Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEnvironmental Assessment Report• Sawyer's Walk Major Use Special Permit Environmental Impact Assessment • Prepared for Crosswinds Communities, Inc. by: EAS Engineering, Inc. 55 Almeria Avenue Coral Gables, Florida 33134 September 6, 2007 • • • • INTRODUCTION EAS Engineering, Inc. has been engaged by Crosswinds to perform an environmental impact assessment for the proposed Overtown Urban Village project (the Project). The Project is a mixed - use community project which will be developed, operated and managed by Crosswinds Communities, Inc. (CCI), This assessment is being prepared in support of CCI's Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) application, as required by the City of Miami. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION The Overtown Urban Village project is located east of 1-95, between NW IS` Court and NW 3td Avenue, and between NW 6th Street and NW 8 h Street (Figure 1). The project consists of four parcels, 45N, 56N. 55N and 46N, The two eastern parcels are currently used as paved, overflow parking lots for the Miami Arena. The southwestern parcel is currently vacant, and the northwestern parcel is occupied by the Poinciana Village condominium. Surrounding land uses are primarily residential and commercial. Several documents listed as references provide background infoi illation pertinent to this environmental impact assessment. Copies of those documents are attached. The Project will create approximately 1,050 residential units and 75,000 square feet of commercial space on currently vacant land. The proposed residential units will include a mixture of housing types, including live/work town homes and mid -rise structures. The development will include a mix of studio, one and two bedroom units and will have an array of amenities, including structured parking, swimming pools and recreational areas. The Project has been designed to revitalize, rejuvenate and bring prosperity to a blighted and neglected area of the City of Miami. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. Wetlands There are no wetlands on the subject property. The soils in the project vicinity (Figure 2) are classified as Urban Land by the USDA Dade County Soil Survey, which is land that is covered by concrete and buildings. The US Fish & Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory (Figure 3) classifies the project vicinity as uplands. 2. Air and Water Although somewhat dated, the most thorough assessment of air and water quality impacts can be found in the responses to Questions 4 (Air) and 5 (Water Quality/Drainage) in the Application for Development Approval (ADA) for the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Project DRI'. Air In response to Question 4 of the ADA, Miami -Dade County air quality data for 1983, 1984 and 1985 were compared for: • • • Particulate Matter Lead Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Dioxide Ozone Carbon Monoxide Particulate Matter Of the 13 stations for which data were presented, only 4 showed particulate concentrations greater than the standard, all of them in 1985. Two (Stations 10 and 32) exceeded the 24 hour standard, and two (Stations 34 and 38) exceeded the annual mean standard. The high value at Station 32 was attributed to a muck fire: that at Station 34 was attributed to local construction activities. The causes for the high values at Stations 10 and 38 (the only station within the City of Miami) could not be explained. It was noted, however, that the 1985 data were incomplete (only 9 months of data), so the annual mean values could be reduced with lower concentrations in the last three months of the year. Lead Lead concentrations were presented for 14 stations (the same 13 stations presented for particulate matter, plus Station 44). There were no exceedances of the lead standard during this three year period (1985-1988), and the general trend was one of decreasing concentration over time, which was attributed to the phasing out of leaded gasoline. Sulfur Dioxide Only one sulfur dioxide station was available. No exceedances were reported and the general trend was downward during this same time period. Nitrogen Dioxide Only two stations were presented for nitrogen dioxide. No exceedances were reported and the general trend was downward during this same time period. Improved automobile emissions controls were suggested as a causative factor. Ozone Ozone data were presented for five stations. Two of them (Station 36A on Virginia Key and Station 50 in South Miami -Dade) showed exceedances of the 0.12 ppm standard in 1985. It was noted that EPA declared Miami -Dade County to be a non -attainment area for ozone in 1979, but subsequent transportation improvements allowed the county to maintain the standard through 1984. At the time the ADA was written, Miami -Dade County DERM was waiting until the end of 1986 to determine the county's compliance status. • • As of June. 2005, Miami -Dade County has been designated a maintenance area for ozone standards under the criteria provided in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 2. Miami - Dade County otherwise is in compliance with .National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide data were presented for four stations. Two of them (the Little Havana Station #41 and the Flagler Street Station #42) recorded violations ofthe eight hour standard for all three years. The number of violations showed a downward trend at these stations (14 in 1983, 4 in 1984 and 3 in 1985), and since 1986 neither site had recorded another violation. Because these declines were attributed to the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, it was predicted that carbon monoxide concentrations would continue to decline in the downtown area over the next 10-15 years. It also was pointed out that the county's air quality monitoring network is not adequate for monitoring neighborhood or microscale trends, and that additional microscale monitoring sites are needed to adequately characterize carbon monoxide levels in the City of Miami. Three additional monitoring sites were recommended: one at Brickell, one at Omni and one at Southeast Overtown/Park West. According to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency's 2007 Air Quality Report, Miami - Dade County is well below the EPA Air Quality Standards for all measured parameters 4. When the U.S. EPA re -designated Miami -Dade County to attainment status in 1995, the County was required to demonstrate conformity to the maintenance plan through its Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan. The 2004 Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 5 demonstrated conformity with the State Implementation Plan. Surface Water Most of the storm water runoff from the study area flows east and is discharged via outfalls into Biscayne Bay', while some also flows into the Miami River. Biscayne Bay, in general, is characterized by good water quality, however, there are some areas, such as the mouth of the Miami River, that have poor water quality. Miami -Dade County and the City of Miami have been very active in seeking solutions to this problem, including dredging of polluted sediment from the Miami River, retrofitting storm water drainage basins and outfalls, eliminating sewage contamination of storm water drainage systems, enforcing environmental standards, establishing best management practices for waterfront land uses, removing abandoned vessels and shoreline stabilization. Any new development is required to retain the first inch of stotin water runoff on -site. This first inch carries 90% - 100% of the pollutant load. Accordingly, any new development will be an improvement over the existing condition with regard to water quality. Ground Water A Phase 'Environmental Site Assessment for the Overtown Project =, conducted by Ambro, • Inc. on August 23. 2007. identified a number of environmental concerns based on the historical use of the subject property and adjacent properties. Seventy-five gas stations and/or cleaning facilities were identified within 1/4 mile radius, some of which were located on the subject property. Their conclusion was that there was a "moderate" risk to the soil and groundwater from dry cleaning solvents and petroleum constituents discharged by these facilities and additional assessment was recommended, particularly for parcels 45 and 55. A Limited Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment was conducted in 2005 in the eastern half of Tract 55 by All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc. Four monitoring wells were installed around a previously existing monitoring well to delineate the contamination plume from the earlier installed well. Only one of the new wells was contaminated, and its concentrations were higher than the older well. The contaminants included: TRPH Acenaphthene Benzo(a) Anthranee Benzo(b)Flurenthene Fluorene Napththalene Phenanthrene All State Engineering recommended further assessment, including soil borings and one additional monitoring well. 3. Flora and Fauna Impacts to flora and fauna were addressed in the response to Question 8 (Vegetation and Wildlife) in the Application for Development Approval for the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Project DRI. Due to the site's highly urbanized character, there is no natural vegetation remaining, nor is any listed wildlife utilizing the site. Vegetation is limited to landscape species, and wildlife is limited to species that have adapted to urban environments. 4. Cumulative and Long -Term Impacts on the Natural Environment Considering the lack of wetlands, native vegetation and wildlife on the subject property, the Project will not have any adverse cumulative or long-term environmental impacts. 5. Irreversible Commitments of Natural Resources Considering the lack of natural resources on the subject property, there will not be any irreversible commitment of natural resources associated with this Project. \\Server20001correspondanceiWp200712007-0612007-06.00 i .wpd • • 4 5 References 1987. Application for Development Approval. Southeast OvertownfPark West Community Redevelopment Project DRI. City of Miami. 2007. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for: Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida. Ambro, Inc. 2005. Limited Environmental Site Assessment, Phase II, for the Over Town Project. All State Engineering & Testing Consultants. Inc. 2007. County Air Quality Report - Criteria Air Pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report. Gannett Fleming. \\Server2008\carrespondancelw-p20071200 7-0612007-06.001. wpd • • • PHASE -I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT For: OVERTOVVN PROJET, CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA Folio: 01-0104-050-1010, Folio: 01-0105-060-1010, Folio: 01-0105-050-1120, Folio: 01-0104-060-1010, Folio: 0131360781250, Folio: 0131360781350, Folio: 0131360780750, Folio: 0131360781000, Folio: Folio: 131360781380, Folio: 0131360780910, Folio: 0131360781450, Folio: 0131360780690, Folio: Folio: 0131360780770,Folio: 0131360781260, Folio: 0131360780850, Folio: 0131360781300, Folio: Folio: 0131360781490, Folio: 0131360780950, Folio: 0131360781320, Folio: 0131360781480, Folio: 01 Folio: 0131360780740, Folio: 0131360780870, Folio: 0131360781390, Folio: 0131360780960, Folio: Folio: 0131360781310, Folio: 0131360780720, Folio: 0131360781470, Folio: 0131360780700, Folio: Folio: 0131360781340, Folio: 0131360781270, Folio: 0131360781420, Folio: 0131360780820, Folio: Folio: 0131360780920, Folio: 0131360780010, Folio: 0131360781360, Folio: 0131360780980, Folio: 01 Folio: 0131360780001, Folio: 0131360781290, Folio: 0131360780890, Folio: 0131360781440, Folio: Folio: 0131360781510, Folio: 0131360781400, Folio: 0131360780650, Folio: 0131360780670, Folio: 01 Folio: 0131360780840, Folio: 0131360780800, Folio: 0131360780660, Folio: 0131360781410, Folio: Folio: 0131360780780, Folio: 0131360781370, Folio: 0131360780880, Folio: 0131360780680, Folio: 01 Folio: 0131360781500, Folio: 0131360780930, Folio: 0131360781280, Folio: 0131360780940, Folio: 01 0131360780900, 0131360780710, 0131360780830, 31360781330, 0131360780810, 0131360780730, 0131360780990, 31360781460, 0131360780970, 31360780760, 0131360780860, 31360781520, 31360781430 Prepared & Submitted For: Crosswinds Communities 600 Corporate Circle, Suite 102 Fort Lauderdale, Fl 33334, Tel: (954) 444-9358 Prepared & Submitted by: IPE M B R O, INC. Consulting Engineers and Planners 13263 SW 124TH STREET, MIAMI, FL. 33186 Tel: (305) 234-7424, Fax: (305) 234-7832 September 14, 2007 PHASE ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR OVERTOWN PROJET, CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA Folio: 01-0104-050-1010, Folio: 01-0105-060-1010, Folio: 01-0105-050-1120, Folio; 01-0104-060-1010, Folio: 0131360781250, Folio: 0131360781350, Folio: 0131360780750, Folio: 0131360781000, Folio: 0131360780900, Folio: 131360781380, Folio: 0131360780910, Folio: 0131360781450, Folio: 0131360780690, Folio: 0131360780710, Folio: 0131360780770,Folio: 0131360781260, Folio: 0131360780850, Folio: 0131360781300, Folio: 0131360780830, Folio: 0131360781490, Folio: 0131360780950, Folio: 0131360781320, Folio: 0131360781480, Folio: 0131360781330, Folio: 0131360780740, Folio: 0131360780870, Folio: 0131360781390, Folio: 0131360780960, Folio: 0131360780810, Folio: 0131360781310, Folio: 0131360780720, Folio: 0131360781470, Folio: 0131360780700, Folio: 0131360780730, Folio: 0131360781340, Folio: 0131360781270, Folio: 0131360781420, Folio: 0131360780820, Folio: 0131360780990. Folio: 0131360780920, Folio: 0131360780010, Folio: 0131360781360, Folio: 0131360780980, Folio: 0131360781460, Folio: 0131360780001, Folio: 0131360781290, Folio: 0131360780890, Folio: 0131360781440, Folio: 0131360780970, Folio: 0131360781510, Folio; 0131360781400, Folio: 0131360780650, Folio; 0131360780670, Folio: 0131360780760, Folio: 0131360780840, Folio: 0131360780800, Folio: 0131360780660, Folio: 0131360781410, Folio: 0131360780860, Folio: 0131360780780, Folio: 0131360781370, Folio: 0131360780880, Folio: 0131360780680, Folio: 0131360781520, Folio: 0131360781500, Folio: 0131360780930, Folio: 0131360781280, Folio: 0131360780940, Folio: 0131360781430 Submitted to: Crosswinds Communities 600 Corporate Circle, Suite 102 Fort Lauderdale, FI 33334, Tel: (954) 444-9358 Prepared by: AMBRO 1NC 3263 SW 124TH STREET, MIAMI, FL. 33186 Tel: (305) 234-7424, Fax: (305) 234-7832 This Report was prepared in accordance with the standards of the environmental consulting industry at the time it was prepared. It should not be relied upon parties other than those for whom it was prepared, and then only to the extent of the scope of work which was authorized. This report does not guarantee that no additional environmental contamination beyond that described in this report exists at this site. • 411, TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION l 1.2 SITE INFORMATION i 1.2.1 LOCATION 1.2.2 CURRENT SITE