana S30 1,535 1,146 148 4,251 FTagaai ' 79 170 146 111 $13 Allapattah 134 293 253 206 886 Virginia Key 46 604 __ 0 0 650 total 4,511 6,861 4,764 40304 20,440 Yholesale Eiployeent 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 141 307 244 187 879 Dovntom 292 611 487 371 1,;51 Coconut Grove 13 41 32 24 115 Little Havana 101 211 176 133 629 Flagaii 27 58 47 36 163 Allapattan 148 321 255 194 918 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 lotai 717 1,557 1,241 345 4,460 Manufacturing Eiployeent 1988490 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL -- w------------------ erww..-w.........--w Edison 119 264 254 198 $35 Pomtom 332 736 705 550 21323 Coconut Grove 27 59 :8 44 188 Little Havana 1'6 279 268 :08 181 Fligaa A :4 54 42 178 Allipittah 163 361 347 2PQ 11141 Virgino Key 13 0 1 0 0 a Aiscellaneous Esploysent 1988-90 ------------ 1990-95 -------------------------------- 1195-2000 2000-05 ----------------- TOTAL Edison 252 416 331 197 1,196 Downtown 1,989 4,455 3,686 2,201 12,431 Coconut Grove 432 892 699 450 2,473 Little Havana 745 1,545 1,219 785 41294 Flagari 180 325 271 174 950 Ailapattah 912 19933 19507 996 5,348 Virginia Key 0 O 0 0 0 Total 41510 91566 70113 41913 26,692 Projected Increase in Total Non -Residential Square Footagewl 1988-90 ------------------------------------------------------------- 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 202,123 427,702 364,788 295,223 1,289,836 Downtown 3,292,531 2,766,377 2,104,734 2,330,141 10,493,783 Coconut Grove 247,1.21 267,267 280,305 263,175 1,057,868 Little Havana 499,717 1,133,249 110,344 687,357 3,231,166 Flagau 82,841 171,326 129,782 123,679 507,123 - Allapattah 193,789 349,354 '17,552 520,168 2,480,863 Virginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 Total 4,778,122 5,865,774 4,507,005 4,219,743 19,370,644 Projected Increase in Total (Residential and Non -Residential) Square FootageA: 1999-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-15 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------- 229,003 628,822 5919868 613,463 2,062,156 Downtown 7,025,198 . 7,530,377 - 7,688,067 3,2561808 30,500,450 Coconut Grove 398,321, 1,400,067 1,034,505 1,323,975 4,156,868 Little Havana 5661917 1,636,768 1,297,644 1,111,677 4,603,006 Flaga�i 123,161 373,426 279,502 335,839 1,1119928 Allapattah 407,229 1,050,954 868,272 838,418 39164,863 Virginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 Total 3,809,829 12,370,414 ,11,748,858 129480,170 45,909,271 Esploysent to non-residential square footage conversions are as follows; '3ffice Elploysent; 250 square feet per elpi0Vee Wail Elploylent; 300 square feet Der eopioyee '4holesale Esploysent; $00 square feet per etployee ilanufacturing Esploysent; 400 squire felt per sepipyee his;p1lantous Esploystnti w100 square feel; per esployee (Source; Planning Oepartitm, Gity of Aim, 1988) q 1,426 0 Miscellaneous Erployrent 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 • 2000-05 TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------- Edison 252 416 331 197 1,196 Downtown 1,989 41455 39686 2,301 12,431 Coconut Grove 432 892 619 450 2,473 Little Havana i45 11545 1,219 785 . 4,294 Flagari lea 325 271 174 950 AlIapattah 912 1,133 1,507 .996 51348 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 4,510 91566 1,713 41913 26,692 Projected Increase in Total Non -Residential Square FootaaeA; i188-90 ------------------------------------------------------------- 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 202,123 427,702 364,788 295,223 11289,836 Downtown 3,292.531 2,766,377 2,104,734 2,330,141 10,493,,783 Coconut Grove 247,121 267,267 280,305 263,175 1,057,868 Little Havana 499,717• 1,133,248 910,844 687,357 3,231,166 Flagm 82,841 171,316 128,782 123,679 507,123- Allapattah 393,789 349,354 ,'17,552 520,168 2,480,863 Virginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 Total 4,778,122 5,865,774 4,507,005 4,219,743 19,370,644 Projected Increase in Total (Residential and Hon -Residential) Square Footage: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------- 229,003 628,822 591,868 613,463 2,062,156 Downtown 7,025,198 7,530,377 7,688,067 3,256,808 30,500,450 Coconut Gme 398,321. 1,400,067 11034,505 1,323,975 4,156,868 Little Havana 566,117 11636,768 11287,644 1,111,677 41663,006 Flagasi 123,161 373,426 279,502 3359839 1,1111928 Allapattah 407,229 1,050,954 8b8,272 838,418 3,164,863 Virginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 Total $9809,829 12,870,414 11,748,858 1214809170 45,109,271 Esploysent to non-residential :quire footage conversions are as follows: Office Esploysents 250 square feet per eeoloyee ketall Eiployetnt: 300 squire feet per eeployee Aclesale Esploysent: $00 square feet per eeployee aanufatturing Eeploysenti 400 square feet per eeployee Miscellaneous Esploytenti 211110 square feet per eeployee (Source: Planning Depirtsent, Gity of Aim, 1969) Nev Non -Residential Square Footage Projected Increase in Office Square Footage: I988.90 1390-95 1995-2000 2000-05 70TAL .. Edison ----- ------------ 26,079 y---- 41,382 ------------ 31,708 ----•............ 34,303 -i 133,472 Oovntovn 2,3739600 11588,347 10222,184 1,263,361 61447,412 Coconut Grove 141,305 101,277 909995 1109165 4439742 Little Havana 180,585 383,488 317,144 209,847 11491,864 F1agasi 31,009 591186 30,992 469129 1679316 Allapattah 1969713 417,274 341,132 226,698 11181,807 Virginia Key 46,000 0 0 O 40,400 Total 21989,211 2,590,954 2,034,955 1,810,493 ?,S05,693 Projected Increase in Retail Square Footage: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-15 TOTAL Edison 45,936 101,310 87,120 701950 305,316 0oontoon 724,755 1,050,525 304,500 620.730 2,700,510 Coconut Grove 33,904 117,480 146,190 120,450 468,024 Little Nawna 209,032 506,550 378,180 312,840 1,405,602 Flagaw 25,608 56,100 48,130 399270 169,158 Allapattah 44,088 96,690 $3,490 67,980 292,248 Virginia Key 20,000 2509000• 0 0 270,000 Total 1,152,323 2,1789655 1,047,660 1,232,220 5,6101858 Projected Increase in Wholesale Square Footage: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 77,660 168,850 134,200 102,350 483,560 Oomtom 161,920 121,425 267,850 204,050 755,245 Coconut Grove 109120 22,550 171600 13,200 63,474 Little Havana 55,660 120,450 96,800 73,150 346,060 Flagami 149960 31,900 25,850 19,800 92,510 Allapattah 91,180 1769550 140,250 106,700 504,680 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 401,500 641,725 682,550 519,750 2,245,525 Projected Increase in Manufacturing Square Footage: 1988.90 1990-95 1995-2010 2000.15 TOTAL Edison --- .,--,..........................�.. 52,448 116,160 I l 1, 760 37,120 367,488 00rntown 32,256 61080 110,200 ;42,OOb 190,536 Coconut Grove 11179Z 251960 25,520 19,360 32,632 l i ttl a Havana 55,440 122,760 117,920 41,520 387, 610 FliA6ei 11,264 24,640 23,760 10,460 76,144 Allapattah 71,808 158,840 152,680 118,800 5021128 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 235, 008 454,440 741, 840 E77,2S0 +, 008, 568 10426 Projected Inctease in Total Non -Residential Square Footages 1988-90 1990-95 1995.2000 2000.45 TOTAL Edison U102,123 427,702 i64,788 245,223 1,239,836 Dovntovn 3,2929531 2,766,277 2,104,734 2,330,141 10,493,783 Coconut Grove 247,121 267,267 280,305 263,175 1,057,868 Little Havana 499,717 1,133,248 1109844 687,357 3,231,166 Flagasi 82,841 171,826 128,782 1239679 507,129 Allapattah 393,789 849,354 717,552 520,168 2,480,963 Uirginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 Total 4,778,122 5,865,774 4,517,005 4,219,743 19,370,644 SECTION 2 - CITY STANDARDS POLICE STANDARDS: Surveys indicate the distribution of calls for service are approxiiiately $6.5% From commercial establishments and IM% from residential units. lies Personnel: 3 shorn personnel per 1000 residents 1 civilian employee per 2 sworn persoroul Facilities/Equipment: Acquisition Cost ---------------- 1 860 ahz portable radio per 3 sworn personnel 13,000 each 1 Wile digital terminal per 3 worn personnel $59480 each 2 parking spaces per 3 sworn personnel $10,000 per space I parking space per 2 civilian employees 110,000 per space 130 square feet of building space per civilian employee 175.00 per square Foot 65 square feet of building space per worn personnel f75.00 per square foot (Source: Police Department, City of Miami, 1996) FIRE/RESCUE STANDARDS: ---------------------- Acquisition Cost -------------- Emergency Rescue Unit 1 per 50,000 persons 193,010 each Hazardous Materials Foam Apparatus 1 per 145,030 persons $300,000 each Aerial Fire Apparatus and Rescue Equipment 1 per 71,301 persons 1500,000each (Source: Fire, Rescue and Inspection Services Department, City of Miami, 1986) RESIDENTIAL PARK STANDARDSs Mini Park: Residential Tot lot/Play Area, Urban Open Space Standards 0.1 acre per 1000 people Average Sizes 1/4 to 1 acre Copulation Served= 500 to 2,500 Service Areas 1/4 mile or less Community Park: Neighborhood Park: Standards 1.0 acre per 1000 people Average $ixes 20 acres Standards 0.5 acre per 1000 people Site Ranges 5 to 50 acres Average Sites 4 acres Population Strytos 8,000 to 25,000 Site Ranges 3 to 20 acres Service Area: 1/2 to 2 silts Population Servtos 11500 to 40000 Service Areas 1/2 tilt 3- 0 Acreage Requirement Renovation Costs Mini Park 0,1 acre per 1000 persons $4.00 per square foot 4eighborhood Park 1.5 acres per 1000 oersons $2.00 per square foot Community Park 1,0 acre per 1000 persons $1.00 per square foot ----------------------.._..----------------------- Total Residential Heed 1.6 ---------------- acres per 1000 persons $1.50 av , g er square foot per square Source: Department of Parks, Recreation and Public facilities, City of Mimi, 1987. STREET AND STORM SEVERS STANDARDS: - Average life expectancy of nevly constructed typical citu ctr.ok with ctnr. SON-S .is 64 ears. Approximately lie miles of city streets exist in each planning district (except Uirginia Key). Cost of streets and storm severs is $150.00 per linear foot for all planning districts except Dovntovn for vhich the cost of street/storm sever construction is estimated at MOM per linear foot. Average non -assessable cost for constructing a typical city street including storm severs is 83 percent of the total cost. Storm sever costs for construction of a typical street in the city are approximately one-third of the total cost. ' Per square foot costs of streets/storm severs do not differ vith respect to residential or non-residential deuetopent. (Source: Public Yorks Department, City of Miami, 1986) SOLID PASTE STAHDARDSs --------------------- Residential Yaste Generations 3 tons generated per nousenold per year P i ck-ttp Days; residential pick-ups assumed at 208 times per year commercial pick-ups assumed at 260 times per year Hon -Residential Waste Generation: Office; 1 lb. per 100 sq. ft. per day Retail; 6 ib, per 100 sq. ft. per day Wholesales 6 lb, per 100 sq. ft, Per day Manufacturings 2 lb. Per 100 sq. ft. per bay Assumes a cityvioe average of 3 lb, per 100 sq-ft.. per 04Y (sources Solid Paste Departaent, City of Miami, 19870 Carrying Capacities: Garbage truck: 12 tons per load; 2 loads per day Trasn Truck: 7 tons per load; 3 loads per day Self -Contained Roll On/Roll Offs (non-residential pickups only) 1 10/10 per 2 trash or garbage trucks Tractor vith Hoist: (non-residential pickups only) 1 tractor per 2 trash or garbage trucks Cranes I crane per 2 trash trucks Equipment Costs: Garbage truck; 5100,000 Trasn Truck; 160,008 Cranes $130,000 Tractor; 1120,000 Self -Contained Roll On/Rplt Off: $10,000 14 GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRAtI0N Solid Mist! Cohoonehts Heavy Equipment Standards: Costs of Required Additional Arta: One 420 square foot parking space for every additional Parking Areas - 28,967 square feet piece of heavy equipment; 162.50 per square foot One additional heavy equipment mechanic for every 30 -------- r_______►___� pieces of heavy equipment; f1,810,113 750 square feet of working bay space for every new heavy equipment mechanic added; York Bay Area - 51,410 square feet One employee parking space (160 square feet in size) for 11"D per square foot every two new heavy equipment mechanics. _-____---_______________ 17,196,000. Police Components light Equipment Standards: Costs of Required Additional Area: 2.5 sworn officers per vehicle (at a cost of $12,000); Parking Areas - 160 square feet One light vehicle equipment mechanic per 47 new cars; 162.50 per square foot ,35 square feet of working bay space for every new light __________ __ ----------- vehicle equipment mechanic added; -11,000 One employee parking space (160 square feet in size) for every two new light vehicle equipment mechanics; York Bay Area - 285 square feet One 160 square foot parking space for every additional $140 per square foot vehicle. � f39,900 _ (Sources General Services Administration, City of Miami, 1987.) Q 10 SECTION 3 - CALCULATION OF COSTS FOR NEV FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT 4b CALCULATION OF POLICE i"PACT FEE COEFFICIENTS (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) 1907 Nptessary impact Fee 4etessary Impact Fee Total impact Coact Existing Sworn Sworn Civilian Civilian Fee Police Fee Residential Personnel' Police Personnel' Polite Cost'm Areas Population (at 3/1000) Cosh' (b x 1/2) Costa' (b f d) -------------------------------------__-__-----------.�._------ EDISON 83,488 250 f3,S98,750 --------•- 125 7118 47_�r-•-___--;._ f1,847,112 f5,445,922 0007OYH 43,859 132 11892,266 66 9719265 2,863,532 COCONUT GROVE 36,129 108 11557,217 54 799,332 213369629 LITTLE HAVANA 112,508 338 418499657 169 21489,241 71338,897 FLAGAMI 439695 131 19883,473 66 966,752 2185OV225 ALLAPATTAH 61,288 184 2,6410819 92 It355,997 39997,816 VIRGIHIA KEY 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---------------- .ITYYIDE -------- 381,006 ------- ------------ 11143 -------------------------------- 116,423,264 572 ----------------;-•- 18,429,753 $24 853' 621 (q) (h) M (j) (k) (1) Presumed Presumed Total Total Residential Hon -Residential Impact Residential Hon4es idential Actual Actual Police Police Fee Police Police Residential Hon -Residential Impact Feexxx lmpact Feexxxx Areas Cost'x' Costxx' Square Footage Square Footage (9/ 0 Wit) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EUISON f735,200 f4,110,723 34,591,680 9,504,207 30.019 f0.283 OOYNTOYN 326,577 2,476,955 34,263,840 331003,319 0.014 0.283 tOCONUT GROVE 318,145 2t038,484 21,288,480 4,842,722 0.017 0.283 LITTLE HAVANA 990,751 613489146 48,075,600 12,527,755 0.019 0.283 FLAGAMI 384,780 29465,444 20,459,520 3,527,277 1.019 0.283 ALLAPATTAH 531,715 31458,111 25,020,240 12,640,271 0.Gt9 0.283 VIRGIHIA KEY 0 0 0 0 0.100 0.283 --------------------- CITYYFDE -•-------------- f3,35S,158 --------•---•--------•----------•---•---------------------------- f21,497,863 183,105,360. 16,045,551 f0.018 f0.283 A At 3 sworn personnel per 1,000 persons and l civilian personnel per 2 sworn personnel. rx Cost per sworn personnel: Radios 0 per 3 Sworn at $3,000 each) Mobile Digital Terminal System (1 per 3 Sworn at $% 480 each) Parking (2 sDaces per 3 Sworn at $10,000 each) Building Expansion (65 square feet per sworn at $75 per square foot) Cost per civilian personnel: Parking (t space per 2 civilian personnel at 110,000 each) Building Expansion (130 square feet per civilian at 175 per square foot) xmN Existing non-residential cost is approximately 06.5% of total Police cost and residential cost is approxisa ly 13.5% of total Police cost, wx"City totals from columns g and i, and h and k, were used to determine the coefficients for all the lawt Fee Areas. Adaustments were We to account for future residential deaogropnic difference; between Downtown, Coconut Grove and other areas as follows: Presumed Residential Area of Total Residential Persons Per Adjusted Res. P91i4e, Police impact the City Square Footage Hov;enold Square Footage Costs Fee ..eR'e4eReR!lRTRwRwRRelw.e ew w•e'weRRtRRww RA wRRRewlR♦ewf RRRRee seRlR4rwers lwelrwRwwwww.eeRsweeewRw+wR Downtown 34, 263, 810 1.8 316014 $1P 43861577 0,014 Comt Grovt 21, 286, 680 31 ,14;j Rest of City 12@0153,Qd! ,D 13806039116 2,650�436 0.11R w�R1!lRReRA1RTwRtf*RRtteRRlRR+RIR�Ivl1tR7.MCRRRRPliR1Re1R�aTRfT�RlfRwIRRIwIIRRRR1RRf.aq.!#tRR.R#r!�ll�AiRRntt RRA! ... ,.. Citl+ri�e 189,705,�60 RR,. Ig3,1Q5,9b0 ;3w�S,158 N^ WU CALCULATION OF POLICE COSTS (1988-2005) (a) (n) (o) (p) (q) 1988-2005 Nwber Residential Residential lapact Husber of of New New Police Police Fee Nov New Residential lapact Fee Casts Areas Residents Units Sq. Ft. (per sq. ft.) (o x p) ------- EDISON ------------------------------------- ----------------------- 1,609 644 172,320 f0.019 f14,767 OOYNTOYH 30,010 16,672 20,006,667 0.014 299,863 COCONUT GROVE 5,165 2,583 3,099,000 0.017 53,524 LITTLE HAUAHA 2.858 19143 1,3719840 0.019 26,232 FLAGAMI 11260 504 604,800 0.019 11,565 ALLAPATTAH 11425 570 684,000 0.019 139079 VIRGIHIA KEY 0 • 0 0 0.000 0 •- ----- CITYYIDE -------------- -j- ---- 42,327 22,116 26,538,627 -------- ---- $0.018 1409,030 (r) (s) (t) (u) Ron -Residential Mon -Residential l�pact 1989-2005 Hew Police Police Fee Nuwber of Mon -Residential lapact Fee `'Costs Areas Esployees Sq. Ft. (per sq. ft.) (s x t) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDISOH 4,321 i364,631 DOYHTOYN 53,668 10,493,783 0.283 2,966,562 COCONUT GROVE 61513 1,057,36S 0.223 2999054 LITTLE HAVANA 14,033 3,231,166 0.283 913,440 FLAGAMI 2,417 507,128 0,283 143,361 ALLAPATTAH 12,589 2,480,863 0.283 701,331 VIRGINIA KEY 783 3109000 0.283 87,635 CITYYIDE 94,324 t9,370,644 0.283 s5,476,014 0 4 0 Projected Rev RESidentia) Square Footage: PLANNING DISTRICT 1988-90 1190-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL .-----------r-----r-------2---r------------r--1r--------------r---------r--r-..----r ED 1SOH 26, 880 20 t,120 --r----- 226, 080 318, 240 772, 320 OOVNTOVN 3,732,667 4,764,OOD 51533,333 51926,667 _,0,006,60 COCONUT GROVE 151,200 1,132,800 754,200 19060,800 31499,000 LITTLE HAVANA 67,200 503,520 376,800. 4249320 11371,840 FLAGAMI 40,320 201,600 150,720 212,160 604,800 ALLAPATTAH 13,440 201,600 150,720 318,240 684,000 VIRGINIA KEY 0 0 O 0 0 TOTAL 41031,707 7,044,641 71241,853 81260,427 26,538,627 Projected Rev Hon -Residential Square Footage: PLANNING DISTRICT 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ------ --------•---------------- EDISON -----------------•---•---•-------------------•--- 202,123 427,702 36/,788 295,223 1,289,836 DOWOWN 3,292,531 21766,377 2 - 1104,734 2,330,141 10,413,733 COCONUT GROVE 247,121 267,267 290,305 263,175 1,057,868 LITTLE HAVANA 499,717 1,133,248 910,844 687,357 3,23t,166 FLAGAMI 82,841 171,826 1289782 123,679 507,128 ALLAPATTAH 393,731 849,354 717,552 520,168 2,430,363 VIRGINIA KEY 60,000 250,000 0 0 310,000 TOTAL 4,778,122 51865,774 41507,005� 4,219,743 19,370,644 Projected Rev Residential Police Costs; PLANNING DISTRICT 1980-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-15 TOTAL ---------------------------------•--------------------------------------------------- EDISON 1514 $3,845 14,323 $6,085 --------- 114,767 DOWNTOWN 54,080 69,022 309813 85,868 281,863 COCONUT GROVE 21611 19,565 13,026 18,322 53,524 LITTLE HAVANA 11285 9,628 7,205 8,114 26,232 FLAGAMI 771 3,855 2,862 4,057 11,565 ALLAPATTAN 257 30855 2,882 6,065 13,079 VIRGINIA KEY 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL $59,518 $109,770 1111,211 $128,531 1409,030 Projected Nev Non -Residential Police Costs; PLAHNINO DISTRICT 1908-90 1990.95 1995-2000 2004.05 TOTAL wwwwwwwwwewwwwwwww-:wrww-.