HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchool Board Review AnalysisPlanning and Zoning Department
City of Miami
444 SW Second Aveinue, 3"' Floor
Miami, Florida 33130
Miami -Dade County School Board
Agustin J Barrera, chair
Perla Tabares Hantman, Vice Chair
Ranier Diaz de la Portilia
Eve)yn Langlieb Greer
Dr, Wilbert "Tee,"Holloway
Dr. Madin Karp
Ana Rivas Logan
Dr. Marta P6rez
Dr. Solomon C. Stinson
..........
Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Shoutd you have any qons, please contact me at
(305) 995-:7287,
Sincerely,
Enclosure
CC" Ms. Ana, Rijo-Conde, A
Mr. Fernando Albuerne
Mr. Michael A. Levine
Mr. Ivan M, Rodriguez, R,A.
Facilities Planning
Ana Rijo-Conde, AICP, Planning Officer - 1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 525 - Miami, Florida 33132
305-995-7285 - FAX 305-9,95-4760 - arifo@dadeschools.net
**REVISED**
Ju,ly 8, 2008
APPLICATION:
La Quinta y Otho
REQUEST:
Change Land Use from R-3 "Medium Density Multifamily
Residential" (65 DU/acre) and C-1 "Restricted Commercial" — Little
Havana Target Area: (200 DU/acre)
ACRES:
1.88 net acres
LOCATION:
504 SW 8 Street, Miami
MSAIMULTIPLIER:
5.2 /.18 Multifamily
NUMBER OF
UNITS :
186 multifarnfly
ESTIMATED STUDENT
POPULATION:
33*
ELEMENTARY:
16
MIDDLE:
7
SENIOR HIGH:
10
SCHOOLS SERVING AREA OF APPLICATION'
ELEMENTARY'-
Riverside Elementary ---11 0 SW 2 Street
Frederick Douglass Elementary — 314 NW 12 Street
MIDDLE:
Jose de Diego Middle — 31 ONW 5 Avenue
SENIOR HIGH:
Booker T. Washington Senior High — 1200 NW 6 Avenue
All schools are located in Regional Center iV,
*Based on Census 2000 information provided by Miami -Dade County Department of Planning
and Zoning.
followingThe Population a+r facility capacitypa by Office of
Information Technology, as of October 2007:
*Studentpopulation proposed ww raw
"Estimated number of students (cumulative) w wn zoning/land use log(2001-present)w
assuming alil approved developments e built: also assumes none of - prior
studentsr -w population.
Notes:
1) Figures above reflect the impact of the class size amendment.
Pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, only Riverside Elementary meets the review
threshold.
L41;[A0A1R7LaP1T#.R1&W-Ar# =01111176"o Sri 11.1WIFTIKErm
w es qM d • ..I. w `: w s: • r w w "". w, /' w « w w' w� - w w
CAPITAL COSTS: Based on the State's July 2008 student station cost factors`", capital oasts for
the estimated additional students to be generated by the proposed development are,
ELEMENTARY 8 aN $19,188 = 153,504
MIDDLE Does not meet threshold
SENIOR HIGH Cues not meet threshold
Total Potential Capital Cost $153,504
D wr w' w w A w -w • w w: 'mow- w w w w, w w
ww^ w N Nr� w- • w w
% UTILIZATION
% UTILIZATION
NUMBER of
FISH DESIGN
FISH DESIGN
FISH DESIGN
PORTABLE
CAPACrr"N'
STUDENT
CAPACITY
CAPACITY
STUDENT
PERMANENT AND
CUMULATIVE
POPULATION
PERMANENT
PERMANENT
STATIONS
RELCOATASLE
STUDENTS"
Riverside
984
131%
1311%
Elementary
*
719
�
1,960
994
1 %
133%,
Frederick
523
68%
55%
Douglas
772
172
1,437
Elementary
531 a
59°
56%
Jose de Diego
788
76%
'7611/6
I'iddn
�
1,
0
;x,475
795
75
76%
Booker T
1,3,45
59%
59%
Washin t n1
2,270
0
4,342.
Senior
,355
%
89 f
80°!�
*Studentpopulation proposed ww raw
"Estimated number of students (cumulative) w wn zoning/land use log(2001-present)w
assuming alil approved developments e built: also assumes none of - prior
studentsr -w population.
Notes:
1) Figures above reflect the impact of the class size amendment.
Pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, only Riverside Elementary meets the review
threshold.
L41;[A0A1R7LaP1T#.R1&W-Ar# =01111176"o Sri 11.1WIFTIKErm
w es qM d • ..I. w `: w s: • r w w "". w, /' w « w w' w� - w w
CAPITAL COSTS: Based on the State's July 2008 student station cost factors`", capital oasts for
the estimated additional students to be generated by the proposed development are,
ELEMENTARY 8 aN $19,188 = 153,504
MIDDLE Does not meet threshold
SENIOR HIGH Cues not meet threshold
Total Potential Capital Cost $153,504
D wr w' w w A w -w • w w: 'mow- w w w w, w w
ww^ w N Nr� w- • w w