USE 1 1.2.3 FORMER SITE USE 3 1.2.4 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 3 1.3 RECORDS SEARCH 3 1.4 SITE VISIT 3 1.5 FINDINGS 5 2 SITE DESCRIPTION 6 2.1 LOCATION 6 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 6 2.3 CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS 7 2.3.1 SITE IMPROVEMENTS 7 2.3.2 CURRENT ADJACENT PROPERTY USES 7 3 RECORDS SEARCH 8 3.1 STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SOURCES 8 3.2 STANDARD HISTORICAL SOURCES REVIEW 13 4 INTERVIEWS 17 4.1 OWNERS/OCCUPANTS, OTHERS WITH SITE KNOWLEDGE 17 4.2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS I7 5 SITE VISIT 18 5.1 SITE OBSERVATIONS 18 5.2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 20 6 OPERATIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 21 7 FINDINGS 22 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES, METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS 23 9 REFERENCES 24 10 APPENDIXES 24 1. Site Location Map 2. Aerial Photographs 3. Topographic Maps 4. Sanborn Map Reports 5. Site Photographs 6. Overall Map 7. Qualification(s) of Environmental Professionals 8. EDR Radius Report • Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project. City of Miami. Florida EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION Consultant Firm AMBRO, INC Date of Site Visit February 18ih, 2005 Site Visit Conducted by Shiv Shahi, P.E. 1.2 SITE INFORMATION 1.2.1 LOCATION Site Name Overtown Project, City of Miami Address The subject site comprises of four (4) adjacent quadrants as indicated in the Overtown Master Plan and historical Sanborn Maps. The quadrants are (from NW to SE) 46N, 45N, 55N, and 56N. The Folio Numbers and associated addresses are listed in Appendix 1 (Site Map). Legal Description Quadrant 45N: MIAMI NORTH PB B-41 LOTS 1 THRU 12 BLK 45 LOT SIZE 90000 SQ FT OR 17064-152 0196 3. Quadrant 56N: MIAMI NORTH PB B-41 ALL OF BLK 56 LOT SIZE 90000 SQ FT OR 17064-152 0196 3 Quadrant 55N: MIAMI NORTH PB B-41 ALL OF BLK 55 LOT SIZE 149856 SQ FT OR 17064-152 0196 3 Quadrant 46N consists of 66 parcels of which 65 are condominium units and one is a vacant land. The legal description for condominium units was not provided. The legal description for the vacant land is as follows: MIAMI NORTH PB B-41 LOTS 1 THRU 12 & 16 THRU 20 BLK 46 & GEORGE C BOLLES SUB OF BLK 46 NORTH PB 1-16 LOTS 1 THRU 8 LESS PH 1 OF POINCIANA VILG CONDO Zoning Quadrants 45N, 55N and 56N: 6406 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN- PARK WEST COM/RES DIS Quadrant 46N: High Density Mixed Use 1.2.2 CURRENT SITE USE Current Owner The subject parcels except for the 65 residential units of Poinciana Village located in the 46N quadrant is currently owned by the City of Miami. Current Use Quadrants 45N and 56N are currently used as overflow parking lots for the Miami Arena. Quadrant 55N is currently vacant. Approximately'/ of Quadrant 46N is primary occupied by Poinciana Village (the condominium association), the remaining % is currently vacant. Current Adjacent Property Uses Commercial and Residential usage of the adjacent properties was observed during the site inspection (e.g., residential buildings and parking lot) Page 1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • North East West NW 5th Street North — mixed commercial and residential NW 1St Avenue East — metrorail) NW 3rd Avenue West NW 7th Street) commercial (building under construction and — commercial (Police Auto Pound listed at 300 South NW 6th Street South — commercial (United States Post Office) Page 2 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 1.2.3 FORMER SITE USE Former Use The review of historical records such City Directory Search, Sanborn Maps, Aerial Photographs and proprietary EDR Databases indicated that the subject property has been developed since at least 1906. In the course of the past 100 years, the primary residential subject property with very light commercial use such as barber shops, grocery stores, doctors and lawyers offices was gradually replaced by mixed residential (apartment complexes along with individual residencies) and commercial use such as dry cleaners, photo labs, medical labs, printing facilities, etc.. By the early 1980s, the majority of commercial and domestic residents had left the area, which lead to the demolition of the dwellings. By the early 1990 three of four (45N, 56N, and 55N) had become grassy vacant lots with a few buildings on the 46N quadrangle. 1.2.4 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Approximate Size 480,000 square feet (over 10 acres) Approximate Shape Approximately Rectangular Flood Plain 100 year flood zone General Groundwater Row The overall groundwater movement at the site is predominantly towards the east - southeast, which is a characteristic of the region. 1.3 RECORDS SEARCH Environmental Record Search A search of federal, state county and local environmental records was conducted. The search records meet the requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments. None of the individual parcels that were a part of this Phase 1 assessment were listed under the regulatory databases that were researched as part of this assessment. Regulatory File Reviews No regulatory files were maintained for the subject site. Surrounding Area Search A detailed surrounding site search results within 1/8, 1/4, 1/2 and 1 mile radius is contained in the Appendix 8. 1,4 SITE VISIT Site Observation Methodology Walking in a grid pattern and visual inspection of the site. A physical reconnaissance of the property and activities in the surrounding area of influence (1/4 mile). Site Observations The subject site consists of 4 quadrangles, which lead to its mixed commercial and residential use. The NE and SE quadrangles are asphalt paved link chain fence almost square parcels used as overflow parking lots for Miami Arena. The SW quadrangle is a vacant grassy rectangular with numerous trees around the perimeter. The SE quadrangle houses Poinciana Village condominiums and a vacant grassy lot currently used by the Poinciana residents as a parking lot. Page 3 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami; Florida • • • The rectangular parcel is chain link fenced. A site visit of the subject site was conducted on February 18th, 2005. The site is located between NW 8th Street and NW 6tr Street to the north and south respectively, and between NW 1st Avenue and NW 3rd Avenue to the east and west respectively, in Miami Dade County, Florida. The site can be accessed from all four streets, which serve as its boundaries along with the access to the SE and SW quadrangles from NW 2nd Avenue and NW 7th Street (also known as Sawyers Walk). Sampling & Analysis No sampling was performed as part of this Phase ! ESA. Page 4 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 1.5 FINDINGS Environmental Concerns There are apparent environmental concerns that were observed during the site visit based on the historical use at the subject site and adjoining properties. Historically, seventy five (75) gas stations and/or cleaning facilities were identified within a 1/-mile radius of the subject property of which a few used to be located on the subject property. Recognized Environmental Conditions The goals of the assessment process are to identify recognized environmental conditions that may exist at the subject property. This report provides a summation of the findings of this assessment and conclusions and recommendations relative to the findings. Representatives of AMBRO who have conducted site observation and reviewed the results of the data collection effort have concluded that there may be moderate risk recognized environmental conditions that exists onsite which may have impact on the soil and groundwater on the subject property. Recommendations Based upon the information available and reported in this assessment, additional assessment is warranted and recommended at this time. The SE quadrangle currently occupied by Poinciana Village and a vacant parking lot, does not appear to pose a serious environmental concern based on the historical and current property use. The SE quadrangle, also known as Southeast Overtown Parking Lot Number 60, does not warrant further investigation based on the findings of the Phase II Environmental Property Assessment performed by ATC Associates Inc. in the August 2003. The remaining two (2) quadrangles should be further evaluated through a Phase II environmental assessment and subsurface investigations. The said assessment shall perform groundwater sampling to rule out or confirm ground water contamination by dry cleaning solvents or petroleum constituents caused by historical use at the subject site and adjoining properties. Page 5 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 2 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 LOCATION Legal Description The subject site is approximately 480,000 square feet currently being used as two parking lots, residential development (condominium association) and 2 vacant lots. The site comprises of 69 parcels with each parcel having a different folio number. The legal description for the 69 parcels is included in Appendix 1. Zoning High Density Mixed Use Nearest Major intersection NW 8th Street and NW 1st Avenue NW 8th Street and NW 3rd Avenue NW 6th Street and NW 3`d Avenue NW 6th Street and NW 1st Avenue 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Approximate Size 480,000 Square Feet (over 10 acres) Approximate Shape The shape of the property is Rectangular Topography of the Site Essentially flat Approximate Elevation Approximately 8 ft above sea level Surface Drainage Quadrangles 45N and 56N are asphalt paved throughout; quadrangle 55N is a grassy area with numerous trees mostly around the perimeter. NE 1/4 of quadrangle 46N is grass covered, the rest is occupied by 3 buildings and asphalt paved. Runoff from impervious areas of the site is routed through a system of on site catch basins that serve the purpose of surface and onsite storm water management. Receives Drainage from Adjacent Sites? No Flood Zone The subject site is located in a 100 year flood zone. Hydrogeology and approximate Depth to Groundwater The surficial aquifer in the general area extends to the approximate depth of 100 ft below land surface (BLS), with water table at an average depth of four to six feet below the property's present ground level, depending upon the amount of seasonal rainfall and climatic conditions. General Groundwater Flow Direction The overall groundwater movement at the site is predominantly towards the east - southeast, which is the general characteristic of the region. Page 6 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 2.3 CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS Current Use Quadrangles 45N and 56N are used as overflow parking lots for Miami Arena; quadrangle 55N is vacant, quadrangle 46N is predominantly occupied by Poinciana Village (condominium association) with its NE % vacant. 2.3.1 SITE IMPROVEMENTS Pavement, Roads & Driveways Quadrangles 45N and 56N were improved as asphalt surface for the purpose of using them as parking lots. Quadrangle 46N was improved with 4 structures. Two structures situated along the southern boundary of the site are four story concrete block condominium buildings (209, 261 NW 7th Street); one four story concrete block building located along the eastern boundary of the quadrangle servers as a parking garage and another small concrete building located in the middle of the quadrangle servers as a pool house. In addition, the quadrangle is improved with a swimming pool located approximately in the middle of it, and asphalt parking lots adjacent to the buildings. Fence The majority of the subject site (in particular quadrangles 46N, 45N and 56N) is chain link fenced. 2.3.2 CURRENT ADJACENT PROPERTY USES North NW 8th Street (commercial and residential use) and Miami Arena overflow Parking Lot due North of NW 8th Street East NW 1st Avenue and metrorail West NW 3rd Avenue and use due west of NW 3rd Avenue South NW 6th Street and commercial due west of NW 6th Street (United States Postal Office and State of Florida Office Building) Page 7 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project. City of Miami, Florida • • • 3 RECORDS SEARCH 3.1 STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SOURCES Records Search Provider Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) Date of Search February 7th , 2005 Site Listings The subject site was not listed on any of the regulatory databases researched below. Surrounding Area Listings The EDR report indicated that numerous sites listed by various Regulatory databases are located within 1/8 — Y. mi of the subject property. It is yet to be determined, whether or not, the sites pose an immediate threat to the subject property (the complete listing is presented in the Appendix 8 — EDR Radius Report. Listing of Regulatory Databases Researched Federal ASTM Standards • RCRIS (Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System) RCRIS-SQG (Small Quantity Generator) State ASTM Standards • LUST (Leaking Underground Storage Tank. • UST (Underground Storage Tank) State or Local ASTM Supplemental • Priority Cleaners (Florida Priority Cleaners list comes from Department of Environmental Protection) • Dry Cleaners (Florida Drycleaners list comes from Department of Environmental Protection) • Enforcement • Industrial Waste (Miami Dade County Enforcement Case Tracking System from Department of Environmental Resource Management (DERM) Page 8 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • Governmental Records Search FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD RECORDS • NPL (National Priority List) • Proposed NPL • CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System) • CERCLIS-NFRAP (CERLIS No Further Remedial Action Plan) • CORRACTS (Corrective Action Report) • RCRIS (Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System) • ERNS (Emergency Response Notification System) • BRS (Biennial Reporting System) • CONSENT ( Superfund CERCLA Consent Decree) • ROD (Record of Decision) • DELISTED NPL (National Priority List Deletions) • FINDS (Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report) • HMIRS (Haz Materials Information Reporting System) Source USDOT • MLTA (Materials Licensing Tracking System) • Mines (Mines Master Index File) • NPL LIENS (Federal Superfund Liens) • PADS (PCB Activity Database Systems) • DOD (Department of Defense Sites) • STORMWATER (Storm water General Permits) • INDIAN RESERV (Indian Reservations) • US BROWNFIELD (A listing of Brownfield Sites) • RMP (Risk Management Plans) • FUDS (Formerly Used Defense Sites) • RAATS (RCRA Admin Action Tracking System) = TRIS (Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System) • TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) • FTTS INSP • SSTS (Section 7 Tracking Systems) • FTTS FIFRTA/TSCA Tracking System — FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substance Control Act) Page 9 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida STATE OF FLORIDA ASTM STANDARD RECORDS • SHWS (Florida State Funded Action Sites) • SWF/LF (Solid Waste Facility Database) • LUST (Petroleum Contamination Detailed Report) • UST (Facility/Owner Tank Report) • INDIAN UST (Underground Storage TANK ON Indian Land) • VCP (Voluntary Cleanup Site) • INDIAN LUST (Leaking Underground Storage Tank on Indian Land) STATE OF FLORIDA ASTM SUPPLEMETAL RECORDS • AST (Facility/Owner/Tank Report) • FL SITES (Sites List) • FI Cattle Dip VATS (cattle Dipping Vats) • SPILLS (Oil and Hazardous Material Spills) • DEDB (Ethylene Dibromide Database Results) • ENG CONTROLS (Institutional Control Registry) • Priority cleaners (Priority Ranking Listing) • Dry Cleaners (Drycleaning Facility) • WASTEWATER (Water Facility Regulation Database) MIAMI-DADE COUNTY RECORDS • Underground Storage Tanks • Grease Trap Sites • Enforcement Case Tracking System Sites • Fuel Spill Cases • Hazardous Waste Sites • Air Permit Sites • Industrial Waste Permit Sites Page 10 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • Proprietary and Records Search Private EDR Proprietary Historical Databases contained the following records, which indicated historical presence of dry cleaning facilities within Quadrangles 55N and 56N. The data is confirmed by the City Directory Search. 