-*-w........0,wwww..wewww.ww-ww.ww--_ EDISON $57,139 11209910 ............ rwww-w♦w.www.ww. 1103,1k4 183,458 $364,631 0001011" 930,781 WOW W 595,002 650,724 2,966,562 COCONUT GROVE 69,860 751555 79,141 74,398 ?99, 054 LITTLE HAVANA 141,260 320,46 2570493 114,313 913,440 FLRGAh1 23,418 48,574 36,406 34,963 143,361 ALLAPATTAN 111,323 240,109 202,@44 147,050 °01,331 . VIRGINIA KEY 16,961 70,674 0 0 87,635 TOTAL 11,3504758 11,658435 114V6015 11,192,916 0,476,014 4r s FIRE/RESCUE - &ESIDEHTIAL ------------------------------------------------------------ 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison Additional Residents 56 419 471 663 1,601 Costs: EIergency Medical Rescue Unit Expansion 1 13001000 $336 129514 12,826 13,978 19,654 per 50,000 persons Doiiintown Additional Residents 51599 11146 3,375 3,890 309010 Costs: Haz. Mat./Fos Apparatus @ 1300,000/145,030 persons s11,581 $14,781 1179324 i18,389 162,075 Esergency Medical Rescue Unit 1 1203,101/50,001 persons $22,731 $29,112 $341102 136,193 11219838 Aerial Fire Apparatus a $500,400171,301 persons M,263 $50,111 $58,729 362,341 1210,444 173,575 $93,904 $110,053 $1169823 1394,357 Coconut Grove Additional Residents 252 19888 1,257 1,768 5,165 Cosh:_ Esergency Medical Rescue Unit @ i300,000/50,000 111023 $7,665 $5,103 $7,172 120,969 persons Little Havana _ Additional Residents 140 1,049 785 334 21858 Costs: Esergency Medical Rescue Unit @ i300,000/50,000 1568 $4,253 $3,187 13,589 tt1,602 persons Total Additional Residents 392 ?,937 2,042 2,652 81023 Total Costs 175,502 $108,341 $121,171 1131,568 $436,582 TOTAL FIREIRESCUE RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 1336 12,514 $2,826 139978 199654 Dovntoon 73,575 93,904 110,055. 116,823 394,357 Coconut Grove 1,023 7,665 5,103 71178 20,969 Little Havana 568 4,258 3,187 31589 11,602 Flagm 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 0 0 0 0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 175,502 $118,341 $121,171 1131,568 $436,582, FIRE/RESCUE - RESIDENTIAL COEFFICIENTS Edison 0.013 Oomton 0.020 Coconut Grove 0,001 Little Havana 0.018 Fiagae: 0.000 Aliapattah 0.000 Virginia Key O.Q00 F1RE/RESCUE - 4ON-RESIDENTIAL 1988-90 1190-55 1995-2000 2000-45 TOTAL Edison---------------------------------------.._..------------------- _ Additional Employees 746 1,444 1,208 123 41321 Costsi Emergency Medical Rescue Unit Expansion is $300,000 $4,476 18,664 17,248 15,538 125026 per 50,000 persons Do�nto�n Additional Employees. 13,138 16,282 13,852 10,316 53,668 Costs: Hazy Mat./Foam Apparatus 1 1311,100/145,030 persons 1279176 133,679 128,653 1219504 1111,012 Emergency Medical gnat Unit E 1213,000/50,001 persons t539340 166,114 156,239 1429217 $217,894 Aerial Fire Apparatus 1 15489101/71,301 persons -------------------------------------------------------------- 192,130 1114,177 $97,137 172,102 1376.346 1172,646 1213,960 $182,029 1136,613 $705,248 Coconut Grove Additional Employees 19066 20322 1,840 1,285 6,513 Costs: Emergency Medical Rescue Unit 0 1300,000/50,000 .14,327 $9,427 17,470 1;5,217 $26,441 persons - Little Havana Additional Employees 2,258 4,974 3,963 2,838 14,033 Costs:. -Emergency Medical Rescue Unit d 1300,000/50,000 19,167 120,114 116,039 111,522 156,972 persons Total Additional Employees 17,208 . 5,022 20,863 15,442 79,333 Total Costs 1190,616 $252,245 1212,836 $158,890 1814,587 TOTAL FIRE/RESCUE NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2010-05 TOTAL Edison $4,476 19,664 17,248 15,538 125,926 Dovntom 172,646 213,960 182,029 136,613 715,243 Coconut Grove 4,327 9,427 7,470 5,217 26,441' Little Havana 91167 20,194 16,089 . 11,522 56,972 Flagami 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 0 0 0 0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total $190,616 1252,245 $212,336 $158,390 $814,587 FIRE/RESCUE - NON-RESIDENTIAL COEFFICIENTS Edison 0.420 Damto�n 0.067 Coconut Grove 0,025 little N4van4 0.018 Flagasi 0.000 Allapattah 01010 Virgini4 Key 0,000 RESIDENTIAL PARK ENHANCEMENT COSTS 1188.10 1190-15 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison----------------------------- __...�....----_-..------. r._--- Mini Park (@ 0.1 acre/1000 residents, 114.00/sf) $975 17,300 $8,206 1111552 528,033 Heighborhooa Park (@ �.5 4crt/1000 residents, @ 12.00/sf) 2,439 18,251 20,516 28,880 70,086 Cossunity Park (1 1.0 acre/1000 residents, 1 11.00/50 2,439 18,251 20,516 281880 70,086 District Total 15,853 143,802 149,238 169,312 1168,205 Oovntovn Mini Park (1 0.1 acre/1001 residents, 1 14.10/sf) Neighborhood Park (@ 0.5 acre/1010 residents, @ 12.00/sf) Coasunity Park (1 1.0 acre/1000 residents, 1 11.00/sf) District Total Coconut Grave - Mini Park (@ 0.1 acre/1000 residents, 1 14.10/sf) Neighborhood Park (@ 0.5 acre/1000 residents, @ 12.00/sf) Coasunity Park (1 1.0 acre/1000 residents, 1 11.00/sf) District Total Little Havana Mini Park (@ 0.1 acre/1000 residents, 1 14.00/sf) Heighbo"ood Park (@ 0.5 acre/1000 residents, @ 12.00/sf) Colmunity Park (1 1.0 acre/1010 residents, 1 11.00/sf) District Total Flagami Mini Park (@ 0.1 acre/1000 residents, @ 14.00/sf) Neighborhood Park (@ 0.5 acre/1000 residents, @ 12.00/sf) Comnity Park (1 1.6 acre/1000 residents, I 11.00/sf) - District Total Allapattah Mini Park (1 0.1 acre/1000 residents, 1 14.00/sf) Neighborhood Park (0 04 eve/1010 residents, @ i2,00/0) Cossunity Park (1 1.0 acre/1001 residents, 1 $1.00/sf) District Total Vir9ini4 Keyx Mini Park U 0,1 xre/1000 residents, 1 14.10/sf) Neignbprnoo4 Park (@ Q,5 4cre/1000 residents, 0 t2,00/sf) Corsuna!ty Park t1 1.4 acrW001 residents, 1 11.004f) District Total Total Residential Park Costs r No relident ai deytiopetat is anticiplttO in Virginia Key, $17,556 1124,511 $145,926 1154,899 15229892 243,892 311,279 364,815 387,248 11307,234 243,892 311,280 364,815 3871248 1,307,235 -------------------------------------------------------------- $585,340 1747,069 $875,556 1929,395 $3,137,361 14,390 $329896 1219901 1301805 $89,992 10,977 82,241 54,754 77,014 224,936 10,977 82,241 54,754 77,014 224,986 -------------------------------------------------------------- 126,344 1197,378 1131,409 1184,833 $539,964 12,439 118,277 $13,677 $15,402 $49,715 6,098 459694 34,194 39,507 124,493 6,098 45,694 34,194 38,507 124,493 114,635 $109,665 162,065 1929416 1298,781 11,463 17,318 $5,471 $7,701 $21,953 3,659 18,295 13,677 19,253 549884 39659 18,295 13,677 19,253 54,884 . ----------------------------------------------------------- $8,781 143,908 132,825 146,207 1131,721' $487 $7,318 $5,471 111,552 $24,828 11219 19,295 , 13,677 29,880 62,071 11219 18,295 13,677 20,880 620071 ............ ...w...................w.......w-.w-w..,......... .ww.. 129925 143,908 132,825 169,312 $148, 971 1q sq s0 f0 f0 0 Q Q u o 0 0 0 0 0 •wwwewwweswwwwwwwwwww+wwwawwwwww+ewewwwwwwwwwwwwwww.wwwwwwwwww 10 f0 f0 1q f0 ;643,978 11,135,°30 fi,203,91� $1,391,475 $4,425,001 17 126 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARK COSTS k }j Edison Downtovn i Coconut.Grove Little Havana Ftaga�� Allapattah Virginia Key is ( Total F i } PARKS - RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS Edison nerntern 1988-90 1990-45 1995-2000 2010-05 TOTAL --------------------- ----r---r-------- 15,353 t43,802 $49,238 1699312 1163.z05 5859340 7471069 $75,556 929,395 39IV, 360 26,344 197,378 1310409 184,833 539,164 14,635 l09,665 82,065 129416 298,781 8,781 43,909 32,825 46,207 131,721 21925 43,908 321825 699312 148,970 0 0 0 0 0 1643,878 51,1859730 119203,918 111391,475 14,4259001 ' 0.218 O.157 [E CALCULATION OF PARKS IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS PARKS - 001147011H URBAN PARK DEVELOPMENT NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS Percent Method Total Hon -Res. Hon-P.es, of Cost Isprovesent Use and/or Development Project Hake Estimate --- Cost -------------- -----------_»--___._-»� Benefit Share ----------- ----------------- 849front Park ---------------------- ----------------------------- Unfunded south portion s7,411,010 25x s1,850,000 llaterfront Park 55 acres 1 III per square foot 23,958,801 25% 599891501 Brickell Park 4.7 acres @ $10 per square Foot 2,047,000 75% 19545,250 Brickell Promenade Consultant estimate based on design 31000,000 75% 2,2500000 Pace Park 1700 1.F. of bayraik @ $4 per I.F. na,iia ax 1i5,000 Southsi`de Park Capital Ikprovekent Program cost estimate 700,000 25% 175,000 LukkusPark - Planning Dept. estimate based on design 190009000 25% 250,000 Biscayne Blvd. 180,000 s.f. 1 110 plus 6 blks 1 $1.5 million 61000,000 25Z 1,500,000 Flagler Street Consultant estimate: 5 blks to tL 5 million 7,5000000 25x 11875,000 Rivervanks 504 l.f. 1 S 4 per I.f. 200,000 25% $0,000 SE 12th Street Park 12,500 S.F. @ i10 per S.F. 125,040 75% 931750 Brickell Avenue 41400 1.F. x 35 Ft. vidth 1 $6.67 per s.f. 11000,000 . 75% 750,000 I+E 4th Street 550 I.F. x 50 ft. vidth @ 110 per S.F. 275,000 25% 6817,00 HE 14th Street 1300 l.f. x 70`ft. vidth 1 110 per S.F. 910,000 75% 682,500 Riverbanks Park 48,000 S.F. @ $10 per S.F. _ 480,000 75% 360,000 $55,295,040 s17,604,750 EXIS71HG NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 33,101,407 HEY NOR -RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 10,4939783 HEY NOR -RESIDENTIAL SHARE OF TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL 24.1% HEY HON-RESIDENTIAL SHARE OF PARK COST f4,237,7�0 COST PER SOUARE FOOT $0.404 (Source: Planning Department, City of Miami, 1188) PARKS - NON-RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS Edison • s0,000 Dovntogn 0,414 Coconut Grove 0.000 Little Havana 01000 Flagami O,OQO Al lapamb 0,000 Virginia Key s0,000 10426 mo CALCULATION OF STREETS/SEVERS IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS. STREMSTORM SEVERS -PORTION OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS 10 BE FUNDED BY IMPACT FEESM: (PERCENTAGE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT TO TOTAL DEVELOPMENT) TOTAL TOTAL HEY OEVELOPMENt DEVELOPMENT IN 2045 SHARE Edison 2,062,156 46,278,304 4.0446 Downtown 30,500,450 96,906,590 0.3147 Coconut Grove 41156,868 30,487,350 0.1363 Little Havana 41603,006 65,481,579 0.0703 Flagaai 1,111,928 25,1619025 0.0442 Allapatt4h 31164,863 41,029,223 0.0771 ..Virginia Key 310,000 0 0.0000 Total 45,909,271 i059352,076 PROJECTED INCREASE IN TOTAL TOTAL HEY SQUARE FOOTAGE 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 DEUELOPMENT Edison ---------------------------------------------------------------- 229,003 628,822 590,863 613,463 2,062,156 Dovntovn 7,025,198 7,530,377 7,688,067 8,256,808 30,500,450 Coconut Grove 398,321 114009067 1,034,505 __1,323,175 41156,868 Little ,Havana 566,117 1,636,768 1,287,644 1,111,677 416039006 Flagasi 123,161 373,426 2799512 335,839 1,111,928 Allapattah 407,229 1,050,954 868,272 838,408 3,1649863 Uirginia Key 60,000 250,000 0 0 3109000 Total 99809,829 12,870,414 11,748,858 12,480,170 45,109,271 3TREET/SEVER COSTS - TOTAL COSTS 1960-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2500-05 TOTAL Edison 1101,381 1270,383 $261,581 1271,584 $912,930 Downtown 21970,494 311840101 3,2500773 3,491,261 12,8961637 Coconut Grove 267,674 941,854 695,194 889,720 2,793,444 Little Havana 177,153 512,045 412,825 347,776 1,440,001 Flagams 1001285 304,067 227,508 273,461 905,402 Allapatt4h 203,347 524,787 433,566 418,654 11580135 Virginia KeyMM 0 0 0 0 0 Total 13,820,534 $5,744,237 15,271,532 0,692,456 120,528,7,0 t Costs for street/stors steer devsiopeenti 17/60 ytars x 110 silts x 5.280 ft./silt x 150 f/lintir ft. x 0.03 portion of Costs which are now noA•tSsessiDl+s x shire of new 4tvtlopsen4 in t,isn district. Costs ptr linear foot in tstisited it $300 in the Oorr►tQ�n pisttict� $$No street/store steer construction is pro4l6 to for Virginia Kty, 1 STREETS - COSTS (2/3 X total SEreet/Store Sewer Costs) 1988�40 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 'OTAL Edison 167,587 S1851.588 ---------------------- 1174, 387 1101, 055 f608, 617 Downtown 1,986,329 2,122,733 2,167,185 2,3270507 3,597,754 Coconut Grove 178,449 627,235 4639462 593,146 1,862,292 Little Havana 118,235 3419363 268,549 231,850 9$99997 Flagili 66,856 202,711 151,725 182,307 613,599 Allapittah 1359564 349,857 289,043 279,102 1,053,566 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 12,547,020 $3,329,487 $3,514,351 t3,194,967 $13,685,325 STREETS - RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------------- $7,933 159,357 166,724 193,924 $227,938 Downtown 1,052,199 1,342,920 1,573,882 11670,664 5,639,665 coconut Grove 67,733 507,418 337,S84 475,242 1,3881362 little Havana 14,015 105,013 78,584 98,495 286,107 Flagm 21,887 109,436 81,316 1159161 328,308 Allapattah 4,474 67,111 50,173 105,940 227,698 Virginia Key 0 0 0- 0 0 Total STREETS - HOH-RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1191689246 12,191,335 129189,063 12,549,434 18,098,078 1989-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison $59,653 $126,230 $107,662 $87,130 $380,675 Downtown 928,129 779,812 593,302 656,842 2,958,085 Coconut Grove 110,710 119,736 125,577 117-1903 4739926 Little Havana 1049219 236,344 189,964 141,354 673,836 Flagasi 44,968 93,274 69,908 67,137 275,287 AIIapattah 131,089 282,745 233,869 173,161 825,864 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 11,378,768 $19638,146 $1,325,282 $1,245,327 15,587,723 STREETS • IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS Edison 11.295 lowntown 0.282 Coconut Grove 0,448 little H#wns 01209 F149jo l 0,543 1l lapotih 01333 Virginia Key t0,000 Z1 1426 ' . i 0 STORM SEVERS - COSTS (1/3 x total Street/Stort Sever Costs) 1198-90 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ---------------------------------------------------------------- $33,793 192,194 197,113 190,527 1304,307 Doontown 190,164 11061,366 1,083,592 11163,153 14,218,815 Coconut Grove 89,224 3139617 231,731 296,573 11319145 Little Havana 59,117 1709681 1349274 115,925 1479,997 Flagam 33,429 101,355 75,862 11,153 $311,798 AlIapattah 67,782 174,929 144,521 1391551 1526,782 Virginia Key 0 1 0 0 10 Total i1,213,508 $1,914,741 11,757,173 S1,831,482 16,842,104 STORM SEVERS - RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2600 2000-05 TOTAL Edison $3,966 f29,678 $33,362 146,161 1113,967 Dovntovn 526,099 671,460 7869940 $35,332 2,819,831 Coconut Grove 33,868 253,748 168,942 237,621 694,179 Little Havana 7,007 52,506 39,292 44,247 1439052 Flagau 10,943 54,718 40,908 57,584 164,153 Allapattah 2,237 33,555 25,086 521970 1139848 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 total $584,120 119095,665 $1,094,530 $1,274,715 14,049,030 STORM SEVERS - HOH-RESIDENTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1998-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 129,826 1639115 153,830 143,565 1190,336 Doentoen 464,064 399,905 296,651 328,420 1,419,040 Coconut Grove 55,355 59,868 62,788 581,951 236,962 Little Havana 52,109 118,174 94,991 71,677 336,941 Flagam 22,484 46,636 34,953 33,568 137,641 Allapattah 650544 141,372 119,434 86,580 412,930 Virginia Key 0 1 0 0 0 Total $609,382 $819,070 1662,637 1622,761 12,7931851 STORM SEVERS - IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS Edison 0,149 Oovntovn 0,141 Coconut Grove O.ZZ4 Little Havana 0.104 Flagari 01VI Al lapatt4h 01166 Virginia Key 0.000 0 �ESIDEHTIAL SOLID YAM COSTS PROJECTED TOTAL NEV UNITS 1988-90 1990-95 1915-2000 2000-95 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------------- 22 168 188 265 644 Downtown 39111 3,970 41653 41139 16,672 Coconut Grove 126 944 629 884 24583 Little Havana 56 420 314 354 11143 flagari 34 168 126 177 504 A11apatt4h 11 168 126 265 570 Virginia Key 1 - 1 1 0 0 Total 31364 5,837 6,035 6,88 4 22,116 PROJECTED TOTAL HEY RESIDENTIAL SOLID PASTE TONNAGE (TONS PER YEAR) ^ �� ` -- " " Q c..0 ovuayti uvvasuN,Y rut' W�fl(.Onl, 2. 40 tuns per household for Coconut Grove and 3 tons per household for rest of City 1988-90 1990-95 1915-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 67.200 _502.800 565.200 795.600 1,930.200 Oowntovn 6,718.800 8,575.210 10,050.000 •10,668.000 36,012.000 Coconut Grove 302.400 2,265.600 1,508.400 2,121.600 6,112-000 Little Havana 168.000 1,258.800 942.000 1,060.800 3,429.600 Flagasl 100.800 504.000 376.800 530.400 1,512.000 Allapattah 33.600 504.000 376.800 795.600 1,710.000 Virginia Key 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total 7,390.801 139610.410 13,819.200 15,972.000 50,792.400 - PROJECTED TOTAL HEY RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE (TONS PER YEAR) 1 50% of residential solid 'waste 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------- 33.600 251.400 282.600 397,300 •f65.400 Downtown 3,359.400 41287.600 5,025.000 5,334.000 18,006.000 Coconut Grove 151.200 11132.800 754.200 11060,800 3,019.000 Little Havana 84.000 629.400 471.000 530.400 1,714.800 Flagam 50.400 252.000 188.400 265.200 756.000 Allapattah 16.800 252.000 188.400 397.800 355.000 Virginia Key 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total 3,695.400 61805.200 6,909.600 7,986.000 25,396.200 PROJECTED TOTAL NEW RESIDENTIAL TRASH (TONS PER YEAR) 1 50% of residential Solid waste 1988.90 1990-95 1995.2000 2000-45 TOTAL .r.w.r........rw....w.wwwrwrwwrr....r .......................... - Edison 33.600 251.400 282,600 397.800 965.400 Downtown 3, 59,409 4,287,600 51025,000 5,334,000 10,006.000 Coconut Grove 151.200 1,132,800 754.200 1,060,800 31119,000 Little Havana 84,001 629,400 471,001 530.400 1,714,800 F149111 50,400 252.000 188,400 265,200 116,000 Allapatt4h 16.800 252,000 108,400 397,800 855,100 Virginia Key Q,1Q0 01000 0.000 0.000 01140 t { e Q k: ti t PROJECTED TOTAL HEY RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE (TONS PER PICKUP DAY) truck pick-ubs asiured a 208 tires per year 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1988-90 1990-45 1995-2000 2000-95 TOTAL Edison 0.162 1.209 1.359 1.913 4.641 Downtovn 16.151 20.613 24.159 25.644 36.567 Coconut Grove 0.727 5.446 3.626 5.1a0 14.899 Little Havana 0,404 3.026 2.264 2.550 8.244 ' Flagaii 0,242 1.212 0.906 1.275 3.635 Allapattah 0.481 1.212 0.906 1.913 4.111 Virginia Key 0.010 0.110 0.000 0.104 0.001 i Total 17.766 32.717 33.219 38.394 122.017 i PROJECTED TOTAL HEY RESIDENTIAL TRASH (TONS PER PICKUP DAY) truc-k pick-ups assumed @ 208 times per year 1188-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------------------------- - Edison 0.162 1.209 1.359 1.913 4.641 Dovntovn 16.151 20.613 24.159 25.644 36.567 Coconut Grove 0.727 5.446 3.626 5.100 14.999 Little Havana 0.404 3.126 2.264 2.550 3.214 1 Fiagami 0.242 1.212 0.906 1.275 3.635 Allapattah 0.081 1.212 _._ 0.906 1.913 4.111 Virginia Key 0.000 0.001 0.000 C.000 0.000 j i Total 17.766 32.717 33.219 38.394 122.097 2+t'�';, x PROJECTED ADDITIONAL SOLID'YAStE EQUIPMENT REQUIRED iESIDENUAL Residential Paste Generation: a load is assuied to consist of 50% garbage and 50% trash residential pick-up days assured at 208 (Source: Miari Deoartkent of Solid Paste) Edison: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Garbagetrucks: ----------------------------------------------------------- Rer Residential Oarbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.162 1.209 1.359 1.913 4.641 Nuiber of Trucks Req'd @ 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day 0.007 0.050 0.057 0.080 0.193 Cost! 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck $673 15,036 $5,661 17,969 $199339 Trash Trucks: Rev Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.162 1.209 1.359 1.913 4.641 Nuiber of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day 0.008 0.058 0.065 0.091 0.221 VV-V• •VV,YVV Nr Trasl•, Truck 1462 13,453 13,882 159464 113,261 - Cranes:- Naber of Cranes Reo'd ! 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0.404 0.029 0.032 0.046 0.111 Cost: U 30,000 Per Crane 1500 13,741 14,205 $5,920 114,366 TOTAL 11,635 112,230 113,748 119,353 146,166 Domtovn: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Garbage Trucks: ---------------------------------------------------------- Rer Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 16.151 20.613 24.159 25.64.4 86.567 Nusber,of Trucks Req'd 8 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day 0.673 0.859 .1.007 1.069 3.607 Cost: 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck . 167,296 185,889 $100,661 $106,851 $360,697 Trash Trucks: Aar Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 16.151 20.613 24.159 25.644 86.567 Nuiber of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day 0.761 0.982 1.150 1.221 4.122 Cost: 160,000 Per Trash Truck 1469146 $58,896 169,025 $73,269 $247,335 Cranes: Nuiber of Cranes Req'd ! 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0.385 0.491 0.575 00611 2.061 Cost: $130,000 Per Crane 149,991 163,804 $74,777 179,375 .$267,946 TOTAL $163,432 1208,539 $244,463 $259,495 $075,979 Coconut Grove: _ 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-95 TOTAL Garbage husks;,_........--........................................... ...- Nee Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0,727 5,446 31626 51100 14,899 Hysber of TrucKs Req'd 8 12 Tons Per load and 2 toads Per Day 0.030 0,227 01151 0.213 0,621 Cost; $100,000 Per Garbage Truck 13,029 122,692 115,106 s211250 162,079 Trash Trucks; Nty REs.idensial.Trish (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.727 5.446 3,626 5.100 14#019 Huebsr of Trucks Req'd t3 7 Tons Per Load ano 3 Loads Per Day )1035 0.2a9 0.173 0.243 0.709 Cost; 16Q,0QQ Per Trish Truck 121077 $15,560 i10,360 114,571, $42,569 Cranes; Nuitber of Cranes 1ea14 11 Crane Per 2 Trisn Trucks 0.011 01130, 01086 0,131 01356 �,osts 1190,Q00 Per Crine 120250 $16,657 1111M $15,766 ° 116,116 TOTAL �.- 1713w6 $554110 1364611 151,607, 11514164 .t 1 Little Havana: 3arbace iracxs; Hew Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) Nuaber of Trucks Req'd @ 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day Cost: $140,000 Per Garbage Truck Trash Trucks: New Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Number of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day Cost: 160,000 Per Trash Truck Cranes: Nuaber of Cranes Req;'d ° 1 Crane Nt+` 2 Trash irucks Cost: 1130,000 Per Crane TOTAL - =lagaal: 5arbaoe (rucks: ize Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 4usber of Trucks Req'd @ 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day Cost: 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck Trash Trucks: New Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Mustier of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day Cost: 1609000 Per Trash Truck Cranes: dumber of Cranes Req'd t 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks, Cost: $130,000 Per Crane TOTAL Allapattah: Garbage lacks: New Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) Nuaber of Trucks Req'd 0 18 Tons Per load and 2 Loads Per Day Cost; 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck Irish Try4ks; Hew Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Nusbsr of Trycxs Req'd 0 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day Costs 160,000 Per Trash Truck cranes; 4vsber of Cranes Re0'0 ! I Cren4 per s Trasn Trucks Cost; s1301000 Per 4rane TOTAL 1988-90 1110.95 1195-2000 2000-85 TOTAL 0, 404 3.026 2,264 2.550 8.244 0.017 0.126 0.094 0.106 0.344 $1,683 112,608 11,435 1101625 134,351 0.404 3.026 2.264 2.550 8.244 0.019 0.144 0.108 0.121 0.393 $1,154 18,646 16,470 17,286 123,555 0.010 0.072 0.054 0.061 0.196 i1,250 191366 17,009 $7,893 s25,�18 $4,087 $30,620 122,914 125,804 $83,424 1988-90 ---------------------------------------------------------- 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL 0.242 1.212 0.906 1.275 3.635 0.010 0.050 .. 0.038 0.053 9.151 $1,010 15,048 13,774 $5,313 115,144 0.242 1.212 0.906 1.275 3.635 0.012 0.058 0.043 0.061 0.173 1692 13,462 12,588 13,643 110,385 0.006 0.029 0.022 0.030 0.087 1750 13,750 $2,804 13,946 111,250 12,452 $12,260 19,166 1121902 $36,779 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL 0481 1.212 0.906 11913, 4.111 0.003 0.050 0.038 0.080 0,111 1337 15,048 13,774 $7,969 i171127 26 01081 1.212 0,906 1.913 41111 0,004 0.058 0.043 0.091 01196 f131 13,462 1Z,568 15,16� i11,7IS 0.002 1250 0.029 SO 1817 11Y,2b0 13, I 0.07Z O,OM16 01090 '1irC�nia Ke4: GArbaae trucks: 44v kw oent:al 6arbaoe (ions Per Pitkub Dav) 4ueb►r *t trucks Re,T"d O 12 ions Per Load and 2 Loads Per Ow Cost: $100,000 Per Garbage truck 1998-90 1190-15 ills-2000 ZOOMS TOTAL -----......................._..____-----_-....._...._.__- 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 3.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 11000 SO t0 t0 t0 $0 trash Trucks! ► 4?v Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 4.001 Hurber of Trucks Req'd 8 7 tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day 0.000 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.010 Cost: $68,000 Per Trash Truck t1 t0 t0 s0 to Cranes: Wjsber.of Cranes Req'd 8 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1;ost: $130,000 Per Crane t0 t0 t0 30 ?Q TOTAL s0 s0 t0 SO s0 TOTAL SOLID VASTE RESIDEHTIAL COSTS 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL "` ------- Edison --------------------------------------------------- 11,634 112,230 $13,748 $19,352 146,164 Dovntovn 163,432 208,588 244,462 259,495- 875,977 Coconut Grove 7,355 55,109 36,691 51,601 150,762 Little Havana 4,086 30,619 22,913 25,803 339421 '' Flanui 2,451 12,259 9,165 12,901 36,776 Allapattah 817 12,259 % 165 19,352 41,593 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1179,,75 1331,064 1336,144 $333,510 $1,235,413 Y • } SOLID PASTE - RESIDENTIAL COEFFICIENTS Edison $0.061 Dovntovn 0.044 1' Coconut Grove 0.049 O ttit Havana 0.061 Flagm 0.061 Allapatth 0.061 10.000 Virginia Key 1042 x I 11 r] SOLID PASTE - 4ON-RESIDEHTIAL COSTS PROJECTED TOTAL HEY HOH-RESIDENTIAL SOLID PASTE (POUNDS PER DAY) a citywide average of 3 ID. per 100 sq. Ft. per day 1188.90 1990.95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 6,663.7 12,831.1 10,943.6 8,856.7 38,695.1 00Vntown 90,775.9 82,991.3 63,142.0 69,904.2 314,813.5 Coconut Grove 7,413.6 80018.0 8,449.2 7,895.3 31,736.0 Little Havana 14,991.5 33,997.4 27,325.3 20,620.7 16,935.0 Flags 2,485.2 5,154.8 3,863.5 3,710.4 15,213.3 �;;;�.;�,;, 11,813.7 25,480.E 21,526.6 15,605.0 74,425.9 Virginia Key 19800.0 7150060 0.0 0.0 1,310.0 Total 143,343.7 175,973.2 135,210.2 126,592.3 `31,119.3 PROJECTED HEY NON-RESIDEHTIAL GARBAGE (POUNDS PER DAY) 1 SOy of total Solid Paste 1188-90 1190-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 3,031.3 69415.5 5,471.3 4,428.3 19,347.3 Dovntovn 49,388.0 41,495.7 31,571.0 34,952.1 157,406.7 Coconut Grove 3,706.3 4:001.0 4,204.6 3,947.6 15,368.0 Little Havana 7,495.8 169998.7 13,662.7 10,310.4 48,467.5 Flagam 1,242.6 2,577.4 19931.7 19855.2 7,616.9 Allapattah 5,906.8 12,740.3 10,763.3 7,802.5 37,212.9 Virginia Key 100.0 3,750.0 0.0 0.0 4,650.0 Total 71,671.8 $7,986.6 67,605.1 63,296.1 290,559.7 PROJECTED HEY NON-RESIDENTIAL TRASH (POUNDS PER DAY) 1 50'% of Total Solid Paste t988-90 1990-a5 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL t;. Edison _....-........... 3103113 ---------- ---------------------------- 6,415.5 5,471.3 -............ 4,428.3 19,347.E Doentoan 40. 41,495.7 ::,573.0 34,952.1 157,406,1 Coconut Grove 3,706.3 4,009.0 4,244.6 3,947.6 15,368.0 Little Havens 7,495,8 16,998,7 13,66217 10,310.4 48,467.5 Ftagaal 1,242,E 2,577.4 1,931.7 1135513 7,616.1 allapatt:h 5,906,$ 32,740,3 10,763.3 1402.5 37,212.9 Virginia Key 900.0 30750.0 0.0 010 4,650.0 Total 71, 671, 3 97,986.6 67, 605,1 63, 296.1 290, 559, 7 jo 42 7 PROJECTED NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE (IONS PER PICKUP DAY) ittuck.olckuDs assured at 260 tires Der year) 1188.90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 1.5 3.2 2.7 2.2 3.7 Ooontovn 24.7 20.7 15.3 17.5 73.7 Coconut Orove 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0 7.9 Little Havana 3.7 8.5 6.8 14.2 24.2 F14gali 0.6 1.3 1.0 0.9 3.8 Allapattah 3.0 6.4 5.4 3.1 18.6 Virginia Key 0.5 1.1 1.0 1.0 2.3 Total 35.3 44.0 33.3 31.6 145.3 PROJECTED HEY NON-RESIDENTIAL TRASH (DONS PER PICKUP DAY) (truck pickups assumed at 260 times per yeir) 1188-90 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1910-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 1.5 3.2 2.7 2.2 9.7 Downtown 24.7 20.7 15.3 17.5 73.7 Coconut Grove 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0 7.9 Little Havana 3.7 3.5 6.8 5.2 24.2 Flagasi 0.6 1.3 1.0 0..9 3.8 Allapattah 3.0 6.4 5.4 3.9 18.6 Virginia Key 0 5 1 9 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 . Total 35.3 44.0 33.3 31.6 143.3 a PUACTED ADDITIONAL SOLID PASTE EAUIPBEHT REQUIRED = y0N-RESIDENTIAL !ion -Residential haste Oenerat►on: a load is assumed to Consist of 50% garbage and 9% trash non-residential pick-+:p days assumed it 260 (Source: Mu i Department of Solid Yaste) Edison: Garbage Trucks: New Non -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Div) Number of Trucks Req'd 1 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day Cost: 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck Trash Trucks: New Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Humber of Trucks Req'd g 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day Cost: 160,000 Per Trash Truck Roll WWI Offs: New Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Humber of RO/ROs Req'd 8 1 RO/RO Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks Cost: 110,000 Per Roll WWI Off 1989-90 1990-95 1915-2000 2000.05 TOTAL -------------------------------------------------------- 1.516 3.208 2,736 2.214 9.674 0.063 0.134 0.114 0.092 0.403 16,316 1139366 $11,400 19,226 1469307 1.516 3.209 2.736 2.214 9.674 0.072 0.153 0.130 0.105 0.461 . 14,331 19,165 $7,817 16,326 127,639 3.032 6.416 5.472 4.428 19.348 0.068 0.143 0.122 0.099 0.432 - S677 $1,432 11,221 1988 14,319 Tractors with Hoists: Hew Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 3.032 6.416 5.472 4.428 19.346 Number of Tractors Req'd 9 1 Tractor Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.063 0.143 0.122 0.099 0.4:32 Cost:, $120,000 Per Tractor $89121 117,184 114,657 $11,862 151,824 Cranes: Humber of Cranes Req'd ! 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks Cost: $130,000 Per Crane TOTAL Downtown: Garbage Trucks: New Non -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) Humber of Trucks Req'd 8 12 Tons Per Load and 2 Loads Per Day, Cost: 1100,001 Per Garbage Truck Trash Trucks New Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Humber of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per Goad and 3 Loads Per Day Cost: $60,000 Per Trash Truck Roll On/Roll Offs: Nei Non -Residential Garbage and Trish (Tons Per Pickup Day) Hwber of RO/ROs Reo'd a 1 ROM Per 2 No or Garbage (rucks Cost: 110,000 Per Roll On/Roll Off 0.036 1.076 0.065 0.053 1.231 $4,692 19,929 S8,468 $6,853 129,943 124,137 $51,076 143,563 135,255 $154,032 1988-90 1990-95 •1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL 24,694 20.748 15.786 17.476 78.703 1.029 .0.864 0.658 0.728 3.279 11029892 186,449 165,773 $72,817 $327,931 24.694 20,748 15.786 17.476 78.703 1.176 0.988 0.752 0.832 3.740 170,554 159,281 145,101 149,932 f224i867 49,388 41.496 31.571 $4.152 157.407 1.102 0,926 0.705 0.780 3,514 111,024 19 262 17,047 17,802 135,135 Tractors with Hoists: Nei Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 49,389 41,496 31.571 34.952 157,407 yu/bar of Tractors Raga @ 1 Tractor Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 1.102 9.336 1.705 0.730 3,514 Colt;- 11.20,000 Per Tractor 1132,289 1111,149 114,565 193,622 1421,625 Cranes: Humber of Cranes Re1'd ! 1 'Crime pee' 2 Trash Trucks 0.588 0,494 1.376 1,416 I'M Cost; 1130,014 Per Tirane f76,434 1644219 148086Q 04,093 1243,606 TOTAL 3� $393,193 1330,960 $41,347 4278465 $1,43.161 11 11 Coconut Grove: Garbaoe Trucks: , low Non -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickuo DAY) 4ugber of Trucks Req'd @ 12 Tons Per load and 2 loads Pet DAY Cost: s100,000 Per Garbage Truck Irish TtUCXS: New Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) Husber of Trucks Req'd @ 7 Tons Per load and 3 loads Per Day Cost: 160,000 Per Trash Truck Roll On/Roll Offs: New Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 4ueber of RO/ROs Req'd @ 1 ROM Per 2 Trash or Garb Y;p trnrkc Cost: S109000 Per Roll On/Roll Off 1988-90 1990-15 11995-2000 2000-05 ------------ TOTAL ____ ♦----------------------------------------- 1.353 2.005 2.102 1.974 7.934 0.077 0.084 0.488 0.082 0.331 17,723 s81352 18,760 18,224 $33,050 1.853 2.005 2.102 1.174 7.934 0.098 0.095 0.100 0.014 0.378 15,295 15,727 16,017 159639 122,669 3.707 4.009 4.205 3.948 15.868 4,09g :,CE9 C.094 0.088 0.354 1827 $895 1139 1881 13,542 Tractors with Hoists: New Won -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 3.707 4.009 4.205 3.948 15.868 r. ftsber of Tractors Req'd @ 1 Tractor Per a Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.083 0.089 0.094 0.088 0.354 . Cost: 1120,000 Per Tractor 11,921 $10,738 $11,262 110,574 $429504 t;ranes: 4aaber of (ranes Req'd E I Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0.044 0.048 0.050 0.047 0.189 Cost: 1130,000 Per Crane $5,737 16,204 16,507 16,109 121,558 TOTAL 529,511 $31,917 133,474 131,428 $126,330 Tittle Havana: 1988-90 1190-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Garbage Trucks: ----------------------------------------------------------- Hew Mon -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 3.748 9.499 6.831 5.155 24.234 #" Number of Trucks Req'd @ 12 Tons Per load and 2 loads Per Day 0.156 0.354 0.285 0.215 1.070' Cost: f100,006 Per Garbage Truck $15,616 1359414 120,464 $21,480 5100,974 Trish Trucks: New WonResidential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 3.748 8.499 6.831 5.155 24.234 Husber of Trucks Req'd e 7 Tons Per load and 3 loads Per Day 0.178 0,105 0.325 0.245 1.15/ Cost: s60,000 Per Trash Truck $10,708 124,284 $199518 $14,729 1699239 Roll On/Roll Offs; Ner Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 7.446 16.949 13.663 10.310 48.467 a Husber of RO/ROs Req'd R 1 ROM Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.167 0.379 0.30 0.230 1.Q82 i Cost, $10,000 Per Roll On/Roll Off 11,673 13,794 131050 12,301 1101819 Tractors with Hoists, Nor son-Res:oential 0#r0;gt and Trash (Tons Per Pickup pay) 7,496 16,999 13.663 10.310 40.467 Husber of Tractors Req'd ! i Tractor Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.167 0.379 0.305 0.230 1.082 Cost; ;120,QOp Per Tractor s20,Q78 145,532 136496 $27,617 1129,024 Cranes, Nyapsr of Cr #nes Req'd ! I Crane per t Trash Trucks 011119 0.202 0,163 0. l23 O. Q77 Co:t, i130,000 Per Crane 111,601 126,308 R1110 MOP i75,009 TOTAL, t09,616 513,382 1118,779 ;S82,OB+1- 19�,865 1042 ' i flags:; 1998-90 1190-95 1915-2000 2000.05 TOTAL Garbage INICks: ------------------------------------------------------- -- 4ev Non -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickuo Day) 0.621 1.289 0.966 0.128 3.803 Husber of Trucks Req'd 8 12 ions Per load and 2 Loads Per Day 0.026 0,054 0,040 01039 O.158 Cost: 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck 12,589 15,370 $4,024 13,865 115,849 — Trash Trucks: Her Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.621 1.289 0.966 0.928 3.803 - Husber of Trucks Req'd 9 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day 0.030 0.061 0.046 0.044 0.181 Cost: $60,441 Per Trash Truck $1,775 $3,682 $2,761 $2,650 5119867 -= Roll On/Roll Offs: New Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 1.243 2.577 i. - !,°:: '.6V7 Husber.of RO/ROs Req'd 8 1 ROM Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.028 0.058 0.043 0.041 0.170 Cos:: $10,000 Per Roll On/Roll Off 1277 1575 1431 $414 11,698 Tractors with Hoists: Hew Non-kesident►al Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Days 1.243 2,577 1.932 1.855 7,607 Husber of Tractors Req'd @ 1 Tractor Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.028 0.053 0.043 1.041 0.1,0 Cost: $120,000 Per Tractor 13,328 16,904 $5,174 $4,969 $20,376 Cranes: Number of Cranes Req'd I 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0,015 0.031 0.023 0.022 0.091 Cost: s130,000 Per Crane t11923 S39981 $2,990 $2,371 111,773 {y TOTAL . $9,893 1209519 115,379 $U ,770 $61,561 Allapattah: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Garbage Trucks: ------•--------------------------------------------------- New Non -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 2.953 6.370 5.382 3.901 18.646 Musber..of Trucks Req'd 1 12 Tons Per Load and 2 loads Per Day 0.123 0.265 0.224 O.163 0.775 ' Cost: 5100,000 Per Garbage Truck - 112,306 $26,542 122,424 $16,255 177,521 { Trash Trucks: Ner Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 2.953 6.370 5.382 3.901 18.606 Husber of Trucks Req'd 17 Tons Per Load and 3 loads Per Day 0.141 0.303 0,256 0.186 0.886 Cost; 160,000 Per Trash Truck 18,436 $18,200 $15,376 111,146 153,161 Roll On/Roll Offs; Kew Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 5.907 12.740 10.763 7.803 37,213 Husber of RO/ROs Req'd 0 1 RO/RO Per 2 Trish or Garbage frucks 0,132 Q,284 0.240 0.174 Q.831 Costs 110,000 Per Roll OnlRoll Off 11,318 12,844 12,403 11,742 18,306 a Tractors rith Hoists; Nov N9n-Resi0en0il•6ar0age and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 5.907 12.140 10,763 1.803 37.213 Moor of Tractors RW 4 0 1 Tractor Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 01132 0.204 0.240 0,174 0.831 Cost; 1120,000 Per Tractor 115,822 $34,126 120,630 120,900 $990670 ►iurper of Cranes Req'd ! 