1960 , SECOND AVENUE SELF SERVICE LAUNDRY DRY CLEANERS, 619 NW 2D AV 1956, SECOND AVENUE SELF SERVICE LAUNDRY, 619 NW 2D AV 1954, SECOND AVENUE SELF SERVICE LAUNDRY, 619 NW 2D AV 1954, SEVENTH STREET DRY CLEANERS, 632 NW 3D AV 1964 , SEVENTH STREET LAUNDROMAT, 642 NW 3D AV 1960, SEVENTH STREET LAUNDROMAT, 642 NW 3D AV 1964, SOUTHLAND CLEANERS, 627 NW 2D AV 1960, SOUTHLAND CLEANERS, 627 NW 2D AV 1956, SOUTHLAND CLEANERS, 627 NW 2D AV 1954, SOUTHLAND CLEANERS, 627 NW 2D AV A Phase ll was conducted on 801 NW 2n° Avenue, the property immediately adjacent quadrangle 45N to the north. The property was historically used for at least 35 years (with the listings going as far back as 1931) as gasfservice station. The report indicated groundwater contamination along the northern boundary of the site and recommended further assessments. No further assessments were conducted. Considering directional south, southeast predominant ground water flow through the quadrangle (typical to the area) there is a low to moderate risk that the contaminants migrated to the subject site (Quadrangle 45N). In addition, the site is listed by FL UST Dade County under the EDR # UST UO03705154 A Phase II Environmental Property Assessment was conducted for Southeast Overtown Parking Lot Number 60 also referred in this report as the SE Quadrangle. The site was historically used by VecTour of Florida, Inc. for the storage and maintenance of their bus fleet. On May 2001, the Miami -Dade Department of Environmental Resource Management (DERM) issued Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) a Notice of Violation (NOV) and Orders for Corrective Action (OCA) pertaining to the discharge of industrial waste pertaining to the soils and groundwater of Miami -Dade County. To address the OCA, the CRA contracted ATC Associates Inc. in the spring of 2002. In January of 2003, ATC subcontracted a waste disposal firm to pump out and subsequently clean up six drainage structures located on site. During the clean up, approximately 1,985 gallons of sediment, petroleum sludge and petroleum impacted water were recovered. The waste material was property disposed off and the corresponding manifests were filed with DERM. As the next step and upon the DERM request, six groundwater monitoring wells along with six soils borings were installed on the property to investigate for the presence on Priority Pollutant Volatiles by EPA Method 8260, Priority Pollutant Semi- volatiles by EPA Method 8270, Petroleum Range Organics by the FL - PRO Method, and the total metals Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium and Lead. The laboratory results of the groundwater samples submitted for the Priority Pollutant Semivolatalies (SVOCs), Petroleum Range Organics (PROs), and the total metals Arsenic, Cadmium, and Chromium did not indicate the presence of any individual compounds above the laboratory detection limits. Three Priority Pollutant Volatiles(VOCs) were dt Pa e 1 1 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • Volatiles (VOCs) Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Total Xylenes were detected in the concentrations of 4.38 ug/L, 1.14 ugfL and 7.8 ug/L, respectively, none of which exceeded the respective Miami -Dade County Chapter 24-11 Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (GCTLs). In addition, Lead in the concentrations of 0.007 mg/L was detected at one of the sampling locations, which was also within the GCTL of 0.015 mg/L. Based on the successful clean up activities as well as the soil and groundwater quality data collected in the course of the referenced Phase II Environmental Assessment, ATC requested the DERM to approve a No Further Action (NFA) for the facility. At the present time the NFA approval could not be located. Page 12 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 3.2 STANDARD HISTORICAL SOURCES REVIEW Aerial Photographs Reviewed available aerial photographs (scale 1":750') from years 1952, 1968, 1973, 1985, and 1991. Quadrant 45N • Aerial photograph from year 1952 indicated multiple smaller structures which appear to be of residential use and one larger structure stretched along the western boundary of the quadrant, possibly of commercial use • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph. • Aerial photograph from year 1973 is similar to the 1968 photograph. • The 1985 photograph depicts a significant change in the site development. The commercial structure along the western boundary appears to have been demolished; most of the residential dwelling is no longer visible as well. • The 1991 photograph depicts the quadrangle as a grassy possibly chain link fenced area. Quadrant 45N • Aerial photograph from year 1952 depicts multiple smaller structures which appear to be of residential use and one larger structure stretched along the western boundary of the quadrant, possibly of commercial use • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph. • Aerial photograph from year 1973 is similar to the 1968 photograph. • The 1985 photograph depicts a significant change in the site development. The commercial structure along the western boundary appear to have been demolished, most of the residential dwelling are no longer visible as well. • The 1991 photograph depicts the quadrangle as a grassy possibly chain fink fenced area. Quadrant 46N • Aerial photograph from year 1952 depicts highly dense multiple smaller structures which appear to be of residential use. • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph with somewhat relatively larger structures along the eastern (NW 2nd Avenue) boundary of the quadrangle. The larger structure might be of light commercial use. Page 13 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project. City of Miami, Florida • • • • Aerial photograph from year 1973 is similar to the 1968 photograph. • Aerial photograph from year 1985 is similar to the 1973 photograph. • The 1991 photograph depicts a significant change in the quadrangle landscape. Only four structures are visible, along the southern boundary (NW 7th Street or Sawyers Way). The larger structure appears to be one of the two Poinciana Village buildings (269 NW 7th Street) with two smaller structures in front of it. Another building is standing in place of the current 269 NW 7th Street second building of Poinciana Village, but it seems to be smaller in size. Quadrant 55N • Aerial photograph from year 1952 depicts highly dense multiple smaller structures which appear to be of residential use intermixed with larger evenly scattered buildings of probable commercial use. • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph. • Aerial photograph from year 1973 is similar to the 1968 photograph. • The 1985 photograph depicts fewer buildings with the larger commercial buildings formerly located in the northeast corner of the quadrangle seem to be demolished. • The 1991 photograph shows the quadrangle as a vacant heavily vegetated parcel. Quadrant 56N • Aerial photograph from year 1952 depicts four larger buildings located in the center of the quadrant stretched from NW 7th Street to NW 6th Street with vegetated area to the east and what appears to be parking space to the west. The buildings could have possibly served as apartments. • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph. • Aerial photograph from year 1973 is similar to the 1968 photograph. • The 1985 photograph depicts approximately 6 buildings evenly scattered thru the quadrangle. The dwellings could be used as apartments or light commercial. • The 1991 photograph shows the quadrangle as a vacant grassy possible chain linked fenced lot. Surrounding Areas • 1952. Northern adjacent properties seem to be of mixed (commercial and residential use) with relatively large structures prevailing. Approximately 8 equal in size most likely commercial structures are located to the east. The Page 14 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • western properties seem to be occupied by very small dwellings most likely of residential use. A few commercial structures seem to be located to the south of the subject property: a rectangular building with a court yard, a U-shaped building identified by the city directory as an apartment complex, another rectangular building immediately south of the apartment complex occupied by a meat processing plant and a parking garage located to the east of the apartment complex. • Aerial photograph from year 1968 is similar to the 1952 photograph in regards to the northern, southern and western adjacent properties. The eastern properties appear quite differently with the small structures replaced by a construction site. The construction appears to be of the interstate road (I- 95). = The 1973 photograph appear to be very similar to the 1952 photograph with 1-95 operational. • Aerial photograph from year 1985 indicates that the area continued on its growth pattern although fewer structures are visible to the northeast. The area adjacent to Q45N (Q36N) appears to be vacant with the exception of one dwelling occupied by the Lyric Theater, buildings to the east seem to be demolished and the metro rail Overtown Station with the metrorail itself are clearly visible. The rectangular building to the south / southwest had been replaced by a larger rectangular building occupied by the post office. • The 1991 photograph doesn't depict any significant changes in the surrounding areas. Topographic (Topo) Map • For the Year 1969 and 1194, U.S.G,S 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle — subject property and surrounding areas are apparently developed. Sanborn Map Report • Fire Insurance Maps from the following years were identified: 1906, 1910, 1914, 1921, 1939, 1950, and 1987 Quadrant 45N 1906 Site boundaries: North: NW 5m Street (NW 8th Street) South: NW 41h Street (NW 71h Street) East: Avenue F (NW lst Avenue) West: Avenue G (NW 2nd Avenue) Site use is primarily residential with 23 structures marked as D (domestic) and 3 structures in the NW corner of light commercial use (Barber, Groceries, Cafe 1914 Site boundaries (see above) Page 15 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • Use is primarily residential 1921 Site boundaries: North: NW 81h Street South: NW 7th Street East: NW tst Avenue West: NW 2nd Avenue Use is primarily residential with light commercial along the western boundary 1939 The majority of the buildings appear to be of residential use (marked as D) with a large commercial structure located along the western boundary. 1950 The generic map appearance is similar to that of 1939 map. The 709 2nd Avenue building is marked as "Dry Cleaning". 1987 The map doesn't depict any buildings The remaining quadrants could be described in the similar manner. Page 16 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • 4 INTERVIEWS 4.1 OWNERS/OCCUPANTS, OTHERS WITH SITE KNOWLEDGE Person Interviewed None Interview Subject Not Applicable Date Not Applicable Knowledge of Site Not Applicable Pertinent Information Not Applicable 4.2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS Interview Subject None Date Not Applicable Pertinent Information Not Applicable Interview Subject Not Applicable Date Not Applicable Page 17 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 5 SITE VISIT 5.1 SITE OBSERVATIONS Date February 21st, 2005 Weather Conditions Bright, Sunny and Humid Environmental Professional Conducting Site Observations Shiv Shahi, P.E. Others Present None Site Observation Methodology Walking in a grid pattern and visual inspection of the site. A physical reconnaissance (walk and drive through) of the property and activities in the surrounding area of influence (1/4 mile). Site Observations The objectives of the site visit are to obtain information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject site. The subject site is located between NW 8th Street and NW 6th Street due east of NW 3rd Avenue and west of NW 1st Avenue. The site comprises of 4 quadrangles each of which will be described separately. Quadrangle 45N is the northeast quadrangle of the subject property, which is situated between NW 8th Street and NW 7th Street due east of NW 1st Avenue and west of NW 2"d Avenue. The site is currently used as an overflow parking lot for Miami Arena. The lot is asphalt paved with a chain link fenced with an unsecured gated entry from NW 8th Street. The quadrangle visit did not reveal any evidence of a past release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products that would have led to a regulatory involvement. No evidence of any distressed vegetation was observed. A construction material storage area is located immediately south of the parcel. The storage was formed by enclosing NW 7t Street from NW 2nd Avenue with a wooden fence. A construction trailer along with various construction materials was observed inside the enclosed area. Patching was observed in the asphalt pavement in certain locations of both quadrangles, which may be indicative of repairs/maintenance related activities. Quadrangle 56N is the southeast quadrangle of the subject property, which is situated between NW 7th Street and NW 6th Street to the north and south, respectively and NW 1st Avenue and NW 2nd Avenue to the east and west, respectively. The site is currently used as an overflow parking lot for Miami Arena. The lot is asphalt paved and a chain link fenced with secured gated entry from NW 6th Street. The quadrangle parcel did not reveal any evidence of a past release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products that would have led to a regulatory Page 18 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • involvement. No evidence of any distressed vegetation was observed. A construction material storage area is located immediately north of the parcel. The storage was described above. Quadrangle 55N is the southwest quadrangle of the subject property, which is situated between NW 7th Street (also known as Sawyers Way) and NW 6th Street to the north and south, respectively and NW 2nd Avenue and NW 3rd Avenue to the east and west, respectively. The lot is a grassy vacant land with trees scattered thought-out the quadrangle, but mostly located along the perimeter An old asphalt patch was noticed in the center of the lot along with a PVC pipe, which was determined to be a former ground water well. Quadrangle 46N is the northeast quadrangle of the subject property, which is situated between NW 8th Street and NW 7th Street (also known as Sawyers Way) to the north and south, respectively, and NW 2nd Avenue and NW 3rd Avenue to the east and west, respectively. The site is primarily occupied by Poinciana Village, a residential condominium community. The quadrangle improvements consist of four buildings: two 4 story concrete block pink buildings with stacked work units (condominiums) located along the southern boundary of the quadrangle, one 4 story concrete building used as a multi -story parking garage and one small concrete block building used a pool house. There is additional asphalt paved parking area in front of all buildings. The site also contains a swimming pool. The site inspection didn't reveal any visible vegetation distress or other environmental concerns associated with the swimming pool. The northeast quarter of the quadrangle is not paved and thought it is currently vacant; the Poinciana residents use it as an additional parking lot. No evidence of petroleum contamination was noticed in the vicinity. The Poinciana Village is chain link fenced and accessible from all four streets with the northern and southern entrances currently closed, and the eastern side has a locked access. The western side of the property has a gated access for vehicles and pedestrians. The subject property was inspected for the presence of liquid cooled electrical units (transformers, and capacitors). Such equipment may be potential PCB sources, which may subject the owner/operator to various regulatory requirements under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and State of Florida regulations. The release of PCB fluids or their combustion products (in the event of spillage or fire) are potential environmental liabilities that may require costly remediation. Pole -mounted electrical transformers are located along roadway utility easements, and pad -mounted transformers within landscaped green areas. No leakage of dielectric fluids was noted around the transformers. A physical reconnaissance of the property and activities in the surrounding area of influence (1/4 mile) was also undertaken. A drive -around in the immediate vicinity of NW 2rd Ave, NW 31-d Street, NW 6th Street and NW 1st Avenue was also performed. Photographs of the subject property are contained in Appendix 5. Page 19 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • Site Observation Limitations Since the site is in use as a parking lot, some vehicles were parked during the time of the inspection. Surface Drainage The site is asphalt paved throughout. Runoff from impervious areas of the site is routed through a system of on site catch basins that serve the purpose of surface and onsite storm water management. Distressed Vegetation None observed Underground Storage Tanks No signs of underground storage tanks was evident (e.g., presence of vent pipes, fueling island, etc.) during the site visit. Waste Materials Storage None observed Drums, Other Containers None observed Drums labeled property Not Applicable Ponds, Pits or Lagoons None observed Other Concerns Raised by Site Visit The site has been in use as a parking lot. The potential for petroleum based constituents from vehicles (e.g. Transmission fluids, etc.) leaking from vehicles and spilling onto the ground exists due to the nature of the use the property has been put to. However, since the parking lot is asphalt paved which serves as an engineering control measure, the potential for such leaks to affect the soil and groundwater beneath the subject property is low. The actual impact, if any can only be ascertained through an intrusive investigation which is beyond the scope of this Phase 1 ESA. In addition, numerous concerns were raised by the historical use of the site and the adjacent properties. The concerns are property addressed in the appropriate sections. Observations of Adjacent Sites The site is essentially located in a mixed residential, commercial/industrial zone. A drive through of the adjacent properties was also conducted. Photograph of adjacent properties are contained in Appendix 5. 5.2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS Samples Collected By/Date The Phase 1 assessment performed excludes the sampling and/or chemical analysis of soil and groundwater. Suspected or potential contamination cannot be confirmed without the field sampling and chemical testing as performed in a Phase 11 Assessment. The investigation of possible Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM) and Radon gas has been excluded from the scope of work of this assessment. Data Objectives N/A Sampling Methods N/A Sample Locations N/A Pertinent Analytical Results N/A Applicable Cleanup Standards N/A Page 20 Phase ! Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 6 OPERATIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS UST's Not Applicable AST's Not Applicable Air Emission Sources Not Applicable. industrial Waste Not Applicable Page 21 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • 7 FINDINGS Environmental Concerns There are apparent environmental concerns that were observed during the site visit based on the historical use at the subject site and adjoining properties. Seventy five (75) gas stations and/or cleaning facilities were identified within a '/a -mile radius of the subject property of which a few used to be located on the subject property. Recognized Conditions Recommendations Environ ental The goals of the assessment process are to identify recognized environmental conditions that may exist at the subject property. This report provides a summation of the findings of this assessment and conclusions and recommendations relative to the findings. Representatives of AMBRO who have conducted site observation and reviewed the results of the data collection effort have concluded that there may be moderate risk recognized environmental conditions that exists onsite which may have impact on the soil and groundwater on the subject property. Based upon the information available and reported in this assessment, additional assessment is warranted and recommended at this time. The SE quadrangle currently occupied by Poinciana Village and a vacant parking lot, does not appear to pose a serious environmental concern based on the historical and current property use. The SE quadrangle, also known as Southeast Overtown Parking Lot Number 60, does not warrant further investigation based on the findings of the Phase II Environmental Property Assessment performed by ATC Associates Inc. in the August 2003. The remaining two (2) quadrangles should be further evaluated through a Phase II environmental assessment and subsurface investigations. The said assessment shall perform groundwater sampling to rule out or confirm ground water contamination by dry cleaning solvents or petroleum constituents caused by historical use at the subject site and adjoining properties. Page 22 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES, METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of City of Miami for the sole purpose of assisting in the evaluation of environmental conditions associated with the Site. The purpose of this ESA is to identify, to the extent feasible, pursuant to the scope and limitation of the guidelines set forth in the ASTM Practice E1527- 97, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. The term recognized environmental conditions is defined by ASTM (1997) as: The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or to the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. The term reasonably ascertainable is defined by ASTM (1997) as information that is publicly available to anyone upon request, obtainable from its source within reasonable time and cost constraints, and provided by the source in a practically reviewable manner sorted by geographical area. The findings presented herein are based upon observations of Site conditions as of the date the assessment was performed and a review of reasonably ascertainable standard records sources. The findings and conclusions presented herein should not be assumed to apply to conditions or operating practices on this property occurring subsequent to AMBRO's actual on -site investigation. This Phase I ESA cannot wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. The performance of this assessment is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions. The findings of the Phase I ESA, as represented within this report, must be viewed in recognition of certain limiting conditions. The scope of work commissioned for this project does not represent an exhaustive study, but rather a reasonable inquiry, consistent with good commercial practice, in accordance with ASTM Practice E1527-97. In the course of this assessment, AMBRO has relied on information provided by outside parties, such as regulatory agencies and interview sources. For the purposes of this assessment, such third -party information is assumed to be accurate unless contradictory evidence is noted; AMBRO does not express or imply any warranty regarding information provided by third -party sources. Page 23 Phase / Environmental Site Assessment Overtown Project, City of Miami, Florida • • • 9 REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). May 2000. Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase t Environmental Site Assessment Process (Practice E1527-OO). Environmental Data Resources; Inc. February 7th, 2005 Preliminary Sanborn Map Report Miami Dade's official website: http://www.miamidade.gov US Geological Survey 10 APPENDIXES Page 24 All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc TESTING LABORATORIES -ENGINEERS -INSPECTION SERVICES -CHEMISTS -DRILLING -ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Hialeah, June 21, 2005 Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm 25 SE 2nd Avenue Miami, Florida - 33131 Attn: Matthew Schwartz Re: Limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase II for the Over Town Project located at 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir; Pursuant to your authorization, All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc, performed a limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase 11 for the above -referenced project on June 09, 2005. The assessment was performed as a follow up to an earlier limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase 11 performed by All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc on May 26, 2005. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work consisted of the following: 1. Installing four (4) shallow monitoring wells surrounding monitoring well MW#2. 2. Purging four (4) monitoring wells (MW # 3, MW # 4, MW # 5, MW # 6). 3. Collecting groundwater samples from the four (4) monitoring wells. 4. Analyzing groundwater samples from the locations for EPA method 8021, RCRA Metals, EPA 610 and TRPH. 5. Reporting the results from the analysis. The entire operation was performed in compliance with our DEP approved quality assurance plan (# 890184) and the tests were performed according to our Nelap certified laboratory E86198. 2380 West 78 Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Tel: (305) 888 — 3373 Fax: (305) 888 — 7443 TEST RESULTS The entire results can be summarized in the following manner: Parameter MW # 2 MW # 4 MW # 3, 5, 6 Target Level i Units Volatile Organics BDL BDL BDL See Test Results pgll RCRA Metals BDL BDL BDL See Test Results mg/I TRPH 53.3 776 BDL 50 mgll Acenaphthene 33.3 90.1 BDL 20 pgil Acenaphthylene BDL 75.4 BDL 210 nil Benzo (a) Anthrance 3.62 1.94 BDL 0.2 µgil Benzo (b) Flurenthene 10.2 2.17 BDL 0.2 µgil Fluorene BDL 46.7 BDL 280 Mil Naphthalene BDL 74.2 BDL 20 110 Phenanthrene BDL 98.4 BDL 210 p.g/1 The complete test results are enclosed with this report. CLOSURE: This report was prepared exclusively for the use of Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm. The conclusions provided by All State Engineering and Testing Consultants Inc., are based solely on the information presented in this report. This limited environmental site assessment was a follow up of the earlier site assessment performed at the subject site on May 26, 2005. In order to delineate the plume of contamination four (4) monitoring wells (MW # 3, MW # 4, MW # 5 and MW # 6) were installed surrounding the monitoring well MW # 2. There was some diesel contamination found in the monitoring well MW # 4 (see attached lab analysis report). The contamination found in the MW # 4 was greater than MW # 2. MW#3, MW#5, MW#6 were found below detection limit and no further investigation is required. Based on the test results below are the following recommendations and conclusions: • Perform six (6) soil borings each eight (8) feet maximum or to the soil/water interface collecting soil samples at 2 ft interval from the surface to the soillwater interface. Based on the OVA reading the soil sample with the worst -case condition will be tested for Rinker petroleum contaminated soil criteria. • Install one additional monitoring well (MW # 7) to east of monitoring well MW # 4. Collect the water samples from the monitoring well and analyzing the samples for EPA method 8021, RCRA Metals, EPA 610 and TRPH. Based on the results to date, the results from MW # 7 and the soil testing results a definite course of action will be taken. This may involve sail excavation and further exploration of the area to determine the source of contamination and an initial remediation program. It should be noted that this does not represent an Environmental Site Assessment of the subject property. The report represents the testing and reporting of four monitoring wells for the parameters referenced in the report. It has been a pleasure to assist you in this phase of your project. Should you have any questions regarding this report or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely Yours, Prepared By tir aseem Quadri RE #51481 ALL STATE ENGINEERING AND TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC. • • Ashrat tgbai. o Attachment 1.0 Location Map • Property Information Map Page 1 of 1 • My Home Miami -bade County, Florida r Property Information Map Aerial Photography - AirPhoto USA 2004 0 151 ft This map was created on 6/21/2005 11:24:33 AM for reference purposes only. Web Site 0 2002 Miami -Dade County. Alt rights reserved. CAS Summary Details: Folio NO.: Property: Mailing Address: 249 263 NW 6 ST SOUTHEAST OVERTOWNIPARK CRA 49 NW 5 ST SUITE 100 MlAMi FL j33128-1811 Property Information: Primaye. 