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 01070 0.152 0.120 0.093 0.443 450 $1300004 Per Crone s9,142 s19,71y s16,451 s12,075 s67,391 I TOTAL $47, 026 f 10ON 115,610 1624118 $216,164 Virginia Key: 1188.50 1110-15 1195.2000 2000-05 TOTAL GarbaneTrucks: ----------------------------------------------�.----�_-- New Mon -Residential Garbage (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.450 1.875 0.000 0.000 2.325 Huiber of Trucks Req'd 0 12 ions Per Load and 2 loads Per Day 0.019 0.078 0.010 0.000 0.417 Cost: 1100,000 Per Garbage Truck 111875 $7,813 $0 10 19,688 Trash Trucks: New Non -Residential Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.450 1.875 0.000 0.000 2.325 Mustier of Trucks Req'd 8 7 Tons Per Load and 3 Loads Per Day 0.021 0.089 0.000 0.000 0.111 Costs 166,004 Per Trash Truck 11,286 13,357 if 11 169643 Roll On/Roll Offs: New Non -Residential Garbane and Trash (Tnnc Per Pirtiip Day) 0.900 3.750 0.000 0.000 4.650 Husber of RO/ROs Req'd 8 1 ROM Per 2 Trash or Garbage Trucks 0.020 0.084 0.000 0.000 0.104 Cost:. $1.0,000 Per Roll On/Roll Off $201 1837 s0 s0 11,038 Tractors vith Hoists: _ 4ev Non -Residential Garbage and Trash (Tons Per Pickup Day) 0.900 3.750 0.000 0.000 4.654 Husber of Tractor Req'd 8 I Tractor Per 2 Trasn or Garbage Trucks 0.020 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.104 Cost: 1120,000 Per Tractor 12,411 110,045 f0 s0 112,455 Cranes: Musber:of Cranes Read 0 1 Crane per 2 Trash Trucks 0.011 0.045 0.000 0.000 0.055 Cost: 1130,000 Per Crane $1,393 $5,344 s0 10 1711% TOTAL 17,165 129,855 $0 s0 137,020 TOTAL SOLID PASTE MOH-RESIDEHTIAL COSTS 1998-90 1990-95 1995-2000, 2000-05 107AL Edison 124,137 151,076 143,562 135,255 $154,030 Downtown 3939192 330,359 251,346 273,264 1,253,161 Coconut Grove 299511 31,916 33,473 31,428 126,328 Little Havana 59,676 135,332 108,772 82,083 385,863 Flagm 9,892 20,519 15,379 14,769 61,559 Allapattah 47,026 101,429 35,609 62,118 2969262 Virginia Key 7,165 29,854 0 0 37,019 Total $570,599 $700,485 s5381Z21 1513,917 $2,313,222 $GtID PASTE - AON*REBIDENTIAL COEFFICIENTS Edison f0.i19 Downtown 0.119 a Coconut Grove 0,119 i : i 1t1 P HOvini 0.119 z Fl4gie: 0.119 Allipittilh O+a19 ' !' Virgin:4 Kev i0,119 :EHERAL SERUIM 45MIHISTRVION - ;ESIDENTTAL USTt OIID YASTE EOUIPMEHT: Additional Solid Yaste Eoutpaent Required by Projetted New Residential Deveiookoht: Edison toNntown Coconut Grove Little Havana Flagari Allapattah Virginia Key Total 198940 1990-?5 1995-2000 2000.95 TOTAL 0.018 0.137 0.154 0.216 0.525 1.827 2.331 2.732 2.900 1.790 0.032 0.616 0.410 0.577 1.685 0.046 0.342 0.256 0.288 0.932- 0.127 0.137 0.102 0.144 0.411 0.419 0.137 1.112 1.216 1.465 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.009 3.700 3.757 4.142 Parking Arta Required for New Equipment (it 420 sq. ft. per item of equipaent): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 8 57 65 9l 220 Downtown 767 171 1,148 11218 4,112 Coconut Grove 35 259 172 242 708 Little Havana 19 144 108 121 i12 ffagaiii 12 53 43 61 173 Aliipattah 4 53 43 91 1,15 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 844 1,554 11578 1,824 51800 Costs of Parking Area Required for New Equipment (it 162.50 per square foot): 1988-SO 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------------------------- $480 13,538 $4,034 fs,673 s13,7 9 Downtown 47,948 61,196 71,721 76,131 256,997 Coconut Grove 2,153 16,168 10,765 15,141 4412.12 Little Havana 1,199 8,903 6,723 7,570 24,475 Flagaw: . 719 31597 2,689 3,785 10,710 Allapattah 240 3,597 2,669 51678 12,203 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 152,744 $97,130 198,6Z0 1113,983 1362,476 hechw c; Required to Service Nov Heavy Equipment (it one mecnanic for every 30 petes of -heavy equipment.)• . 19@8.90 1990-95 1995-2090 3 00-85 TOTAL ,. Edison -re'e+•........... y..-.w---- 0.011 -0,Q05 .......... ..-sws----- 0,105 0,007 0.01J DorntQrn 0.061 0.070 0,091 0, 097 D, 3Z6 Coconut Grove Q.003 Q-121 01014 01019 0.056 Tittle Havana 0.0Q2 9101.1 O.Q09 0.01Q 9,031 F14g4ei 1,OQ1 0,015 O,i103 0,005 0,014 Atl4pettin 0,000 O,OQS �,013 0,107 Q,015 Virglma toy 01100 0,100 Q,100 0,Q00 01000 Iota) 01067 0,33 0�120 0�#1S 0 14 f 0 York Bay Area Requ:red to Service Nov Heavy Equipment tat 750 so. ft. for every nee heavy equipment WNW added):. 1908-90 1910-55 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison DOYntoiin 45.665 58.282 68.306 72.506 244.759 Coconut Grove 21055 i5.398 10.252 14,421 42.125 Little Havana 1.142 9.556 6.402 7.210 23.310 Flags 0.685 3.425 2.561 3.645 10.276 Allapattah 04222 3.425 2.561 5.417 11.622 Virginia Key 0.018 1.101 1.011 1.111 1.011 Total 50.232 92.504 93.923 103.555 345.215 York Bay Area Costs (at 1140 per square foot) 1988-90, 1990-95 1795-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison -----------f64-----------f473--- _-------- $538 --------- ----------------- Dovntovn 6,393 3,159 9,563 10,151 34,266 Coconut Grove 288 2,156 11435 2,019 5,398 Little Havana 160 1,198 896 1,009 3,263 Flagami 96 480 359 S05 1,439 Allapattah 32 480 359 757 1,627- Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 17,033 $12,951 $13,149 $15,198 $48,330 Employee Parking Spaces Required for Additional Mechanics (at 160 square fee of parking space for every tvo nev heavy equipment mechanics added): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL --------- ---------- 0,049 0.365 0.410 Q.577 1.400 0ovntovn 4,071 6.217 7.286 7.734 26.108 Coconut Grove 0.219 1.642 1.494 1.538 4.413 Little Havana 0.122 0.913 0.683 0.769 2.486 Flagami 0,073 0.365 0.273 0.385 1.016 Allapattah 0,024 0,365 0.273 0.577 1.240' Virginia Key 01000 0.000 0.400 01000 0.000 Total 5.358 9.867 10.018 11.579 36,823, Employee Parking Spase Costs (at 162,50 per square foot per parking space) 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison e_••wwww.+.tswne•sw••►ssw..:es..wswwwe..�.wors5.v"swwerwww..•w►_wewwre.wes•w f3 t23 ;26 . x s36 387 Downtown 304 381 455 48$ 11632 Coconut Grove 14 103 63 96 281 Little Havana ;1 g, 43 48 155 FT4gm- 69 allilpi�4ih 4 23 !1 6 �y airgrnii Rey 0 0 0 0 0 T4t4l $335 1617 $626 s 2# 12,901 104 Total Residential Solid Vaste tou:oreht-Related Costs: 1988-90 1990-95 1115.2000 2000-05 TOTAL SAison --- -------------------- 1547 ------------------------------ $4,099 14,597 ---------- 16,474 -------... -- 115,;04 �onntdvh 54,646 69,744 819739 $6,766 2929815 Cotonut Oroue 2,459 18,427 129268 17,256 50,410 Little Havana 11366 10,238 71662 81628 27,894 Flagami 820 4,459 31065 41314 12,217 M lagattah 273 4,099 31065 61471 13,909 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1609111 1110,697 $112,315 1129,104 1413,107 3 11 iENERAL StRU10ES ADMINISTRATION - RESIDENTIAL COSTS POLICE EQUIPMENT Residential teoatt Fee Coats of Police Service: 1198 - 2005 00-50 1190.15 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ----------------- Edison 1514 -------------------------------- t39845 14,323 --------- _ $6,085 ------ ------- t14,767 Downtown 549080 69,022 809893 85,868 289,863 Coconut Grove 2,6C1 11,565 139026 18,322 53,5,4 Little Havana 19285 9,628 71205 81114 269232 Ftagasi 771 31855 2,882 41057 11,-65 Allapattah 257 31855 2,882 61185 13,071 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 159,518 1109,770 $111,211 11289531 1409,030 Sworn Officers Required at an Average Cost of t21,744: 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ----------------- Edison 0.024 -------------------------- 0.177 ft------------------------------- 0.199 0.280 0.679 Downtown 2.487 3.174 3.720 3.949 13.331 Coconut Grove 0.120 0.900 0.599 0.843 2.462 Little Havana 0.059 0.443 0.331 0.373 1.236 Flagaai' 0.035 0.177 0.133 0.187 0.532 Allapatt:h 0.012 0.177 0.133 0.230 0.01 Virginia Key 0.000 0.001 0.010 0.000 0.000 - Total 2.737 5.049 5.115 5.911 18.811 Required Additional Vehicles (at 2.5 sworn officers per vehicle): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-OS TOTAL Edison ------------------ ----------0 01009 0.071 --- -------- 080 - ----------------- 0,2 0.272 Downtown 0.995 1.270 1.488 1.580 5.332 Coconut Grove 0,048 0.360 0.240 0.337 0.985 I little Havana 0.024 0.177 0.133 0.149 0.493 ?' Flagaai 0.014 0.071 0.153 0.075 0.213 Allapattah 0.015 0.071 0.053 0.112 0.241 Virginia Key 0.000 01000 0.000 0.000 0.000 s' Total 1.095 2.019 2.046 2.364 7.524 Required Vehicle Mechanics (at one aechanic per 47 new vehicles): 1908-90 1990-95 1995f2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison fOlff!lffO!!!lffffOflffOOfffff...........flff lf!lffffflffff...Offffffff!!?f} ' O,Q00 Q1002 0.002 0.002 0.006 DoMntorn 0,021 0.027 0.132 01034 01113 Coconut Grove 0.001 0.019 0.005 1.007 0.021 Little Havana 01011 0.004 0.403 01003 01010 Flagaei 0.000 01002 0.001 010Q2 0.005 Allapattah 41440 0,102 01401 0.002 O,Qu5 Virginia Key 0.010 0.001 0.000 0.001 Q.000 ..': total 0.023 0.043 0.044 Q,OS4 -0.1b0 York Bay Area Required to Service New Vehicles kit 285 sd- ft. for every new vehicle aeehahie added) 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2001-45 TOTAL Edison ---------- -............ ------------------- 0 0 ------------- ----------------- -1 2 Gowntovn 6 3 9 10 32 Coconut Grout 0 2 l 2 6 Little Havana 0 1 1 1 3 Flagaii 0 0 0 0 I Allapattah 0 O 1 1 1 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 7 12 12 14 46 York Bay Area Costs (it $140 per square foot): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison .......... -------------------------------------------------------- 18 $60 $68 195 $231 Downtown 345 1,078 - 1,263 1,341 41527 Coconut 6rove 41 306 203 286 836 Little Havana I50 113 127 410 Flagari 12 60 45 63 181 Allapattah 4 60 45 95 204 Virginia Key 0 0 0 O 0 Total t929 s1,714 11,737 s2,007 $6,338 Parking Area Required for Rev Equipment (at 160 sq. ft. per police vehicle); 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2001-15 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 11 13 18 43 Downtown 159 203 238 253 853 Coconut Grove 8 58 38 54 158 Little Havana 4 18 21 24 77 F)agasi 2 ll 8 12 24 Allapattah I 11 8 18 38 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 175 323 327 378 1,204 Costs of Parking Area Required For Her Equipment (it 162.10 per square foot); 1998.90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL . Edison awwwwwwwre.aw.w.wwe.awe-we.............................. a 115 1717 ................ $795 s1,119 12,717 Oovntovo 99948 12,617 14,881 15,796 53,323 Coconut 0rovt 400 30519 21396 31370 91846 x little Havana 236 1,771 11325 11493 4,416 F 1 a941 i 142 701 $30 746 21127 AI►aPast4A 47 709 530 11119 21406 Virg+nia KtY 0 0 0 D 0 Total $10,749 120,493 120,458 $23,644 175,245 n Eaployee Parking Spates Reouired for Additional Mechanics (at 160 square fee of parking space for dvtry two new heavy equipaent aechanics added): 198840 1990-95 1195-2000 2010-05 TOTAL Edison --------•---------------------------------------------------------------- 0.016 0.120 - 0.135 0.191 0.462 Downtown 1.693 2.161 2.533 2.681 1.076 Coconut Grove 0.082 0.613 0.408 0.574 1.676 Little Havana 0.040 0.301 0.226 0.254 0.821 Flagm 0.024 0.121 0.090 0.127 0.362 AlIapattah 0.019 0.121 0.490 1.191 0.410 Virginia Key 0.000 0.410 0.000 0.011 1.104 Total 1.864 3.437 3.482 4.125 12.808 Employee Parking Space Costs (at 162.50 per square foot per parking space) 1988-90 1190-95 1195-2000 2004-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------- it -------------- 18 ---..... -- $8 --- ------------- $12 --------•- $21 Downtown 106 135 158 168 567 Coconut Grove 5 33 25 36 105 Little Havana 3 19 14 16 51 flagali 2 s 6 3 23 Ailapattah 1 8 6 12 26 Uir9lnia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total ills 1215 $218 1252 1800 j Total Residential Police Equipsent-Related Costs: 1988-90 1990 -95 1995-2000 2010-05 TOTAL Edison ---------- --.-•----------- 1104 •-------------- f11S -------------- f871 -•----------------.� f1,226 12,476 Downtown 10,899 139910 16,303 11,305 53,411 Coconut Grove 526 3,943 2,625 31692 10,787 Little Havana 259 11940 1,452 10635 5,237 Flagaai 155 777 $81 Ole 2,331 Allapattah 52 777 Sol 1,226 2,636 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 111,995 $22,122 122,413 $25,903 182,433 k?' 39 39 r, Total GSA Residential touipaentakelated Costs! 1908-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000r115 TOTAL — Edison .................... $650 14,864 ..rraa.. f5,468 f7,697 rr -31$,6i9� Do�ntorn 65,544 83,654 98,041 104,070 1519309 Coconut Grove 21985 22,369 14,893 20,947 61,194 Little Havana 11625 12,178 9,113 10,262 33,178 F1agm 975 4,876 31645 5,131 14,622 Allapattah 325 4i876 3,645 71697 16,543 Uirginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total t 172,114 1132,817 $134,805 $155,88 4 14",531 i F 3. 6. F t 3 t • 10426 y^ 4 Q i a GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION - 4014-RESIDENTIAL COSTS SOLID VASTE MIPMEHTc Wditional Solid Paste Equipment Required by Projected Mon -Residential Devel0010t: 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 iOTAL ----- ------------- Edison ----------------- 0.307 ------ --------------------- 0.649 ---- 0.554 0.448 1.958 Downtown 4.918 4.199 3.195 3.537 15.928 Coconut 0rovt 0.375 0.406 0.425 0.399 1.606 Little Havana 0.758 1.724 1.383 1.043 4.954 Flagami 0.126 0.261 0.1" 0.188 0.770 Allapattah 0.599 1.289 1.089 0.7" 3.766 Virginia Key 0.491 0.379 0.010 0.000 0.471 Total 7.253 3.103 6.W b.in Z9.402 -Pirkinq Area Required for New Equipment (at 420 sq. ft. per item of equipment): 1988-90 1990-95 4995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison. -------•---129-----------•2 73-------- -233--- -----188•---•-------822 Downtown 2,091 1,764 1,342 1,485 6,690 Coconut Grove Ilia 170 179 168 674 Little Havana 319 722 581 438 2,060 Flagaai 53 110 82 79 323 AtIapattah 251 541 457 332 11582 Virginia Key 38 159 1 0 198. Total 3,046 31131 2,a13 21630 i2,249 Costs of Parking Arta Required for New Equipment (at $62.50 per square foot)! 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison -----------------------------------------------------•----------------- s11,041 $149535 $11,763 $51,392 Downtown 131,187 110,223 83,861 92,842 410,112 Coconut Grove 9,846 10,649 11,168 10,486 42,149 Little Havana 19,911 45,153 36,291 27,387 128,742 Fl again i 3,301 6,846 5,131 41920 20,266 Allapattah 15,690 339841 28,590 20,725 98i847 Virginia Key 2,391 31961 0 0 129352 Total 1190,370 1233,714 1179,576 $168,130 $771,799 , Mtcnanics Required to Service Her Heavy Equipment (at one mechanic for every 30 p►eces of heavy equip%tnt); 1900.90 1990-95 1"5.2000 ZOOO.45 TOTAL Edison ......wwwww.w.w.e..wwe wwsws,rw.wwv*we eswsawwwws•sw..n...........•....... 01010 0.022 0, 010 0.015 0,065 Downtown 0,167 0,�14Q 0,106 0,118 01531 Coconut Grout 0.013 11014 0,014 01013 6.054 041t, Howl 0.025 O.057 0,046 4.035 0.163 Flig4oI Q,Q04 0.001 4.447 01406 046 A1lipattah 01021 1 0.043 01036 11016 0.14 Virginia Key 41410 44400 0,016 ` Total 0,i<4� 0417 Q.zzp Q,t18 .0�981 e_ 41 10 ' York Bay Area keouired to Service Met Heavy Eouipsent (at 7SO sq. Ft. for every nor heavy equipsent sechanic added)% 1988-90 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ---------------------------------- 7370 16.231 -------------- 13.842 ----------------------- 11.203 49.945 ' Oovntovn 124.140 104.974 71.867 $8.421 3986202 Coconut Grove 1.377 10042 10.637 1.197 40.142 Little Havana 18.962 43,043 34,563 26.083 122.611 Flagasi 3.144 6.520 4.887 4.693 19:244 Allapattah 14.943 32.230 27.229 19.739 14,144 Virginia Key 2.277 9.497 1.001 0.111 11,763 Total 181.313 222.585 171.025 160,124 735,047 York Bay Area Costs (at 1144 per square foot) - 1988-10 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-45 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------- sl 074 $2 272 - ---------- f1 S --�------------------- 11 568 16 �52 Dovntovn 17,492 14,696 11,181 12,319 551148 Coconut Grove 1,313 1,420 1,489 11398 5,620 Little Havana 2,655 6,020 4,839 31652 17,166 Flagaii 440 913 684 657 2,694 Allapattah 2,092 4,512 31812 _ 2,763 13,180 Virginia Key 311 1,323 0 0 11647 Total $25,384 $31,162 123,943 122,417 $102,907 Eiployes Parking Spaces Required for Additional Mechanics tat 160 square fee of parking space to every two nev heavy equiplient eechanics added): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ---------0.813----------------------------------- 1,731 1.477 1.195 5.221 Dorntovn 13.327 11.197 81519 9.432 42.475 Coconut Grove 1.000 1.082 1.135 1.063 4.282 'Little Havana 2.023 4.587 3.687 2.782 13.079 Flagasi 0.335 0.695 0.521 9.501 2.053 A1lipattah 1.594 3.438 2.904 2.105 10.042 Virginia Key 0.243 1.012 0.000 01000 1.255 total 19.340 23.742 18,243 17.080 78,405 Elpioyee Parking Space Costs (at $62.50 per square foot per parking space) 1988-10 1990.95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL .................................. 192 175 ,. 1326 P9rncoen 833 700 $32 501 21655 Coconut Groye 63 68 71 67 268 tittle Haym 126 287 230 174 817 F1aQa�: 21 43 33 31 128 ailapartah 190 215 182• 132 448 Virginia Key 15 63 0 0 70 Total 11,209 111484 11,140 $1,067 14,901 11042 42 i r k. Total Non -Residential Solid Vaste Evuipaent-Related Costs: 198$-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-15 TOTAL Edison ---- -------------- t9,173 ------- ft--- 119,422 ------ -----........... $161565 $13,406 »......... ._- 158,574 Dovntown 149,511 125,619 951574 105,810 476,515 Coconut Grove 11,222 12,136 12,728 111951 48,037 _ little Havana 229692 51,464 41,361 31,212 146,725 flaga�i 3,162 71342 51848 51616 23,028 Allapattah 17,882 39,561 32,583 23,620 112,654 Virginia Key 21725 11,352 0 0 14,017 Total $216,971 1266,361 1204,666 1191,615 1079,606 k- (i ' 11 4 �ANERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION - SON-REMENTIAL COSTS POLICE E001PRENT Mort -Residential tipact fee Costs of Police Service: 1988 - 2005 1988-90 1990.95 1945.2000 2000-45 fOTAI Edison --- ---------------- $57,139 -----.__---•----------------------_-_-----------..----- $1200910 $103,124 $839458 064,631 0ovntovn 1300789 782,047 595,002 650,724 2,966,562 Coconut Grove 69,860 75,555 79,241 74,398 299,054 Little Havana 141,268 320,366 2571493 194,313 913,440 Flagim 23,418 48,574 36,406 34,963 143,361 Allapattah 111,323 244,109 202,849 147,050 741,331 Virginia Key 16,961 70,674 0 0 97,635 Total f1,350;718 11,658,235 ;1,274,::5 :1,:^.2,^56 -,5,476,uiq .worn Officers Required at an Average Cost of $21,744! 1988-90 1990-95 _ 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ---------2.628----------5.56t---------_4.743----------3.838 - - 16.769 Dorntom 42.307 35.966 27.364 10.215 136.431 Coconut Grove 3.213 3.475 3.644 3.422 13.753 Little Havana 6.497 14.734. 