6406 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN- /PARK WEST COM/RES 015 CLUC: 0040 MUNICIPAL Beds/9aths: `'_16/16 Floors: Living Units: 16 AO S9 Footage: 6,752 lot Size: 149,856 SO FT Year 504t: 1951 MIAMI NORTH P8 8-41 ALL OF ELK Legal 55 LOT SIZE 149856 SO FT OR esanPtion. 37064-152 0196 3 — Sate information: Ei e Date: 119/7 OIR: 10983 Amount: 5.000 Assessment Information: Year: 2004 $2.247.840 '52,247.840 2003 Land Value: Holding Value: $54,60a 554,608 Market Value: 52,302.448 52,302,448 Assessed Value: $2.302,448 52.302.448 Total Exemptions: $2.302,448 $2,302,418 Taxable Value: $0 50 http://gisims2.miamidade.gov/myhome/printmap.asp?mapurl=http://gisims2.miamidade_go... 6/21/2005 • N W 3rd Ave Location : 249 263 NW 6 Street NW 'nth Street NW 6th Street • Attachment 2.0 Laboratory Test Results • • ALL STATE ENGINEERING AND TESTING. CONSULTANTS, INC. Testing laboratories -Engineers -Inspection Services -Chemist bril(ing-En.vironmental Services • Chain of Custody & Analysis Request Form - CLIENT: P-)012,y. q tA-x 8 p tz c\ ADDRESS: ?`(— S, E ` ' ..4,,,--, r,adu,...r., ('- 3315/ PROJECT: ()vet c,,,, ' ec a r' ADDRESS: - z +?� N �' .s {� C , i '� �r � , l` A> Lai #; ) 3 3C� C1 - c 5j2 c _. 1 �� /. 6 710 11 Lab !D # LOCATION C1ATE TIME Na.of conialnero Sample Condition as received (c4iJ , Dec/0 i'-ct~ • Temp: " 5 et rnv,3 /1 L-9''9 < ,,' L-- - . { 8 �1 li 3�U ' � (i / I 1 " “, c �.. L . L' - v ,e,, {` „ �f,, /� .--- �--- Sealed (yes) (no) • Remarks: Sampled By: A . Date: AG Ever Time; 1` i Received by: Date: Time; Received By: rf,tik L,„` Date: 6 qjr,r Time: g- 3c Received by; • Date: Time: 2380 West 78th street, Hialeah, Florida. 33016 Phone: 305- 088-3373/Fax:lir 888-7443 J • All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES • ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F D01-1 LAB 1_D # E-86198 M Client: rage:tot I t Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Ivlami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: t F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC —Ball / PID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 802IB BDL 0.200 µg/L. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 µ/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 utg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl beaf7ene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 802IB BDL 0_300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0_500 p..g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene , 8021B BDL, 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-I,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µpz/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 AWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. I,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. I,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichioro benzene 8021E BDL, 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,I-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0300 AWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. I,1-Dichloro propene 8021E BDL, 0.200 µgIL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Detectian Limit • BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 2...... All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inca TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS • INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Page: 2 of 1 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm - Address: 25 SE. 2"°' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33I31 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S, Compound. Method Result _ DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 }Ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachioro buta diene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 II.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B I3DL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 802113 BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.200 Itgi/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluaro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µza. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 8021E BDL 0.100 µg(L. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trimethyl benznen 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 .tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total _ 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit SD1 = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, kil Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director • 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Ine. T'ESTTNG LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - ❑R/LLINO - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB LD # E-86i 98 Client: UtIg . -1 01 If Biaxberg_Graysan Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2a° Avenue, Miami, FL. 33i31 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A-L Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03.30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method F Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PAHs by GCIFLD Acenaphthene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 gg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 µg&L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-ed) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µ8/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. L = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, ple.ae contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectinliy submitted, i . rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. 1 tsTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - LNsPECr1ON SERVICES - CHEM1TTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERV ICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. 1.D # E-86198 Page: 4 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2"d Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 .� Report #: 2330/BO-03/2005 Report by: F.S. a Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FID TRPH FL -PRO BDL 0.500 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmium 213.1 BDL 0.005 milL 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 rng/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. 1 DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/Icg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, v,� �•� rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone / : (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888--7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS • DRILd ING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Paee:5 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6td Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: -MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BC-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. \,. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC -Hall / PM Benzene 80218 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 pg!L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 06/14/05� F. S. F. S. n-Butylbenzene S021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 Sec -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 Itg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021E BDL 0.500 jrgIL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 p:gfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 Aga, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 tie, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloropropane 8021B BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit • BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 6 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONAMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Client: V Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2"d Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW MW /14 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 _Location: Time: 01:36 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buts diene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B 2.06 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl -Teri Butyl -Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene8021E BDL 0.500 1tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021E 0.483 0.300 Ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,14,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 pa 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B 0.327 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.300 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg,/1, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trxrrlethyl benznen 80218 BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene: Total 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Bclow Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. R spectfully submitted, ptit Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888--7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc, TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGtNEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I. D # F-86198 Pace: 7 of ! 6 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2nd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PAHs by GC/FID Acenaphthene 3510/610 90.1 1.000 AWL 06/13/05 06/13/05 ' F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 75.4 1.000 #.g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 !tg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 1.94 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 2.17 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µ.gfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benno (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 }tg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 ig/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 46.7 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pa 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 74.2 1.000 lig/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanth.rene 3510/610 98.4 1.000 ltg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, arhana M. Sindbu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS • INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - E-NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. I.D # E-86198 Client: _ Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm . + Address: 25 SE. 2'4 Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FID .......... ... TRPH FL -PRO 776 0.500 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cad rium 213.1 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 0.129 0.015 m&IIL 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 mIJI 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mgfL 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director • 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Client: Biaxber8 Grayson Law Firm I cgyc; Y Uf .K Address: 25 SE. 2n`' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Tirne: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: , 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units mm Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC -Hall / PID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Brown chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dchloro methane 8021B BDL 0200 AWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 1ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021E BDL 0.500 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 802113 BDL 0.500 µe, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 Lig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 }ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 tt L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B 0.724 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µz/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (FI)B) 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. E 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 802113 BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 lig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 gg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 1tpfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 pa 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL _ 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 10... All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTLNC LABORATORIES - ENGCNEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DR/CLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # F-86198 Fate: 10 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2°a Avenue, Miami, FL 33131 Project: Over town protect, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6a Street, Miam., Florida Matrix: OW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG•03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta diene 8021B BDL 0.300 }rg1L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 ligfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 itg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021E BDL 0.500 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S, Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021B 7.36 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,I,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 lt.g1L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021E BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0_500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloroethene 8021B 1.06 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 8021E BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 Lxga, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trimethyl benznen 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BBL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone#: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. '7ESITNG LP.EORATORIES - ENGINEERS - fNSPECrloN SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I. D # E-86 i 98 Page: II of 16 Client: Blxxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2°d Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PAHs by GC/FID Acenaphthene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 ktg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 p,g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 itg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 lig/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 itg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 Itg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDI = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, fs1" Ede , rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888--3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABO€WTORJES . ENGENEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • • Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. I.D # E-86198 Page: 12 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE . 2"d Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 • Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6L1 Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: A.T. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/13G-03/2005 Report by: _ F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GCfFID TRPH FL -PRO BDL 0.200 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 rng/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmium 213.1 BDL 0.005 mgfL 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 rngn, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, La -MA Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRyLLiNG - EKVrR©NMEt4TAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F ©OH LAB 1.D # E-86t98 Client: D Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2'd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6h Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab, ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/13G-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst 1 VOC by GC -Hall / PID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 802113 BDL 0.500 xg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dchloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Brotnoform 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 j g(L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1 Chloroform 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06f14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 80218 BDL 0.500 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 gg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B 0.283 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 80218 BDL 0.100 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. E Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 µ /L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 lt� 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.300 t /L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µglL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/1, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloro propane 8021E BDL 0.200 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 14_.. All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATOPJES - ENGitti££it5 - INSPECTION SERVICES • CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.1) 4 E-86198 Page: 14 of 1 Client: Rlaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2" Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 . Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 1tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta diene 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 80218 BDL. 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 80218 0.622 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021E BDL 0.500 pgiL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 pa 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021E 1.99 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Diehloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Drichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 Egg, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B 0.363 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 80218 BDL 0.100 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trimethyl benznen 8021B BDL. 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 p.g(L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 _ F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LA96RATOit1ES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Pa¢c: i of lb Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2n° Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 I Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: _ F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PAtis by GC/FID Acenaphthene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 }tg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L, 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluoresce 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. lndeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL = Detee#ian Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. 1.i1 # F-86198 t'aEez 16 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2'd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW ##6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC[F1D TRPH FL -PRO 1.08 0.200 Qm.g/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Ars nic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmium 213.1 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.I BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 mg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, F Dana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State .Engineering & Testing pRConsultants, SERVInlets TESTING LABORATORIES -ENGINEERS -INSPECTION SERVICES Hialeah, June 21, 2005 Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm 25 SE 2nd Avenue Miami, Florida - 33131 Attn: Matthew Schwartz Re: Limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase II for the Over Town Project located at 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida. Dear Sir; Pursuant to your authorization, All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc, performed a limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase II for the above -referenced project on June 09, 2005. The assessment was performed as a follow up to an earlier limited Environmental Site Assessment Phase II performed by All State Engineering & Testing Consultants, Inc on May 26, 2005. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work consisted of the following: 1. Installing four (4) shallow monitoring wells surrounding monitoring well MW#2. 2. Purging four (4) monitoring wells (MW # 3, MW # 4, MW # 5, MW # 6). 3. Collecting groundwater samples from the four (4) monitoring wells. 4. Analyzing groundwater samples from the locations for EPA method 8021, RCRA Metals, EPA 610 and TRPH. 5. Reporting the results from the analysis. The entire operation was performed in compliance with our DEP approved quality assurance plan (# 890184) and the tests were performed according to our Nelap certified laboratory E86198. 2380 West 78 Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Tel: (305) 888 — 3373 Fax: (305) 888 — 7443 TEST RESULTS The entire results can be summarized in the following manner: Parameter MW # 2 MW # 4 MW # 3, 5, 6 Target Level Units Volatile Organics BDL BDL BDL See Test Results µg/1 RCRA Metals BDL BDL BDL See Test Results mg/I TRPH 53.3 776 BDL 50 mg/I Acenaphthene 33.3 90.1 BDL 20 PTA Acenaphthylene BDL 75.4 BDL 210 µfill Benzo (a) Anthrance 3.62 1.94 BDL 0.2 µg/I Benzo (b) Flurenthene 10.2 2.17 BDL 0.2 µfill Fluorene BDL 46.7 BDL 280 µg/1 Naphthalene BDL 74.2 BDL 20 tig/l Phenanthrene BDL 98.4 BDL 210 110 The complete test results are enclosed with this report. CLOSURE: This report was prepared exclusively for the use of Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm. The conclusions provided by All State Engineering and Testing Consultants Inc., are based solely on the information presented in this report. This limited environmental site assessment was a follow up of the earlier site assessment performed at the subject site on May 26, 2005. In order to delineate the plume of contamination four (4) monitoring wells (MW # 3, MW # 4, MW # 5 and MW # 6) were installed surrounding the monitoring well MW # 2. There was some diesel contamination found in the monitoring well MW # 4 (see attached lab analysis report). The contamination found in the MW # 4 was greater than MW # 2. MW#3, MW#5, MW#6 were found below detection limit and no further investigation is required. Based on the test results below are the following recommendations and conclusions: • Perform six (6) soil borings each eight (8) feet maximum or to the soil/water interface collecting soil samples at 2 ft interval from the surface to the soil/water interface. Based on the OVA reading the soil sample with the worst -case condition will be tested for Rinker petroleum contaminated soil criteria. • Install one additional monitoring well (MW # 7) to east of monitoring well MW # 4. Collect the water samples from the monitoring well and analyzing the samples for EPA method 8021, RCRA Metals, EPA 610 and TRPH. Based on the results to date, the results from MW # 7 and the soil testing results a definite course of action will be taken. This may involve soil excavation and further exploration of the area to determine the source of contamination and an initial remediation program. It should be noted that this does not represent an Environmental Site Assessment of the subject property. The report represents the testing and reporting of four monitoring wells for the parameters referenced in the report. it has been a pleasure to assist you in this phase of your project. Should you have any questions regarding this report or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely Yours, Prepared By i5 F Waseem Quadri.R.E. #51481 Ashraf IgbaL ALL STATE ENGINEERING AND TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC. • o Attachment 1.0 Location Map Property Information Map My Home Miami -Dade County, Florida tn,af /daa * ..' 0 Property Information Map Aerial Photography -Photo USA 2004 This map was created on 6/21/2005 11:24:33 AM for reference purposes only. Web Site p 2002 Miami -Dade County. All rights reserved. 0 15111 CloseF': Page 1 of 1 Summary Details: Folio No.: 1 -Di 95-Q 0-1iQ Property: 249 263 NW 6 ST Mailing SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK W Address: C R A 49 NW 5 ST SUITE 100 MIA16 FL 33128-1811 Property information: PwnarY 7nrte. 6406 SOUTHEAST OVERTaWN- PARK WEST COM/RES US CWUC: 0040 MUNICIPAL Beds/Baths: 16116 Flops: 2 Living Units: 16 Arl1 SQ Footage: 6,752 gym. 149,856 SO FT fear Built 1951 ieg� MtAMI NORTH PB &A1 ALL OF Bt_K alesrr:ption: 55 LOT Si2E 149856 SO FT OR 17064-152 0196 3 -. Sale information: 0/R: Date: Amount: L477 5610963 5,000 Assessment information: Year. 2004 2003 Land Value: 52.247.840 S2,247,840 , Building Value: 554,608 52,302,448 �S2,302,448 S54,608 Market Va4fe: Anc-F ert Value: S2,302,446 '1' $2,302,448 22,32,446 $2,302,448 Tool Exemptions: Taxable Value: 50 S0 http://gisims2.miamidade.gov/myhome/printmap_asp` mapnrl=http://gisiz sImiamidade.go-.. 6/21/2005 • • Location : 249 263 NW 6 Street N W 3rd Ave NW 7th Street NW 6th Street N W 2nd Av Attachment 2.0 Laboratory Test Results ALL STATE ENGINEERING AND TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC. Testing laboratories -Engineers -Inspection Services -Chemist Drilling -Environmental Services Ch..ain. of. Custody & Analysis _Request _Form .: CLIENT: , N-R`i qt -x g;~.2 Cr ADDRESS: r 4 ?C 4 rye , r,ad►w, c( 331/ PROJECT: 1 i'E LIE( 0"O pR�,qe{'� ¢jai+ ADDRESS: JLJ , , /� �' •l t, q(. N ,1 ��J \ jf, / ;n• t //{ LAB LOG #: 2 3�/t-,G) ,_c?3%2c,c�`f 6 1 M �/ �r Lab n tt LOCATION DATE T[ No.ol conlafnere Sample Condition as received Cc °i ] . Temp: C c-,q I S tI P711/ ! � f 1'' � .. L . - = ' e 9 l60 f�9,,v it 1 ' ' ` " �. , .- �.. C : Sealed (yes) (no) 1 • Remar.lcs: Sampled By: A -j Date: c'C aeltr Time: i Received by: Date: Time: Received .Bx: �1 i-, ,,,,,, Date: 9%,/- Time: 51 3 c Received by: • Date: Time: 2380 West 78th street, Hialeah, Florida. 33016 Phone: 305- 888-3373/Fax: 5- 888-7443. • • • • All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES • CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I.D # E-86198 • Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami Florida Matrix: GW Location: I MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Methods _ Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC -Ball / PID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 WL, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Brornoform 8021E BDL 0.500 NgL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 jig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform. 802IB BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgel 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. 5. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-.1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL m- 0300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 80218 BDL 0300 lcg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dtbromoethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 gjL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 gg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dicbloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 802IB BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 µa 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021E BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78t Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 2...... All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc® TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEM11S - DRILLLNG - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB ID # E-86198 Page:2 of i6 B1axberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: —06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta diene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021E BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg1L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 rig(, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2; Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Drchloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 - F. S. Trichloro tluoro methane 802IB BDL 0.500 pet, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 Aga, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 Lt 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Tritnethyl benznen 8021B BDL 0.500 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, Farhana M. S Lab Director • SAjc, 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Client: Address: Project: Address: All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I.D # E-86198 Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Over town project, City of Miami 249 263 NW 6` Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GAT Sampling Date: Received Date: Report Date: 06/09/2005 06/09/2005 06/15/2005 Compound. Method PAHs by GCIFLD 3510/61t Acenaphthene 3510/61t Acenaphthylene Anthracene 3510/61( 3510/61( Benzo (a) Anthracene Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/611 Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/611 3510/611 Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/611 Benzo (k) Fluorenthene Chrysene 3510/611 3510/61 Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/61 Fluorenthene 3510/61 Fluorene Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/61 3510/61 Naphthalene 3510/61 Phenanthrene Pyrene 3510/61 Location: Time: Time: Report #: 0 0 0 0 Result BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL I3DL BDL MW #3 12:45 pm 03:30 pm 2330/13G-03/2005 DL Units 1.000 µg/L 1.000 µ8/L 0.200 I�S2 0.200 0.100 µ 0.200 pg/L 0.200 118/1- 0.200 µg/L 1.000 µgal 0.200 pgfL 0.200 1.000 µg/L 0.200 AWL 1.000 µ$/L 1.000 1ig/L 0.200 pg/L Lab. ID: - Sampled by: Received by: Report by: Date Ext. 