11.842 3.936 42.009 Flagm 1.477 2.234 1.674 1.608 6.593 Allapattah 5.120 11.043 9.321 6.763 32.2r.1 Virginia Key 0.780 3.250 0.000 0.000 4.030 Total 62.121 76.262 58.516 S4.861 251.840 Required Additional Vehicles (at 2.5 sworn officers per vehicle): 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2004-03 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------------------------- t.051 2.224 1.897 1.535 6.703 povntom 17.123 14.386 10.946 12.118 54.573 Coconut Grove 1.285 1.310 1.458 1.369 5.501 Little Havana 2.519 5.893 4.737 3.575 16.804 flagas: 0.431 0.894 6.670 0.643 2.637 Allapattah 2,048 4.417 3.732 2.705 12.902 Virginia Key 0.312 1.300 0.000 0.000 1.612 Total 24.848 30.505 23.438 2t.945 100,736 Required vehicle Mechanics (it one iechinic per 47 new vehicles); 1988-90 1190-95 1990-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 01022 0►041 0,040 0.033 0,143 Domtorn 0,364 0.306 0.233 0.250 1.161 Coconut Grove 0.017 01030 0.031 0.029 0.117 Little Havana 0.055 01125 01141 0.076 0.351 Fispal: 0.009 0.019 0,014 0.014 0.056 Allapattah 0.044 0►094 0.079 0.058 0,215 Virginia Key 0.007 R,0Y0 0,000 0.000 0,034 Total 9.5*9 0,649 0.499 0,461 2►143! 44' Mork Bay Area Required to Service New Vehicles cat 285 SO- it. for every nev uenitie eethan(c added) lies-90 1910-95 1995-2000 2001-05 TOTAL Edison ----..-•------------------ - ------------------------------------------- t3 12 Oovntown 104 87 66 73 131 Coconut drove 3 8 9 8 33 Little Havana 16 36 29 22 102 Flagaii 3 5 4 4 16 Allapattah 12 27 23 16 78 Virginia Key 2 8 0 0 10 Total 151 185 142 133 611 'fork Bay Ar•a rnctc (at. 1140 nor cgkljre foot): - 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1892 $1,388 11,610 11,303 $5,614 Downtovn 14,536 12,213 31192 10,237 46,329 Coconut Grove 1,091. 1,180 1,238 1,162 4,670 Little Havana 6,206 5,003 4,021 3,035 14,265 flagami 366 759 569 546 2,239 Allapattah 1,139 31750 31168 2,296 101953 Virginia Key 265 1,104 0 0 1,369 Total 121,095 $25,897 $19,818 $18,630 $851519 Parking Area Required for Nev Equipeent (at 160 sq, ft. per police vehicle): 1988-90 1998-95 1995-2000 2001-45 TOTAL Edison -------------------------------------------- 168 356 304 2---------- ,073 Dovntown 2,740 2$02 11751 1,939 8,132 Coconut Grove 206 222 233 219 DSO , Little Havana 416 943 758 572 2,689 Flagau 69 143 107 103 422 Allapattah 329 707 597 433 2,064 Virginia Key 50 208 0 0 "c`,8 Total 31976 4,881 3,750 31511 .16,118 Costs of Parking Area Required for Hev Equipsent tat 42,50 per square foot); 1980-90 1990-95 1995w2000 2000.05 TOTAL Edison .www.wew.ww.www.w.w...w..ww..wwwww..www.w.............wwwwwww.....www..w..w s10,S11 S22,Z42 i18,971 $15,353 $67,077 porntom 171,227 143,864 109,456 121,170 545,7Z5 Eoconus 6rpve 12,851 130819 14,577 13,686 $5,014 Little Havana 251987 58,934 47,368 35,746 160,035 f 1 igae 1 41308 036 6,617 61432 2613,13 Allapattah 20,471 - 44,170 37,316 27491 1y91016 l rginia Key 31120 13,001 0 0 16,121 total 5248,484 1305,047 S234,385 M1,446 11,007,361 �1-0421; Espioyee Parking Spaces Required for Additional Rothanics cat 160 square fee of parking space for every twa new heavy equipsent lechanics added): 1188-90 1990-15 l995-2400 20b0-05 TOTAL Edison 1.784 3.7$6 3.229 2.613 11.417 Oowntown 29.145 24.488 18.631 20.626 92.s39 Coconut Grove 2.187 2.366 2.481 2.330 9.364 Little Havana 4.423 10.031 8.663 6.084 28.602 Flagasi 0.733 1.521 t.140 1.095 4.484 A1lapattah 3.486 7.518 6.352 4.614 21.961 Virginia Key 0.531 2.213 1.000 1.001 2.744 Total 42.295 51.923 39.895 37.32 171,466 Eikployee Parking Space Costs tat $62,50 per square foot per parking space) 1986-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2004-05 TOTAL Edison -------------------------------------------2--------------------------1714 i112 s231 f20.. f163 3114 Oowntorn 1,822 11530 11164 1,189 5,806 Coconut Grove t37 148 155 146 C.35 Little Havana 276 627 504 380 1,788 Flagass 46 95 71 68 131 allapsttah 218 470 317 288 1,373 Virginia Key 33 138 0 0 112 Total $2,643 $3,245 129493 $2,335 110,717 Total Hon -Residential Police Equipsent-Related Costs: 1988-90 1910-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison --------------------------- fll 535 ........ fT4 361 ---�----------- f2Q 183 ----------•--•--��-•- f16 820 $73 485 Downtown 187,584 157,608 119,912 132,714 '097,359 Coconut Grove 140079 15,127 15,970 14,934 60,269 Little Havana 29,470 64,564 51,893 39,160 12.4,423 Flagasi 4,719 91709 7,337 7,046 28,892 Ailapattah 22,435 480390 40,081 29,635 141,341 Virginia Key 3,418 14,243 0 0 17,661 Total $V2,222 1334,139 1256,776 $240,410 f1,f03,544 46 10426• lad x a Total GSA Non -Residential E4uiplent-Related Costs: 1988-40 1990-?5 1995-2000 2000.05 TOTAL _------------- Edison ........ t20,693 .---------•---------..__.._._._..---- 543,733 t31,347 ------- 530,225 --------- i132,053 Dovntown 337,095 293,227 215,486 238,564 1,0741372 Coconut Grove 25$00 27,363 28,698 26,944 108,305 Little Havana 51,161 116,024 939253 70,372 330,810 F149asi 81481 17,591 13,184 12,662 519918 Ailapattah 40,316 86,958 73,464 53,255 253,993 Virginia Key 61142 25,595 0 0 31,737 Total 1489,188 1600,546 $4619432 1432,022 ti ,983,188 47 SECTION 4 - SUMMARY OF COSTS TOTAL RESIDENTIAL COSTS STORK SOLID TOTAL POLICE FIRE/RESCUE(2) PARKS STREETS SEVERS PASTE GSA RESIDENTIAL Edison 114,767 19,654 $168,205 $227,930 11139967 146,964 $18,679 1644,174 Downtown 2891863 394,357 39137064 5,639,665 21819,831 8751977 331,309 13t548,362 Coconut Grove 53,524 20,969 539,964 11388,362 694,179 150,762 61,194 2,918,954 Little Havana 26,232 111602 298,781 296,107 143,052 83,421 33,173 882,313 Flaoaat I,565 0 131,721 329,308 164,153 36,776 14,627 687,150 Allagattah 13,079 0 148,970 227,698 113,843 41,593 16,543 $61,731 Virginia Key(i) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total S409,030 $436,582 14,425,001 $8,013,078 14,0491030 $1,235,493 1495,530 $11,146,744 - 101AL NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS STORM :OLID TOTAL POLICE FIREiRESCUE(2) PARKS(3) STREETS SEVERS YAS1E GSA `ION -RESIDENTIAL Edison 1364,631 S25,926 SO 13809675 1190,336 $154,030 1132,053 11,247,651 Downtown 2,966,562 705,248 4,231,721 2,9$8,085 1,473,040 1,253,(61 1,074,372 14,614,1'i5 Coconut drove 299,054 269441 0 473,926 136;962 126,328 108,305 1,271,016 Little Havana 9131440 561912 0 673,886 336,941 385,863 330,810 2,697,912 Flagaui 143,361 0 0 275,287 1370641 66,559 51,918 6689766 Allagattah 741,331 0 0 325,864 412,930 296,262 253,993 214901380 Virginia Key 87,635 0 0 0 0 37,019 319737 156,391: Total SS,4761014 $814,587 14,237,727 $5,587,723 $2,7137350 52,313,222 11,9839183 $23,206,311 (1) No residential developaent is anticipated in Virginia Key. No costs are derived for Flagait, Allapattah and, Virginia Kay due to the excess capacity J existing fire/rescue facilities. (3) only the Downtown District has an urban parks deuelopient prograa. SECTION 5 - SUMMARY OF IKPACT FEE-FELATEO COST. TOTAL COSTS SY SERVICE 1988-40 1990-95 1915-2000 2.000-05 TOTAL Police -Res. 159,518 $109,770 1111,211 1128,531 1449,030 Police -Mon -Res. 1,350,758 1,658,235 1,274,115 11192,91b 51476,014 Firt/Rescue-Res. 75,502 108,341 1219171 131,568 436,582 Fire/Rescue-Non-Res, 190,616 252,245 212,336 153,810 814,537 Parks -Res. 643,878 1,185,730 1,203,9IR 11311,475 4,425,001 Parks -Non -Res. 11329,630 1,117,152 849,959 940,986 41237,727 0treets-Res. 1,160,246 2,111,335 21189,063 21549,434 $1098,078 Street0on-Res. •11378,768 1,638,146 1,325,282 1,245,527 5,587,723 Store Sewers -Res, 584,120 1,095,665 1,094,530 1,274,715 41049,030 Store 689,332 3191070- 662,637 622,761 2,793,5-40 Solid Vast# -Res, 179,775 331,064 ?36,144 tM,510 1,235,493 Solid Vast# -Non -Res. 570,599 700,485 533,221 :03,917 2,313,2�2 GSA -Res. 72,104 132,817 134,805 155,004 495,0'30 GSA -Non -Res. 489,138 600,546 461,432 432,022 1,933,13 Total 18,782,084 $11,140,601 $10,515,324 111,117,046 $42,355,055 TOTAL COSTS BY DISTRICT 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2040 2000-05 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------- 1216,810 1570,073 1528,462 1532,480 11,847,825 Domtown 71075,314 7,113,079 6,753,604 71240,060 231182,557 Coconut Grove 436,187 1,387,197 1,045,195 1,310,591 4,179,970 Little Havana 460,821 1,270,306 1,012,911 346,247 3,580,285 Flagaui 155,051 455,646 341,071 404,148 11355,916. Allapattah 416,333 1,018,177 $44,081 703,520 3,052,111 Virginia Key 30,268 126,123 0 0 156,391 Total 18,182,084 111,940,601 $10,515,324 511,117,046 $42 355,055 14 , 49 a a +� SECTION 6 - IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS STORM SOLID TOTAL POLICE FIRE/RESCUE PARKS STREETS SEVERS PASTE GSA RESIDENTIAL Edison 10.019 $0.013 10.218 $0.295 10.148 $0.061 $0.024 $4.778 Downtown 1.114 0.121 0.157 4.282 0.141 0.444 0.118 0.676 Coconut Grove 0.017 0.007 1.174 0.448 0.224 0.049 0.420 1.9" Little Havana 0.019 0.008 0.218 0.209 0.104 0.061 0.024 0.643 flaga�i 0.019 0.000 0.218 0.543 0.271 0.061 0.024 1.136 AIIapattah 0.119 0.004 0.213 0.333 0.166 0.061 0.024 0.821 ;llirlinia Key 10.000 10.000 $0.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 f0.000 HON-RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS z _ STORM SOLID TOTAL POLICE FIREIRESCUE PARKS STREETS SEVERS PASTE GSA NON-RESIDENTIAL Edison 10.283 $0.020 10.000 10.295 10.148 $0.119 10.102 $0.967 Downtown 0.283 0.067 0.404 0.282 0.141 0.119 0.102 1.318 Coconut Grove 0.283 0.025 0.000 0.446 0.224 0.119 0.102 l.201 Little Havana 0.233 0.018 0.000 0.209 0.104 0.119 0.102 0.833 Flagasi 0.283 0.000 0.400 0.543 `0:271 0.114 0.102 1.318 Allapattah 0.283 0.400 0.000 0.333 0.166 0.119 0.102 1.003 0irginii Key $0.283 $0.401 10.001 10.001 $4.004 10.119 14.102 $1.504 SECTION 7 - EXEMPTED SQUARE FOOTAGE SINGLE FAMILY (CITYVIDE) 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000. 2000-05 TOTAL Edison --------------------------------------------------------- 39600 31,200 33,601 48t011 116,410 Downtown 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 38,400 2834200 188,400 265,200 7759200 Little Havana 71200 40,400 37,200 43,200 138,010 Fligall 81400 39,600 31,200 42,000 1219200 Allapattah 11200 20,400 14,400 32,400 68,400 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 total 589300 424,800 -304,800 430,800 1,2t?,290 TARGET AREA DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL 1988-90 1190-95 11195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 2,334 23,333 26,372 V ,107 r,1.1 Downtown 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 61598 21,237 16,521 21,688 669044 Little Havana 1,148 19,631 14,645 16,515 52,739 Flagasi 0 0 0 0 0 Ailapattah 156 20,068 15,051 31,535 67,610 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 11,836 84,274 '2,589 106,845 275,544 TARGET AREA MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 61063 60, 327 ---------------------------- 689735 16,715 232, 360 DowntowM 0 1,711,969 51057,158 5,404,736 12,173,863 Coconut Grove 31695 37,111 249688 34,752 1009246 Little Havana 21,468 2161598 161,589 182,217 531,312 ' flagaei D 0 0 0 0 Allipattah 3,358 709519 52,889 110,815 237,C.31 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 34,624 2,097,024 5,365,05? 5,329,235 13,3Z5,942 e Includes Phase 11 (31210,000 sq, ft,) end Phase 111 (317'0,000 sq, ft,) of the the proposed Overcown•Park Vest residential deveiopeent► 51 W s EXEMPTED DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT - <ESIDENTIAL (CITYWIDE) t489.90 1490-95 995-2000 4000-05 TOTAL Edison 0 0 0 0 Dorntoon 536,429 0 0 4 536,429 Coconut Grove ) D 0 0 0 Little Havana 0 0 4 0 0 flag��� 4 0 0 0 O Aliapattah 0 0 0 0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 0 O 0 Total 536,129 0 0 0 536,929 DEVELOPMENTS Of REGIONAL IMPACT • NON-RESIDENTIAL (CITVYIDE) 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2004 2000-05 TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------ Edison 0 0 0 0 J Doentotin 1,467,104 1,000,000 0 1 2,467,104 fnconut Grove 0 0 0 0 0 Little Havana •! 0 0 0 0 f 1 agar 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattih 0 0 0 0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 11467,104 1,400,000 0 0 2,467,104 JOINT VENTURES - RESIDENTIAL (CITYWIDE) 1988-90 1990-95. 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 0 36,000 0 0 36,000 Dovntoena 11200,000 2,640,000 0 0 ' 31340,000 Coconut Grove 0 48,000 0 0 48,000 Little Havana 0 0 0 0 0 Flagasi 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 0 89,640 68,724 " 140,436 2989800 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 tutai 1,200,000 l,313,640 68,724 140,436 41222,300 JOINT VENTURES • NON-RESIDENTIAL (CITVYIDE) 1988.90 1990-95 1995-2000 000.05 TOTAL ...ww.n.ww............w..wwww ............................. Edison 0 0 0 0 0 2omtorn 0 172,200 0 0 232,20A coconut Grove 0 0 0 0 Little Hama 0 0 0 7 9 FiOgalll 0 0 0 9 0 • v,rQ�n+a KA'9 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 232,200 0 0 232,200 e Incluots Philp I (3,841,000 sq, fW of Averoon•Park Yaat rralldentaal de 0990fris, - E 1042 SON -TARGET AREA LOY AND MODERATE 14COME DUPLEX HOUS1HGx 1988=4 1990-95 1195-2000 1:000.05 TOTAL Edison 2,433 13,531 15,014 21,047 $2,025 Dovntovn 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 15,101 130,132 4,940 121,7% 354,573 Little Havana 91226 659785 49,078 $5,343 179,431 Flagasi 4,200 11,800 15,660 21,000 60,600 Allapattah 1,122 30,166 23,075 47,833 102,995 Uirginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 _ Total 33,682 260,263 188,706 2669978 7491629 HOW -TARGET AREA LOY AND MODERATE INCOME MULTIPLE FAMILY HOUS1HGx 1988-90 1990-95 1WS-7000 W -05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 41759 29,587 33,433 47,043 114,820 Domtom 118669600 11526,016 263,221 261,032 3,916,869 Coconut Grove 35,353 264,645 _ 176,056 247,824 723,877 Little Havana 9,0% 42,101 32,646 36,092 120,654 Flagm 12,000 60,000 44,400 62,400 178,800 Allapattah 1,921 15,141 110356 -5,593 54,610 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1,929,638 19138,883 561,071 679,983 5,109,62.3 TOTAL EXEMPTED SQUARE FOOTAGE 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 19,209 194,483 1779154 249,911 6409756 Dorntoen 5,0709633 7,110,185 5,320,379 5,665,768 23,166,965 Coconut Grove 99,947 785,174 491,605 691,220 2,067,945 Little Havana 48,918 395,315 295,117 333,366 1,072,716 Fligam 24,600 119,400 11,200 125,400 360,600 Allapattah 9,357 246,534 185,494 339,611 829,996 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5,272,663 8,051,009 6,560,949 7,454,276 23,138,976 TOTAL NOR -EXEMPT SQUARE FOOTAGE 1986-90 1990-95 1995-2000 100-05 TOTAL wwww ww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ... Edison 209,795 434,340 413,715 363,552 1,421,401 Dovntorn 1,154, 565 420,193 Z,367,686 2,591,040 7,333,486 Coconut Grove 298,375 614,893 4V42, 901 632,755 "088, 923 L i M a Havana $17, 999 1,241,454 992, 527 173, 311 3430,211 211 F 1 agae s 98,561 ?54, 026 150,302 210, 439 °51, 328 Allapattah 317,872 304,421 642,771 4490797 2,334,86$ Virginia Key 6090Q0 .30,pop 0 0 310,000 1 Total 3,537,166 4,019132w 111,137,1IQ ,Os5,s'i4 17,770,ki5 y x Total non tarpt are; for iud 1Pderate InC0f 90111 an0 1009111 fasuly housing is vrl"110 hers to 4e aoproislitely 50 percent of all Qruf0to nev non target arto Ouplei #n0 /Yltiple fiaily re;i0enii4) 0tyelOplOI1L, 1042 a .a SECTION 8 - EXEMPTED kEVEHUES (To 8e Paid Fro& Other City Revenues) SINGLE FAMILY (CITYWIDE) - 1988-90 1990-95 1195-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison $2,801 124,274 126,141 $37,344 $90,559 Dovntovn 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 36,058 265,925 1769908 249,023 727,113 Little Havana 4,630 32,407 23,920 27,778 88,734 Flags i 9,542 44,986 35,443 47,712 137,683 Aliapattah 985 16,748 111822 26,600 56,156 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 total 154,016 $384,340 1274,234 $388,457 $1,101,046 TARGET AREA DUPLEX 1998-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 111816 s18,157 $20,517 128,869 169,359 Oo>ntovn 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 6,196 19,942 15,513 20,365 62,015 Little Havana 1,253 12,623 91417 10,619 13,911 Flagasi 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 785 16,476 12,357 259890 551508 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 110,049 $67,197 157,304 $85,744 $2201714 TARGET AREA MULTIPLE FAMILY 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2004-05 TOTAL Edison $4,733 $47,323 $539476 $759244 1180,776 Downtown 0 1,157,291 3,418,639 3,653,602 8,229,531 Coconut Grove 31470 34,847 23,182 32,632 14,131 Little Havana 13,017 139,273 103,902 1170166 374,157 Flagni 0 0 0 0 0 Al l apattah 2, 757 57,096 43,422 90,979 115,454 Virginia Key 0 0 0 9 0 Total $24,776 $1,436,630 13,642,620 $3,969,6Z3 19,073,649 54 n DEUELOPMEHTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT - �ESIDEHTIAL (CITYYIDE) 1900-90 1990-a5 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------ Edison $0 10 i0 $0 s0 Dovntovn 362,964 0 0 0 3629964 Coconut Grove 0 0 0 0 0 Little Havana 0 0 0 0 0 Flagami 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 0 0 0 0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 O 0 0 Total 1362,164 SO s0 10 1362,964 DrvELUMMIS OF'REGIOHAL IMPACT = NON-RESIDEHTIAL (CITYYIDE) 1986-90. 1990-95 * 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ----------------------------------------------------------» Edison SO s0 �s0 s0 s0 Dovntovn 29051,011 1,393,000 0 0 3,449,011 Coconut Grove 0 0 0 0 0 Littlo Havana I �1 0 0 �j Flagali 0 0 0 0 0 Allapattah 0 0 0 -0 0 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0-- 0 Total 1290519011 119398,000 to $0 $3,449,011 JOINT VENTURES - RESIDENTIAL (CITYYIDE) 1988-90 - 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------ Edison to 129,003 s0 $0 $28,008 Dovntovn 811,200 1,784,640 0 0 29515,840 Coconut Grove 0 45,072 0 0 45,072 Little Havana 0 0 0 0 0 Fl�ga�i o 0 0 0 0 Al lapittah 0 73,594 561422 115,298 2459315 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total $811,200 11,931,314 $56,422 1115,298 12,914,235 JOINT VENTURES - NON-RESIDENTIAL (CITYYIDE) 1908-90 1990.95 1995-2004 10000-05 TOTAL *wwwxwwwwwxwww�wwxx xwwxwxw wxws xxxwwxxxxxxwxwwx-wxwrxxwxx-wx- Edison s0 s0 f0 s0 s0 Dorncown 0 324,616 0 0 324, 616 Coconut Grove 0 0 0 0 0 Little N�v+tna 0 0 0 9 0 Fla�aas 0 4 0 0 0 d114patt4h i � ) :'1 Virginia 4Y G 0 0 0 0 i0 1394,616 10 TO M4,616 ra SON-1ARGET AREA LOV AHD MODERATE INCOME DUPLEX HOUSING 1988-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison t19893 110,527 111,681 $16,374 140,475 Downtown 0 0 0 0 0 Coconut Grove 14,931 122,992 80,697 114,329 332,949 Little Havana 51932 429299 31,557 35,585 115,374 Flagasi 4,771 22,493 17,722 23,856 63,842 Allapattah 1,578 24,766 12,944 1q;274 24,,,W Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 129,105 - $223,077 $160,601 1229,415 1642,198 NON -TARGET AREA LeW AND MODERATE INCOME MULTIPLE FAMILY HOUSING 1988-90 1990-95 .1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison 139702 $23,018 126,010 $36,519 $89,330 Downtown 11261,822 1,031,536 177,937, 176,459- 2,647.,203 Coconut Grove 339196 2489501 165,317 232,707- 6791721 Little Havana 5,823 27,585 20,965 23,207 779581 Flagaoi 13,632 689160 50,438 70,886 203,117 Allapattah 11577 12,923 9,323 21,011 • 449834 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total 11,3191752 tt,411,774 1449,911 $560,368 s3,742,385 TOTAL EXEMPTED REUENUES 1989-90 1190-95 1995-2000 2900-05 TOTAL Edison ------------------------------------------------------------ 14,944 151,307 137,825 114,431 14981508 Downtown 4,486,997 5,696,133 31596,576 31830#059 17,609,765 Coconut Grove 93,050 737,278 461,617 649,056 1,141,800 Little Havana 31,454 254,187 189,760 214,354 689,756 Flagasi 27,946 135,633 103,603 142,154 409,642 Allapattah 71662 2029404 152,211 319,050 681,426 Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 Total $4,662,873 $7,176,949 14,641,672 15,349,404121,830,898 SECTION 9 - ANTICIPATED IMPACT FEE kEVENUES (After Exelptions) TOTAL IMPACT FEE -RELATED COSTS ties -so 1998-95 1995-2040 2000-05 TOTAL Edison f216,810 15701073 1528,462 $532,480 t118471825 Dovntown 7,075,314 7,113,079 6,753,604 71240,060 23,182,557 Coconut Grove 436,927 1,337,117 110459195 1,310,591 4,1731970 tittle Naysna 460,821 11270,306 1,002,911 846,247 3,580,285 Flagau 1559051 455,646 341,071 404,148 1,355,116 Allapattah 406,333 100189177 844,081 783,520 31052,111 Virginia Key 30,266 126,123 0 0 t56,391 Total 13,732,084 111,940,601 110,515,324 $11,117,046 142,355,055 TOTAL EXEMPTED REVENUES 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ----------------------------------------------------------- 1149944 $1519307 1137,825 $194,431 $498,508 Dorntoen 49486,997 596969133 39596,576 3,830,059 17,609,765 Coconut Grove 93,850 737,278 4619617 649,056 1,141,800 Little Havana 31,454 254,187 139,760 2141354 689,746 Flagami 27,946 135,638 103,603 142,454 409,642 Allapattah 71682 202,404 132,291 319,056 681,426 Virginia Key: 0 0 0 0 0 Total 14,662,373 17,176,949 $4,641,672 $5,349,404 121,830,318 ACTUAL ANTICIPATED IMPACT FEE REVENUES 1988-90 1990-95 1995-2000 2000-05 TOTAL Edison ----------------------------------------------------- 1201,366 1418,766 1390,637 $338,049 $1,349,117 00mtown 21568,817 11416,946 3,157, 028 3,410,001 10, 572, 792 Coconut Grove 343,137 649,119 $83,578 661,535 w,2381170 Little Havana 429,367 11016,119 $13,151 631,893 2, 890, 529 FTa'94e1 127,105 3201000 2371468 261,694 146,274 Allapattah 399,651 815,773 691,790 464,470 2s370,685 Virginia Key 30,268 126,123 ' 0 0 156,311 Total $41119411 14,763,652 15,073,652 15,767,642 120,524,157 57 1'04 6' n APPENDIX C IMPACT .FEE —RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 3 i .. '+ 51J� 7 i t �; i .. '� -:'R' ,, 4 � ,r !