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 , 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/03 06/13/05 Page:3 of 16 F0509/159 A.I. F.S. F.S. Date Analysis 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 06/13/05 Analyst F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Lim Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unlessotherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, �wlr tik4 •A -AA rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888--3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TEST[NG LABORATORIES • ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. I.D # E-86198 Page: 4 of 16 ., Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Finn Address: 25 SE 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #3 Lab. ID: F0509/159 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:45 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. , l Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FED TRPH FL -PRO BDL 0.500 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmivan 213.1 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 mWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection imit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, ktn VA hana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 • • All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - LNSPECTION SERVICES - C} EMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOf{ LAB 1.D # E-86198 Page: 5 of 16 Client: Btaxberg,Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2 Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Kam', Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC -Hail / FID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlombenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg1L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo ehloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 tig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dieblora ethane .8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µgiL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichlom propane 8021B BDL 0.200 tt€/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dl = Detection Limit BDL = .Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 6..... _ All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inca TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Page: 6 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2 Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Kam', Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36ym Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 ] Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbeazene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta diene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B 2.06 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl -"Pert -Butyl -Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021E BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 lig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-lsopropyl toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 igit 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra ehloro ethene 8021B 0.483 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 }ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B 0.327 0.200 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 jig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.100 AO.. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 fig/L. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trim.ethyl benznen 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021E BDL 0.500 fit/L. 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL - Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, wi- Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 • • All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc, TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES CHEMISTS - rouLLWNG - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I. D # E-86I 98 Page: 7 of 16 Client: BlaxberGrayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2 Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 pm Sampled by: A. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pna Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PAHs by GC/,ID Acenaphthene 3510/610 90.1 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 75.4 1.000 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 }tg/L. 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 1.94 0.200 ttgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benno (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 2.17 0.200 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 p.g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µgg... 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 46.7 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 13DL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 74.2 1.000 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 98.4 1.000 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL. 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL — Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC- For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, arhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Slieet, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTBSO LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSBZETION SERVICES - CHEMISTS . DRi1JJNG - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. ID # E-86198 Page_ 8 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2nd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #4 Lab. ID: F0509/160 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 01:36 pm Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-0312005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FID TRPH FL -PRO 776 0.500 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmium 213.1 BDL 0.005 mgfL 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 0.129 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 mg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.B. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc® TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - [NSPEC-PION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - ➢RILLINO • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOB LAB I.D # 11-86198 Page: 9 of Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2"d Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Monti Address: 249 263 NW 6tb Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330,BG-03/2005 Retort by: F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC -Hall / PID Benzene 8021B BDL 0.200 t/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 _ug/L µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 802113 BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021E 0.724 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 80218 BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 80218 BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 µgiL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.300 j.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. y 2,2-Dichloro propane 80218 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 Continued on page 10... All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. 7ESi'ING LM1BORATORIES- ENGINEERS • INSPECTION SERVICES- CHEMISTS • DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Page: 10 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: , 25 SE. 2'4 Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6'1' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pin Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result r DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021E BDL 0_500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta diene 8021B BDL 0_300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 . F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14i05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra ehloro ethene 8021B 7.36 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 pgIL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B 1.06 0.200 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 pa 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.100 Eg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trimethyl benznen 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021E BDL 0.300 jtWL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021E BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A_S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, . - hana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888.-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRJLL NO - ENV1RONNIENPAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB LD # E-86198 Page:11 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address; 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: Al. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 1 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result _ DL Units Date Ext.Analysis Date Analyst PAHs by GC/FID - Acenaphthene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 g.g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 It. g , 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 gg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i)Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 ___gg/L µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Diibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 .g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 -. BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 _gg/L µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director a (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, hana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888.7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc, TESTING LABORATORIES -ENGINEERS. INSPECTION SERVICES .CHEMISTS -DRILLING- ENVIRONMENITAL SERVICES Client: Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB.1.D # E-86198 Blaxbert Grayson Law Firm Page:12 of 16 Address: 25 SE. rd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miatni, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #5 Lab. ID: F0509/161 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 02:05 pm Sampled by: AI. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Thne: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL UnitsDate Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FID TRPH FL -PRO BDL 0.200 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208,1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cadmium 213.1 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 nng/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium. 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, arhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc® TESTING LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB I.D # E-86198 Page: 13 of 16 Client: Biaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2nd Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of 1VIIami Address: 249 263 NW 6th Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.I. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Methods Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst VOC by GC --Ball / ND Benzene 8021E BDL 0.200 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo dichloro methane 8021B BDL 0.200 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromoform 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Bromo methane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Sec -Butyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 pg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Ter -Butyl benzene 8021E BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Carbon Tetra chloride 8021B BDL 0.300 }cg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chlorobenzene 802IB BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloroform 8021B BDL 0.500 j g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Chloro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µgfL 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro ethyl vinyl Ether 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 4-Chloro toluene 8021B BDL 0.500 pig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B 0.283 0.200 1tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Cis-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo methane 8021B BDL 0.300 ltg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dibromo chloro methane 8021E BDL 0.200 Itg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Dichloro difluoro methane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo ethane (EDB) 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 8021B BDL 0.500 }.tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 ftg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichioro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,4-Dichioro benzene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichioro ethane 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 }ig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 p.g/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.200 }tg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.300 it 06/14/05 ,� 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 2,2-Dichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.200 j. L, 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit 2380 West 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (30) 888-7443 Continued on page 14... All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTLNG LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS • INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB ID # E-86198 Page: 14 of 16 Client: Blaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6* Street, Miam', Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst Ethylbenzene 8021B BDL 0.500 lcg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Hexachloro buta dime 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Isopropyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methylene Chloride 8021B 0.622 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Naphthalene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. n-Propyl Benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. p-Isopropyl toluene 802lB BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Styrene 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Tetra chloro ethene 8021B 1.99 0.300 Lig/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2,2,-Tetrachloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,2-Dichloro ethene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trans-1,3-Dichloro propene 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trichloro benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro ethene 8021B 0.363 0.200 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Trichloro fluoro methane 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,1-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 p.g L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,1,2-Trichloro ethane 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,3-Trichloro propane 8021B BDL 0.100 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. 