`{' .,: �;. Planning District A. Edison/Model City B. Downtown C. Coconut Grove Police Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary 2-Year Period 1988-90 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1990-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 S57,653 S124,755 $107,447 S89,543 $379,398 984,869 851,069 675,895 744,592 3,256,425 72,471 95,120 92,267 92,720 352,578 0. little Havana 142,553 329,994 _264,698 202,427 939,672 E. Flagami 24,189 52,429 39,288 39,020 154,926 F. Al 1 apattah 111,580 243,964 205,731 153,153 714, 410' G. Virginia Key 16,961 70,674 0 0 87,635 All Districts $1,410,276 $1,768,005 $1,385,326 $1,321,437 $5,885,044 w � w 10426 Pot ice Impact Pee Projects Project description Sheet Project game: 800 mhz Radio System Expansion Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: With the addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase_of employee and resident population, the Miami Police Department will need to increase sworn personnel. For every three officers added to the force, one 800 mhz portable radio will have to be purchased and added to the system. Project Cost: $3,000 per radio 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $64,854 $81,307 $63,708 $60,770 $270,639 4 10426, Police Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Mobile Digital Terminal System Expansion Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: With the addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of employee and resident population, the Miami Police Department will need to increase sworn personnel. For every three officers added to the force, one mobile digital terminal will have to •be purchased and installed in a police vehicle. Project Cost: $5,480 for each Mobile Digital Terminal 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $118,471 $148,523 $116,376 $111,008 $494,378 0 Police Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Parking Expansion Project Area(s): Edison, Allapattah Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of- employee and resident population requires increases in sworn and civilian personnel. Additional parking spaces must be provided at a rate of two for every three sworn officers and one for every two civilian personnel. =x Project Cost: $10,000 per parking garage stall 1988-1990 $71,343 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $155,441 $132, 026 $102,305 $461,115 N Police Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Parking Expansion Project Area(s): Downtown, Virginia Key Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of- employee and resident population requires increases in sworn and civilian personnel. Additional parking spaces must be provided at a rate of two for every three sworn officers and one for every two civilian personnel. Project Cost: $10,000 per parking garage stall 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $422,343 $388,581 $284,938 $313,899 $1,409,761 Police Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Parking Expansion Project Area(s): Little Havana, Coconut Grove, Flagami Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of_ employee and resident population requires -increases in sworn and civilian personnel. Additional parking spaces must be provided at a rate of two for every three sworn officers and one for every two civilian personnel. Project Cost: $10,000 per parking garage stall 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 $100,844 $201,317 S167, 048 2000-2005 TOTAL $140, 874 $610, 083 N -4 Pol ice Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Building Expansion/Modifications Project Area(s): Edison, Allapattah Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of. employee and resident population requires increases in sworn and civilian personnel. The additional employees result in the need for additional space or modifications in the police facili- ties for offices, property bureau, classrooms and other supplementary functions. While the need for expansion is known, the exact locations cannot be determined until manpower assignments are made based on chan'9es in calls for service, crime patterns'and actual service requirements that cannot be determined at this time. Project Cost: $7.5 per square foot of expansion area 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $75,883 $165,333 $140,428 $108,816S490,460 Police Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Building Expansion/Modifications Project Area(s): Downtown, Virginia Key Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of_ employee and resident population requires increases in sworn and civilian personnel. The additional employees result in the need for additional space or modifications in the police facili- ties for offices, property bureau, classrooms and other supplementary 'functions. While the need for expansion is known, the exact locations cannot, be determined until manpower assignments are made based on. changes in calls for service, crime patterns and actual service requirements that cannot be determined at this time. Project Cost: S75 per square foot of expansion area 1988=1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2d00-2005 TOTAL $449,219 $413,3 08 $3 03,071 $333,874 $1,499,472 WIV Police Impact Fee Projects Project Oescription Sheet Project Name: Building Expansion/Modifications Project Area(s): Little Havana, Coconut Grove, Flagami Project Justification: The addition of residential and commercial space, and the increase of employee and resident population requires increases in sworn and civilian personnel. The additional employees result in the need for additional space or modifications in the police facili- ties for offices, property bureau, classrooms and other supplementary functions. While the need for expansion is known, the_ exact locations cannot be, determined until manpower assignments are made based on changes in calls for service, crime patterns and actual service requirements that cannot be determined at this time. Project Cost: $75 per square foot of expansion area 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $107,261 $214,1219 $177,678 $149,839 $648,907 -10426 RDIM LEE i Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary Planning District 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 1990-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 A. Edison/Model City $4,812 $11,178 $10,074 $9,516 $35,580 B. Downtown 246,221 307,864 292,084 253,436 19099,605 C. Coconut Grove 5,735 17,092 12,573 12,395 47,410 D. Little Havana 9,735 24,452 19,276 15,111 68,574 E. Fl agami 0 0 0 0 0 F. Allapattah 0 0 0 0 0 G. Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 All Districts $266,118 $360,586 S334,007 $290,458 $1,251,169 10 „ Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Expansion of Fire Station #12 Project Area(s): Edison Project .Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency unit per 50,000 population. Expansion is needed to accommodate a rescue unit and personnel recently added to Station #12. A►, additional rescue unit is needed to respond to increased service needs. This capital project will cost in excess of.S20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. This is a new project with most funding provided under Fire/Rescue-Bond Funds. Project Cost: Estimated expansion cost $300,000. 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $4,812 $11,178 $10, 074 $9, 516 $35, 580 4 Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Hazardous Materials/Foam Apparatus Project Area(s): Downtown i �t Project Justification: New hazardous materials/foam apparatus is needed to provide a means of handling the ever increasing threat and volume of hazardous materials being transported into and out of Miami through the Port of Miami, the Miami River, and Biscayne Bay adjacent to the Downtown Planning District. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. Presently one (1) converted foam pumper and one (1) van serve as a hazardous materials foam unit for 145,030 total population in the Downtown District. Project Cost: Estimated hazardous materials/foam apparatus cost $300,000. — 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 20004005 TOTAL $38,757 $48,460 $45,977 S39,893 $173,087 . +� 1 '4+S 46 i i' Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Renovation to Station #1 and an Emergency Medical Rescue Unit Project Area(•s): Downtown a Project Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency rescue unit per 50,000 population. EMS units are needed to maintain acceptable response times to emergency medical incidents and redupe the wear and tear on large, heavy fire aparatus used for basic life support responses. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. Present- ly, there are no funds budgeted for this project. Project Cost: A fully -equipped EMS unit: $93,000 Station #1 renovation, furniture, fixtures and equipment: $110, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995=2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $38,036 $47,558 $45,121 $39,150 $169,865 13 n Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project De9cription Sheet Project Name: Renovation to Station #4 and an Emergency Medical Rescue Unit Project Area(s): Downtown Project Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency rescue unit per 50,000 population. EMS units are needed to maintain acceptable response, times to emergency medical incidents and reduce the wear and tear, on large, heavy fire aparatus used for basic life support responses. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life -expectancy of 20 years. Present- ly, there are no funds budgeted for this project. Project Cost: A fully -equipped EMS unit: $93,000 Station #4 renovation, furniture, fixtures and equipment: $110,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $38,036 $47,558 $45,121 $39,150 $1691865 14 04W t Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Aerial Fire Apparatus and Rescue Equipment Project Area(s): Downtown Project Justification: The City of Miami has one (1) aerial apparatus per 71,301 population. Aerial apparati are needed to conduct highrise firefighting and rescue operations. This project will cost in excess of $20*000 with a lifeexpectancy of approximately 20 years. Project Cost: Fully -equipped aerial apparatus: $500,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $131,393 $164,288 $155,866 $135,243 $586,790 Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project bescription Sheet Project Name: Emergency Medical Rescue Unit and Renovation to Station #8 Project Area(s): Coconut Grove Project Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency rescue unit per 50,000 population. EMS units are needed to maintain acceptable response times to emergency medical incidents and reduce the wear and tear on large, heavy fire aparatus used for basic life support responses. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. Present- ly, there are no funds budgeted for this project. Project Cost: Fully -equipped EMS unit: $93,000 Station #8 renovation, furniture, fixtures and equipment: $110, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-:2005 TOTAL $5,350 $179 092 $12, 573 $12,'395 $47,410 1042 t Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Emergency Medical Rescue Unit and Renovation to Station #8 Project Area(s): Coconut Grove Project Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency rescue unit per 50,000 population. EMS units are needed, to maintain acceptable response times to emergency medical incidents and reduce the wear and tear on large, heavy fire aparatus used for basic life support responses. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. Present- ly, there are no funds budgeted for this project. Project Cost: Fully -equipped EMS unit: $93,000 Station #8 renovation, furniture, fixtures and equipment: $110,000 1988-1990 $5,350 1990-1995 1995-2000 20004005 TOTAL $17, 092 $12, 573 $12,395 $47,410 c Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Emergency Medical Rescue Unit and Renovation to Station #7 Project Area(s): Little Havana Project Justification: The national average is one (1) emergency rescue unit per 50,000 population. EMS units are needed to maintain acceptable response times to emergency medical incidents and reduce the wear and tear on large, heavy fire aparatus used for basic life support responses. This project will cost in excess of $20,000 with a life expectancy of 20 years. Present- ly, there are no funds budgeted for this project. Project Cost: Fully -equipped EMS unit: $93,000 Station #8 renovation, furniture, fixtures and equipment: $110, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 20ON2005 TOTAL $9,735 $24,452 $19,276 $15,111 .$68,574 17 6 PARKS, RECREATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES i Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary Planning District 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 199 0-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 A. Edison/Model City $5,853 $43,802 $49,238 $69,312 $1689205 B. Downtown 1,914,970 1,864,221 1,725, 515 1,870,381 7,375, 087 C. Coconut Grove 26,344 197,378 131,409 184,833 539,964 0. Little Havana 14,635 109,665 82,065 92,416 298,781 E. Fiagami 89781 43,908 32,825 46;207 131,721 F. Allapattah 2,925 43,908 32,825 69,312 148,970 G. Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 All Districts $1,973,50B $2,302,882 $2,053,877 S2,332,461 $8,662,728, W 18 - 104 i 0 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Edison Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Edison Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards •require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $975 $7,300 $8,206 $11, 552 $28, 033 Parks and Recreation Impact Pee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Downtown - Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $97,556 $124,511 .$145,926 - $154,899 $522,892 -20� 104 1 13 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-199 5 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $97, 556 $124, 511 $145,926 - $154,899 $522,892 � r 1 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Coconut Grove Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Coconut Grove Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-199 0 1990-199 5 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $4,390 $32,896 121,901 $30,805 $89,992 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Little Havana Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $2,439 $18,277 $13,677 - $159402 $49,795 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagami Mini -Park Enhancement Project Area: Flagami Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $4.00 per square foot, mini park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1,463 $7,318 $5,471 $7,701 $21,953 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Allapattah Mini -Park. Enhancement Project Area: Allapattah Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .1 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S4.00 ner snuarp font_ mini nark pnhanramant is t S i Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Edison Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Edison Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $2,439 $18,251 $20,516 $28,880 $70,086 1046 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $243,892 $311,279 $364,815 -_ $387,248 $193 07,234 �R:4'4?�e!FT�Ffl'r'++&MTf 'fi:�ranxun,A M+ sa,ms ' ..:.+�*�•.aa+e;v-n.�n.'mmrva Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Coconut Grove Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Coconut Grove Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Coconut Grove Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Coconut Grove Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Little Havana Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $6,098 $45,694 $34,194 - $38,507 $124,493. } 10426 � Parks and Recreation Impact Fee projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagami Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Flagami Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $3,659' $18,295 S13,677 $19,253 $54,884 29 p 1042 T EJ Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Allapattah Neighborhood Park Enhancement Project Area: Allapattah .Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require .5 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S2.00 per square foot, neighborhood park enhance- ment is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1,219 $18,295 S13,677 S28,880 $62,071 r i i 1 I, Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Oescription Sheet Project Name: Edison Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Edison Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to result i-n the following costs: i i 1 I, Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Oescription Sheet Project Name: Edison Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Edison Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to result i-n the following costs: y f t Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to result in -the following costs: 1988-199 0 1990-1995 1995-2000 2 000-2005 TOTAL $243,892 $311,280 $364,815 _$387,248 $1,307,235 32 112 and Recreation :t Fee Projects Description Sheet nity Park Enhancement and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $10,977 $82,241 $54,754 - $77,014 $224,986 FA 0 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Little Havana Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to result in the following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2 000-2005 TOTAL S6,098 $45,694 $34,194 S38,507 $1249493 0 . # Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagami Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Flagami Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of $1.00 per square foot, community park. enhancement is anticipated to result in the'following costs: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $3,659 S18,295 $13,677 $19,253 $54,884 .iC+.dfR6F'RR"sR4>�4`�+se✓± z .... .._... ._ .. .. d Jr Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: A1lapattah Community Park Enhancement Project Area: Allapattah Project Justification: Miami Park and Recreation standards require 1.0 acre per 1,000 additional residents. Project Cost: At a cost of S1.00 per square foot, community park enhancement is anticipated to resultrn the following costs: V i 'FF ti Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Bayfront Park Redevelopment - Phase II Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project involves the redesign of Bayfront Park by Isamu Noguchi working in conjunction with the City's design consultants. Funding is to be used for design, the preparation of construction documents, and con- struction administration connected with the redevelop- ment of the entire park, and construction in the north end. Anticipated funds would be for further design and construction in the south end. Project Cost: $7,400,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $445,323 $44 5,323 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Waterfront Park (Bicentennial Park and FEC Tract) Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: The plan recommends three primary concepts for the use and structure of the park: open space, waterfront and activities, along with a conceptual framework for pedestrian and vehicular circulation, public access and parking. The plan suggests two large commons (open lawn areas) extending from Biscayne Boulevard to the bayfront promenade, a major plaza connecting to Biscayne Boulevard and a waterfront walkway bordering the deep water slip. A two percent slope in the park allows for the walkway edges of the slip to be raised. and consequently -creates the opportunity to step down with terraces to the water level. A pedestrian bridge would cross the- slip resulting in a unique landmark structure, a major promenade at the waters' edge' ;and four pavillions housing special attractions (science museum, omni-max theatre, etc.). Lining the south edge of the slip could_ be temporary structures sheltering'a variety of shows, exhibits and markets. The northern quadrant of the park would be reserved for field games, small concerts, playgroundsand a visitor/tourist information center. Project Cost: $23,958,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1,441,764 $1,441,764 _ 38 - 0 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Brickell Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Brickell Park is located at the entrance of Brickell Avenue in close proximity to the downtown core. The park is needed to serve the high population of employ- ees and the increasing population..of teurisr: in -the area. The project involves upgrading' of the park through the construction of the Baywalk connecting the Brickell Waterfront Developments and allowing for the park to be the link to the bay, a special feature at the entrance of the park at Brickell Avenue, which will become a gateway to the park as well as for the Brickell area, special park furniture - decorative lighting and walkways. These improvements will serve to maximize the use of the park and serve the employee and visitor population. Project Cost: $2, 047, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $369, 558 $369; 558 i Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Brickell Promenade Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project involves land acquisition and development of a new urban park in the area of SW loth Street and South Miami Avenue. This park is needed to serve the rapidly increasing office worker densities ii the - Brickell area and to be the principal activity space of the loth Street Brickell Promenade - a pedestri- an/transit mall. It will also serve to attract future. residential and office redevelopment in the transit station area. Project Cost: $3, 000, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $541,609 - $5419609 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Pace Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: The project involves the construction of a Baywalk along the Park's water frontage. The Baywalk is an internal element of the Bay/Riverwalk system being implemented throughout the downtown area. It will ensure an attractive peaestrian link to our waterfront while maximizing park use. Project Cost: $700, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995=2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $42,125 $42,125, Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Southside Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This, project involves- upgrading Southside Park to provide a range of active/passive activities for the high density urban population projected for the neighborhood around the Brickell Transit Station Suggested improvements include a vita course; tennis and raquetball courts',night lighting, a day, care center and a plaza entrance adjacent to the transit station. Southside Park is the only active recreation neighborhood park for the area extending from Biscayne Bay west to 1-95 and from SW 8th Street south to 5th Road. . These improvements will serve to draw private residential development in the area which through taxes, improves the financial condition of the City. Project Cost: $700,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $42,125 $42,125 11 11 Project Name: Lummus Park Project Area: Downtown Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Justification: This project involves a reorganization and redesign of Lummus Park to become a neighborhood center and to serve the growing employee population of government center. Given the historic significance of the park, the plan calls for facilities, workrooms and allows for open areas for outdoor education activities and special events. Other improvements for the park include gateway features adjacent to the river and to government center, a cafe/restaurant and additional seating areas. These improvements will act as a gateway to -promote revitalization and urban growth in the neighborhood while maximizing the use of the park as the link to the neighborhood. Project Cost: $1, 000, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $60,179 $60,179 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Biscayne Boulevard Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Biscayne Boulevard is downtown Miami's front doorstep, a major thoroughfare and a barrier between the City and the Bayfront Park system. A major redesign of the boulevard is needed to create a world class image for the City and to provide attractive pedestrian linkages to Bayfront. Phase I includes sidewalk expansion, pedestrian crosswalks, decorative paving; decorative lighting, street furniture and landscaping through the 'boulevard from Miami River to NE 18th Street. Phase II of the project calls for a major widening of the boulevard between NE 5th Street and I-395 to include a center median with parking and landscaping and gateway features adjacent to the Miami River seaport entrance and I-395. Project Cost: $6,000,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $361,073 $361,073 .. 44 . Parks and Recreation Impact Pee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Biscayne Boulevard Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Biscayne Boulevard is downtown Miami's front doorstep, a major thoroughfare and a barrier- between the City and the Bayfront Park system. A major redesign of the boulevard is needed to create a world class image for the City and to provide attractive pedestrian linkages to Bayfront. Phase I includes sidewalk expansion, pedestrian crosswalks, decorative paving, decorative lighting, street furniture and landscaping through the boulevard from Miami River to NE 18th Street. Phase II of the project calls for a major widening of the boulevard between NE 5th Street and I-39 5 to include a center median with parking and landscaping and gateway features adjacent to the Miami River seaport entrance and I-395. Project Cost: $6, 000, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL. $361,073 $361,073 0 44 e 0 40' Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Biscayne Boulevard Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Biscayne Boulevard is downtown Miami's front doorstep, a major thoroughfare and a barrier between the City and the Bayfront Park system. A major redesign of the boulevard is needed to create aworld class image for the City and to provide attractive pedestrian linkages to Bayfront. Phase I includes sidewalk expansion, pedestrian crosswalks, decorative paving; decorative lighting, street furniture and landscaping through the 'boulevard from Miami River to NE 18th Street. Phase II of the project calls for a major widening of the boulevard between NE 5th Street and I-395 to include a center median with parking and landscaping and gateway features adjacent to the Miami River seaport entrance and I-395. Project Cost: $6,000,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 $3619073 2000-2005 TOTAL $361, 073 N Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagler Street Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Flagler Street is the downtown east -west urban highway functioning as a typical "mainstreet". This project involves the, implementation of planning and urban design guidelines that will insure Flagler Street's improvement in this physical; economic and social environs and still maintain its unique and competitive retail edge. Improvements call for: (1) rerouting of taxi and bus operations, service traffic and automobile traffic which will alleviate existing congestion; (2) improving pedestrian zones and activities such as redesigning special activity areas, rede- signing and widening_ sidewalks, redeveloping architectural and landscape guidelines to create a unique streetscape. Project Cost: $7,500,000 1988-1990 199 0-199 5 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $451,341 $451,341 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project !lame: Ri verwal ks Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Miami's waterfront, both public and private, lack continuity and access. This project calls for the development of a bay/ ri verwa I k along the City's waterfront linking major public attractions and private developments. This linkage will encourage growth and revitalization of our waterfront properties by attracting mixed commercial and residential devel- opment to Miami's_ water's edge Project Cost: $200,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $12, 036 $12, 036 46 142 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: S.E. 12th Street Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project calls for the development of a new waterfront urban park in the area of Brickell through the use of the public right-of-way. The S.E. 12th Street park will become the gateway to the Brickell waterfront and the catalyst for future' retail development in this area. It will include a transient marina, fishing- pier, cafe/restaurant and retail space. The park is needed to serve the high density employee population in the area. Project Cost: $125,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 $22,567 - 47 2000-2005 TOTAL $22, 567 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: S.E. 12th Street Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project calls for the development of a new waterfront urban park in the area of 9rickell through the use of the public right-of-way. The S.E. 12th Street park will become the gateway to the Brickell waterfront and the catalyst for future retail development in this area. It will include a transient marina, fishing pier, cafe/restaurant and retail space. The park is needed to serve the high density employee population in the area. Project Cost: $125,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $22, 567 $22, 567 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: S.E. 12th Street Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project calls for the development of a new waterfront urban park in the area of Brickell through the use of the public right-of-way. The S.E. 12th Street park will become the gateway to the Brickell waterfront and the catalyst for 'future' retail development in this area. It will include a transient marina, fishing pier, cafe/restaurant and retail space. The park is needed to serve the high density employee population in the area. Project Cost: $125, 000 - 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2 000 2000-2005 $22, 567 TOTAL $22, 567 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Brickell Avenue Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: Brickell Avenue is the center of Miami's major corpo- rations, and financing institutions. A redesign of Brickell Avenue is needed to make this avenue one of the great avenues of Miami. The project calls for improvements to the public right-of-way, including the center median with landscaping, gateway features at the Brickell Avenue Bridge and SW 15th Road, decora- tive paving, decorative lighting and street furniture. These improvements are needed to create an attractive pedestrian linkage and insure the positive development and growth of the Brickell area. Project Cost: $1, 000, 000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 -2000-2005 TOTAL. $180, 536 $180, 536 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: N.E. 4th Street Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project calls for right-of-way improvements on N.E. 4th Street between Second Avenue and Biscayne Boulevard. These improvements are needed to complete the east -west linkage from the cortmuniLf college to the Bayfront. Project Cost: $275,000 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $16,549, $16,549 49 10426 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: N.E. 14th Street Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: The project calls for the design of N.E. 14th Street at the Omni area which will create an east -west connection to the bayfront. The plan includes improvements and design of the public• right-of-way with decorative paving, decorative lighting, street - furniture and landscaping throughout. The project will provide the link needed to the existing neighborhood and _encourage future development in the area. Project Cost: S910, 000 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Riverbanks Park Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: This project involves acquisition and development of Riverfront property. The plan calls for the design of a cafe/restaurant, a transient marina, plazas and seating areas. 'These improvements wilt include decorative paving, decorative lighting, street furni- ture and landscaping. The design of Riverbank Plaza will attract commercial development in the neighbor- hood, revitalize -the ri verfront as well as become the principal node of this riverfront neighborhood. Project Cost: $480, 000 1988-1990 1990-199*5 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $86, 657 $86,657 .�. STREETS if l 1 Streets Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary Planning District 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 1990-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 A. Edison/Model City $67,586 $185,587 $174,386 $181,054 $60B,613 B. Downtown 1,980,328 2,122,732 2,167,184 2,327,506 8,597,750 C. Coconut Grove 178,448 627,234 463,461 593,145 1,8621288 0. Little Havana 118,234 341,362 _268,548 231,849 959,993 E. Flagami 66,855 202,710 151,724 182,306 603;595 F. Al l apattah 135,563 349,856 289,042 279,101 1, 053, 562 G. Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0' All Districts $2,547,014 $3,829,481 $3,514,345 $31794,961 $13,685,801 a Streets Impact Fee Projects Project 0escription Sheet Project Name: Edison Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Edison Project Justification: The Edison street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1968 and 2005 are estimated to cost S6O8,613. The average life expectancy of the street rebti 1 rli improvements, with adequate maintenance including, periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Edison Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-199 0 1990-1995 $67, 586 $185, 587 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $174,386 $181, 054 $608,613 0 Streets Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Edison Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Edison Project Justification: The Edison street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $608,613. The average life expectancy of the ctroot rabuilding i.mpro ements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These _ improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Edison Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $679586 $185, 587 $174,386 $181, 054 S608,613 n r] F1 Streets Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: The Downtown- street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $8,597,750. The average fife expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Downtown Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: ` 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1,980,328 $2,122,732 $2,167,184 $2,3279506 $8,5979750 Streets Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Coconut Grove Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Coconut Grove Project Justification: The Coconut Grove street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $1,862,288. The average life expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements', with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the ,Coconut Grove Planning District that will serve .traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $178,448 $627,234 $463,461 S593,145 $1,862,288 Streets Impact Pee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Little Havana Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: The Little Havana street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $959,993 The average life expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the .Little Havana Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for, street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. _ Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL I Streets Impact Pee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Little Havana Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: The Little Havana street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $959, 993 The average 1 i.fe expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees -will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Little Havana Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-199 0 199 0-199 5 $118,234 $341,362 199 5-2000 2000-2005 $268,548 $231,849 It 56 , TOTAL $959, 993 IL0424* 1 , woo "A1 AL Streets Impact Fee projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagami Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Flagami Project Justification: The Flagami street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost S603, 595. The average life expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Flagami Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 $66,855 $202,710 $151,724 r 57 W 2000-2005 TOTAL $182,306 $603, 595 1.00r6 b Alk Streets Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Allapattah Street Rebuilding Improvements Project Area: Allapattah Project Justification: The Allapattah street rebuilding improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $1,053,562. The average life expectancy of the street rebuilding improvements, with adequate maintenance including periodic pavement resurfacing, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the rebuilding of streets within the Allapattah Planning District that will serve traffic generated by new development. The impact fees will provide funding for street rebuilding that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1359563 $349,856 S289, 042 $279,101 $1, 053, 562 d Storm Sewers Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary Planning District 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 1990-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 -A. Edison/Model City S33,792 $92,793 $87,192 $90,526 $304,303 B. Downtown 990,163 1,061,365 1,083,591 1,163,752 4,298,871 C. Coconut Grove 89,223 313,616 231,730 296,572 931,141 D. Little Havana 59,116 170,680 134,273 115,924 479,993 E. Flagami 33,427 101,354 75,861 91,152 301,794 F. Allapattah 67,781 174,927 144,520 139,550 526,778 G. Virginia Key 0 0 0 0 0 All Districts $1,273, 502 $1,914,735 $1,757,167 $1,897,476 $6,842,880 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Edison Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Edison Project Justification: The Edison storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost S304,303. The average life expectancy of the storm sewer improvements, with adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of •storm sewers in the streets within the Edison Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers' that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $33,792 $922793 $87,192 $90,526 $3 04,303 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Downtown Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Downtown Project Justification: The Downtown storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2605 are estimated to cost S4,298,871. The average life expectancy of the st;.r n. sewer -Improvements, with adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of storm sewers in the streets within the Downtown Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-199 0 $990,163 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $1, 061,365 $1, 083, 591 $1,163, 752 $4,298,871 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project description Sheet Project Name: Coconut Grove Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Coconut Grove Project Justification: The Coconut Grove storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $931,141. The. average life expectancy of the storm Sewer irjir o- en- ei- 6s, wi th adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of. Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of storm sewers in the 'streets within the Coconut Grove Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 199 0-199 5 $89,223 $313,616 199 5-2 000 $231,730 2000-2005 $296, 572 TOTAL $931,141 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project !Jame: Little Havana Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Little Havana Project Justification: The Little Havana storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $479,993. The average life expectancy of the sLurm sewer improvements, with adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of storm sewers in the streets within the. Little Havana Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: - 1988-1990 1990-1995 199 5-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $59,116 $170,680 $134,273 $115,924 $479,993 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Flagami Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Flagami Project Justification: The Flagami storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost $301.794. The Average life expectancy of the storm sewer improvements, with adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. - These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City 'of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of storm sewers in the streets within the Flagami Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2005. Project Cost: 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $33,427 $101,354 S75,861 S91,152 5301,794 Storm Sewers Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Allapattah Storm Sewer Improvements Project Area: Allapattah Project Justification: The Allapattah storm sewer improvements that will be constructed with impact fees between 1988 and 2005 are estimated to cost S526,778. ' The average , life expectancy of the storm sewer improvements, with adequate maintenance, is approximately 60 years. These improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Miami engineering specifications and standards. Impact fees will fund the construction of storm sewers in the streets within the Allapattah Planning District that will serve new development. The impact fees will provide funding for storm sewers that would not otherwise occur between 1988 and 2006. Project Cost: 1988-1990 $67,781 199 0-1995 $174,927 1995-2000 $144,520 2000-2005 $139,550 TOTAL $526,778 Planning District A. Edison/Model City B. Downtown C. Coconut Grove D. Little Havana E. Flagami F. Allapattah G. Virginia Key All Districts Solid Waste Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 1990-95 95-2000 2000-05 1988-2005 $25,771 $63,306 $57,310 S54,607 $200,994 556,624 538,947 495,808 537,759 $2,129,138 36,866 87, 02 5 - _ 70,164 83,035 277,090 63,762 1659951 131,685 107,886 469,284 12,343 32,778 24,544 27,670 97,335 47,843 113,688 94,854 81,470 337,855 7,165 29,854 0 0 37,019 $750,374 $1,031,549 $874,365 $892,427 $3,548,715 . 6{ . Solid Waste Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Purchase of Additional Garbage Trucks Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: Miami Solid Waste Departmient standards suggest that the carrying capacity of a typical garbage truck is approximately 12 tons per load and 2 loads per day. Project Cost: $100,000 per garbage truck 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $223,342 $319,627 $279,256 $291,841 $1,114,066 Solid Waste Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Purchase of Additional Trash Trucks Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: Miami Solid Waste Department standards suggest that the carrying capacity of a typical trash truck is approximately 7 tons per load and 3 loads per day. Solid Waste Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Purchase of Additional Self -Contained Roll On/Roll Offs Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: Miami Solid Waste Department standards suggest that the carrying capacity of a typical roil on/roll off is 1 roll on/roll off per 2 trash or garbage trucks (for non-residential pickups only). Project Cost: $10,000 per roll on/roll off 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 $15,998 $19,639 $15,090 $14,128 69 L1 Solid Waste Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Purchase of Additional Tractors with Hoists Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: Miami Solid Waste Department standards suggest that the carrying capacity of a typical tractor with hoist is 1 tractor per 2 trash or garbage trucks ( for non- residential pickups only). Project Cost: S120,000 per tractor and hoist 1988-1990 $191,978 1990-1995 $235, 678 1995-2000 $181,085 2000-2005 $169, 543 TOTAL $778,284 Solid Waste Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Purchase of Additional Cranes Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: Miami Solid Waste Department standards suggest that 1 crane is required for every 2 trash trucks. Project Cost: $130,000 per crane 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $165,911 $237,436 S2079'447 $216;797 $827,591 Planning District A. Edison/Model City B. Downtown C. Coconut Grove D. Little Havana E. Flagami F. Allapattah G. Virginia Key All Districts General Services Administration Impact Fee Capital Projects Cost Schedule Summary 2-Year Period 5-Year Periods 17-Year Period 1988-90 i99C-95 9 -2000 2000-U5 1988-2 005. $21,343 $48,652 S42,815 $37,922 $150,732 402,639 366,881 313,527 342,634 1,425,681 28,285 49,732 43,591 47,891 169,499 529786 128, 2 02 102,366 80, 634 363, 988 9456 22,467 16,829 17,793 66,545 40,641 91,834 77,109 60,952 270,536 6,142. 25,595 0 0 31,737 $561,292 $733,363 $596,237 $587,826 $2,478 718 w 72 w : 10426 26 lob General Services Administration Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Construction of Heavy Equipment Parking Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: General Service Administration standards suggest 420 square feet of parking area for each piece of heavy equipment, at a cost of approximately S62.50 per square foot of parking area. Project Cost: $62.50 per square foot of parking area 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 $243,118 $330,841 $278,192 $282,11 0 3 General Services Administration Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Construction of Light Equipment Parking Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: General Service Administration standards suggest 160 square feet of parking area for each police vehicle at a cost of approximately $62.50 per square foot of parking area. Project Cost: $62.50 per square foot of parking area 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 20004 005 TOTAL $259,429 $325;237 $254,840 $243, 088 $1, 082, 594 74 R 102 i General Services Administration Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Construction of Employee Parking Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: 'General Service Administration standards suggest 160 square feet of parking area for every two equipment mechanics at a cost of approximately $62.50 per square foot of parking area. Project Cost: $62.50 per square foot of parking area 1988-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 TOTAL $49301 $5,557 $49475 $4,375 $18,70a 75 10 2b For General Services Administration Impact Fee Projects Project Description Sheet Project Name: Construction of Heavy Equipment Work Bay Project Area(s): Citywide Project Justification: General Service Administration standards suggest 750 square feet of working bay space for each additional heavy equipment mechanic at a cost of approximately $140 per square foot of working bay area. Project,Cost: $140 per square foot of working bay area 1988-1990 $32,412 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005 $44,109 $37,090 $37,611 TOTAL $151,222 14, MIAMI REVIEW Pkjhhshrri D,40N, e: cepl 5atklfd y, SuIIJ,1y and t.e;7nr fiohdays Mlamr, Dade County. Florida. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF DADE: Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Octelma V. Ferbeyre, who on oath says that she is the Supervisor of Legal Advertising of the Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) newspaper, published at Miami in Dade County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a Legal Advertisement of Notice In the matter of CITY OF MIAMI ORDINANCE NO. 10426 in the . , . X .. X . , X..... ...... . .. Court, was published in said newspaper In the Issues of May 6, 1988 Affiant further says that the said Miami Review Is a newspaper published at Miami in said Dade County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Dade County, Florida, each day (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Miami in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporatio iscount, rebate, commission or refund for the p:I,/dp, f se ring this advertisement for pu r lion in theX1111 saspape %/ i Swor% �&d subscribed before me this • A.D. 19 6h..; 88 t ' : Cheryl H. Marmer NgfSr .POfic, State of Florida at Large 4 ISE�1"•.""CC',,"• My CofSrryr) Ali wr 4tii 12, 1992. MR 114 CITY Of! MIAMI bAbIl COUNtV, t:L6011bA LEGAL NOTICE All interested persons will take notice that on the 28th day of April. 1988, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, adopted the following titled ordinances' ORDINANCE NO. 10426 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO 10273 AND SUB- STITUTING THEREFORE A NEW CHAPTER 54.6 IMPOSING AN "IMPACT FEE" ON ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS HEREIN DETERMINED IN ORDER TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL iMPROVSMENTS, THE DEMAND FOR WHICH IS CREATED BY SUCH DEVELOPMENT, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AND INTENT: PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY THEREFORE; PROVIDING DEFI- NITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS: PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SUBAREAS; PROVIDING FOR DETERMINA- ,ION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR E5rABLI$HMENT OF AN IMPACT FEE•RELATEO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS; PROVIDING FOR CALCULA- TION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR BONDING IMPACT FEE - RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS: AND PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN APPELLATE BOAR') AND APPELLATE PROCEDURES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, ORDINANCE NO. 10421 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES AS ORIGINALL, IMPOSED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO, 10273, ADOPTED MAY 28, 1987, TO LAST UNTIL MAY 28. 1988. ORDINANCE NO. 10428 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY REMOVING THE "PEDESTRIAN STREET DESIGNATION" FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHTOFWAY IN THE SPI 14 ZONING DISTRICT FOR THOSE PORTIONS OF SOUTHWEST 12TH AND SOUTHWEST 17TH AVENUES BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 8TH AND SOUTHWEST 9TH STREETS, RETAINING SAID DES- IGNATION FOR THAT PORTION OF RIGHTOFWAY ON PROPERTIES FOR HEREIN AFFECTED AREAS FACING SOUTH- WEST 8TH STREET; BY RETAINING THE SPI.14 ZONING DES. IGNATION; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NOS. 38 AND 39 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS.) ORDINANCE NO.10429 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, ENTITLED "ZONING AND PLANNING," OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING ARTICLE Vill ENTITLED "LATIN QUARTER REVIEW BOARD," SECTIONS 62.76 THROUGH 62.82, BY CLARIFYING DEFINITION OF CLASS "C" PERMIT; MODIFYING THE BOARD'S PURPOSE;; MODIFYING BOARD ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS; CLARIFYING BOARD FUNC- TIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES; MODIFYING BOARD PROCEDURES; CLARIFYING DUTIES OF LATIN QUARTER OFFICER; AND MODIFYING APPEAL PROCEDURES. ORDINANCE NO.10430 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2, DIVISION 8, SECTION 2.135, PARAGRAPH 8, TO INCORPORATE THE "LATIN QUARTER DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS" BY REFERENCE; BY RATIFYING URBANPLAZAS AND THE LATIN QUARTER DISTRICT AS AREAS SUBJECT TO REVIEW UNDER SAID GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS; AND UPDATING DEPART- MENTAL NAMES: ORDINANCE NO.10431 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. BY AMENDING ARTICLE 15, SECTION 15140, ENTITLED "SPI.14, 14.1, 14.2; LATIN QUARTER COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AND RELATED SECTIONS 15141/15145 BY EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF USES ALLOWED IN COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; MODIFYING THE SUBMISSION AND REVIEW PROCESS; CLARI- FYING "PEDESTRIAN STREETS' ALLOWING BARS, SALOONS, AND TAVERNS AS ACCESSORY USES; EXPANDING OUTDOOR USES; INCREASING THE NUMBER OF INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT; AND AMENDING THE LANGUAGE FOR PEDESTRIAN OPEN SPACE AND SIGN REQUIREMENTS. ORDINANCE NO.10432 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 62, ZONING AND PLANNING, ARTICLE 11, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING; SECTIONS 62.15 THROUGH 62.23 AND SECTIONS 62.55 PERTAINING TO: PURPOSE AND INTENT, ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY AND POLICY BOARDS GENERALLY, AOMINIS. TRATION GENERALLY, EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, PREPARATION OF THE COMPRE- HENSIVE PLAN, TYPES OF PLAN AMENDMENTS, APPLICA- TIONS FOR PLAN AMENDMENT, r PROCEDURES FOR, REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PLAN AMENDMENTS BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ,PLAN AND'PL.AN PREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADOPTION OF AN EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT, PROVIDING FOR LEGAL STATUS AND APPLICABILITY OF THE PLAN AFTER ADOPTION AND PROVIDING FOR APPROPRIATIONS, FEE$ AND OTHER EXPENSES; PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL LEGAL NOTICE AND OTHER PRO0EDUR4 REQUIREMENT$; Bald ordlnenoee moy t* InopooteA ay the puhllc fit the iolflo of the Olty Clans, Pan Amp"can Drlyo, Mlomi, F1940o, MonSoy 4hrouph F11OaY, efsoiupinp hpllQeyf, between the houre of $�9 A.M. r1inQ 6 G A,M. MATTY HIRAI t414MI Lcw41 ftl$1 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA ><134M • General Services Administration Impact Fee Projects Project Oescription Sheet Project Name: Construction of Light Equipment Work Bay