1,3,5-Trimethyl benznen 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Toluene 8021B BDL 0.300 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Vinyl Chloride 8021E BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. Xylene, Total 8021B BDL 0.500 µg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, rhana M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 All State Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESi1NG LABORATORIES - ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISrs - MILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB 1.D # E-86198 Page: 15 of 16 Client: 13iaxberg Grayson Law Firm Address: 25 SE. 2' Avenue, Miami, FL. 33131 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6' Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date Analysis Analyst PARS by GC/F1D Acenaphthene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 lig/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Acenaphthylene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 lcg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 tg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (a) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.100 ig1L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (b) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 .g/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (g,h,i) Perylene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Benzo (k) Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Chrysene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 N.g1L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Dibenzo (a,h) Anthracene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorenthene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Fluorene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 µgfL 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 µg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Naphthalene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 ltg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Phenanthrene 3510/610 BDL 1.000 pg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. Pyrene 3510/610 BDL 0.200 ltg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F. S. DL = Detection Limit BDL Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, u-1. moo, t Farhana M. Sindhu Lab Director • 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 • • All State .Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. TESTING LABORATORIES • ENGINEERS - INSPECTION SERVICES - CHEMISTS - DRILLING - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Laboratory Analysis Report F DOH LAB. 1.D # E-86198 Client: l laxberg Grayson Law Finn Address: 25 SE. god Avenue, Miami, FL. 33I31 Project: Over town project, City of Miami Address: 249 263 NW 6`" Street, Miami, Florida Matrix: GW Location: MW #6 Lab. ID: F0509/158 Sampling Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 12:00 am Sampled by: A.1. Received Date: 06/09/2005 Time: 03:30 pm Received by: F.S. Report Date: 06/15/2005 Report #: 2330/BG-03/2005 Report by: F.S. Compound. Method Result DL Units Date Ext. Date .Analysis Analyst Organic GC/FID TRPH FL -PRO 1.08 0.200 mg/L 06/10/05 06/10/05 F. S. Metals by FL/AAS Arsenic 206.3 BDL 0.005 rxlg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Barium 208.1 BDL 0.100 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 F.S. Cade 213.1 BDL 0.005 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Chromium 218.1 BDL 0.050 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Lead 239.1 BDL 0.015 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. Mercury 245.1 BDL 0.001 mg/L 06/14/05 06/14/05 F.S. Selenium 270.3 BDL 0.002 mg/L 06/13/05 06/13/05 F.S. Silver 272.1 BDL 0.010 mg/L 06/09/05 06/10/05 N.M. BL = Detection Limit BDL = Below Detection Limit Analysis performed in accordance with E.P.A., A.S.T.M., Standard Methods, or other approved methods. Unless otherwise noted, mg/kg denotes wet weight. Test results meet all the requirements of NELAC. For any inquiries, please contact lab. Director at (305) 888-3373. Respectfully submitted, Acam. .T'A FiifhIna M. Sindhu Lab Director 2380 west 78th Street, Hialeah, Florida 33016 Phone #: (305) 888-3373 Fax #: (305) 888-7443 County Air Quality Report - Criteria Air Pollutants AirData US EPA Page 1 of 1 County Air Quality Report - Criteria Air Pollutants Geographic Area: Miami -Dade Co, FL Year: 2007 EPA Air Quality Standards: Carbon Monoxide: 35 ppm (1-hour average), 9 ppm (8-hour average) Nitrogen Dioxide: 0.053 ppm (annual mean) Ozone: 0.12 ppm (1-hour average), 0,08 ppm (8-hour average) Sulfur Dioxide: 0.14 ppm (24-hour average), 0.030 ppm (annual mean) Particulate (diameter < 2.5 micrometers): 65 pg/m3 (24-hour average), 15,0 pg/m3 (annual mean) Particulate (diameter < 10 micrometers): 150 pg/m3 (24-hour average), 50 pg/m3 (annual mean) Lead: 1.5 pg/m3 (quarterly mean) ppm=parts per million pglm3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 Rows See Disclaimer Row CO NO2 (P. pm) (PPm) 2nd 2nd Max Max 1-hr 8-hr SORT;, 3.7 Page 1 of 1 Annual Mean D3.(PP. 2nd Max 1-hr 4th Max 8-hr 2.0 0.012 0.090 0.068 SO2 (ppm) 2nd Max 24- hr .............. 0.001 Annual Mean 0.001 PM2.5 (pg/m3) 98th Percentile Annual Mean 44 10.9 PM10 PB (pg/m3) (pg/m3) 2nd Max Annual Quarterly Population County 24- Mean Mean hr 53 26 Export this report to a text file Create comma -delimited or tab -delimited values, compatible with PC spreadsheets and databases. f Comma Tab'', About exporting Miami- 2,253,362 Dade Co State FL EPA Region 04 Disclaimer: AirData reports are produced from a monthly extract of EPA's air pollution database, AQS. Data for this report were extracted on September 6, 2007, They represent the best information available to EPA from state agencies on that date. However, some values may be absent due to incomplete reporting, and some values subsequently may be changed due to quality assurance activities. The AQS database is updated daily by state and local organizations who own and submit the data. Please contact the pertinent state agency to report errors. Readers are cautioned not to infer a qualitative ranking order of geographic areas based on AirData reports. Air pollution levels measured in the vicinity of a particular monitoring site may not be representative of the prevailing air quality of a county or urban area. Pollutants emitted from a particular source may have little impact on the immediate geographic area, and the amount of pollutants emitted does not indicate whether the source is complying with applicable regulations. • httpJ/iaspub.epa.gov/airsdata/adags.summary?geotype=co&geocode= 12086&geoinfo—co%7E12086%7E... 9/7/2007 • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report CAATZ VAN '• iftt December 2004 Prepared by: ri Gannett Fleming In association with: PACO Group Public Financial Management Media Relations Group • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents List of Tables List of Appendices Conformity Requirements iv Executive Summary 1 1.0 Introduction 2 2.0 Conformity Requirements 3 3.0 Public Involvement 12 4.0 Statement of Conformity 18 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report ii • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Air Quality Conformity Analysis Results 2 Table 2: Public Involvement Activities Associated with the Year 2030 LRTP 17 Table 3: Cost Feasible Plan Emissions Reduction Summary 18 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: List of Acronyms Appendix B: Selected Model Summaries Appendix C: Year 2030 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan Project Lists by Conformity Horizon Year Appendix D: Year 2030 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan Project .Map Appendix E: Year 2000 EMIS Model Input & Output and Supporting FSUTMS Reports/Files Appendix F: Year 2005 EMIS Model Input & Output and Supporting FSUTMS Reports/Files Appendix G: Year 2015 EMIS Model Input & Output and Supporting FSUTMS Reports/Files Appendix H: Year 2025 EMIS Model Input & Output and Supporting FSUTMS Reports/Files Appendix I: Year 2030 EMIS Model Input & Output and Supporting FSUTMS Reports/Files Appendix J: Letter from FHWA/FTA Approving Previous CDR Appendix K: Letter from FDOT Approving Previous CDR Appendix L: Air Quality Newsletter Appendix M: Year 2030 LRTP Public Involvement Brochures Appendix N: Year 2030 LRTP Adoption Public Hearing Advertisements Appendix 0: MPO Year 2030 Adoption Resolution Appendix P: MPO Subcommittee Agendas Appendix Q: Agency Comments on .Draft Conformity Determination Report Air Quality Conformity Determination Report Ili • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 CONFORMITY REQUIREMENTS Name of MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Miami Urbanized Area ITEM EM NO. Requirement Page Number 1 A copy of the MPO's finding of conformity on the transportation plan is included. 3 2 An emissions reduction summary table such as Table 3 of this procedure is included. 2 3 The report demonstrates that the implementation of the transportation plan will contribute to annual emission reductions when compared to the 1990 base year network, and that the same is true for each analysis or horizon year. The horizon years were selected by the MPO through the Consultation Process. 3 4 The report documents that the transportation plan is in conformance with the SIP, the CAA, and the transportation conformity regulation, the metropolitan planning regulation, and other applicable and state requirements. 3 5 The report states that the transportation plan is financially constrained. 4 6 The dates the MPO's Technical and Citizens' Advisory Committees (TAC and CAC, respectively) reviewed the conformity finding, and the date the MPO adopted the transportation plan and its Conformity Determination Report, are indicated. 4 7 The MPO has documented that the contents of the transportation plan meet the requirements of 40 CFR 93.106 4 8 The emissions expected from the implementation of the transportation plan are consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the MPO shown in the approved maintenance plan; emissions for each horizon year are less than the 1990 base year inventory by any non- zero amount. 4 9 The date the area was re -designated to attainment by EPA is shown. 5 10 The transportation plan conforms to the purpose of the SIP by eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of NAAQS and achieving expeditious implementation of such standards. 5 11 Page numbers in the transportation plan where financially funded Transportation Control Measure (TCM)-type strategies, programs, and projects, including C.MAQ projects, as applicable, are identified. 5 12 The dates that FHWA/FTA made finding of conformity on the previous TIP and the TIP was approved by the Secretary of FDOT as shown. 6 13 The report identifies significant issues raised verbally or in writing at, 6 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report iv • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Name of MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Miami Urbanized Area ITEM I NO. Requirement Page Number or subsequent to, the TAC meeting by state or local air quality agencies. and how the MPO addressed such concerns; or, the report states that no significant comments were received. 6 14 Relevant interagency and/or interlocal agreements necessary to implement the conformity process are documented, and the parties to the agreements and the dates executed are cited. 6 15 The .MPO has documented how data collection, analysis, and development of the transportation plan was coordinated with the other MPOs in the same airshed (if applicable), and how the interagency consultation process was implemented to ensure consistency between emissions and conformity analyses. 6 16 The plan documents that the emissions budgets used in the conformity analysis are those contained in the SIP's approved maintenance plan, and the conformity analysis meets the analysis requirements of 40 CFR 93.118. 7 17 The long-range plan describes the future transportation system specifically enough to allow a determination of conformity. 7 18 The public involvement process is fully documented. If documented in the transportation plan rather than the plan's Conformity Determination Report, indicate the page number. 7 19 The MPO consulted with FDOT, FDEP, the local air quality program, transit providers, and local transportation agencies before adopting the transportation plan Conformity Determination Report. The date the public comment period began and the date the draft plan and CDR were provided to the public and agencies for review indicated. 7 20 The CDR documents whether significant changes were made in the conformity analysis after TAC review, indicates the purpose of the changes, the agencies consulted, the consultation process undertaken, and the outcome. 8 21 The report includes the MPO's written response to all significant (non - editorial) concerns of the state and local air quality agencies, whether such concerns were stated verbally or in writing. 8 22 The CDR explains how models to be used in the regional emissions analysis were evaluated and selected by the MPO through the consultation process. 8 23 if applicable, the MPO has documented that minor arterials and other transportation projects were deter wined through the consultation process to be regionally significant, and therefore subject to conformity analysis. 8 24 Projects were identified through the consultation process that 8 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report v • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan update to the Year 2030 Name of MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Miami Urbanized Area I ITEM I I Page No. Requirement -Number underwent a significant change in design concept and scope from the previous conforming transportation plan 25 The CDR documents methodology and emissions reductions resulting from TCMs and TSMs in the plan; the CDR documents whether certain exempt projects were evaluated to determine if they should be treated as non-exempt because of potential adverse impacts on air quality, if applicable. 8 26 The CDR. documents that all parties to the consultation process were notified by the MPO when revisions or amendments to the transportation plan and TIP added or deleted exempt projects, and the dates of such notification. as applicable. 8 27 The CDR documents that the EPA -approved emissions model was used, coordinated with FSUTMS and EMIS, and the use of other models was coordinated with FDOT, FHWA, DEP, and other parties 9 28 The sources of the most recent planning assumptions, derived from the estimates of current and future population, employment, travel, and congestion are documented. 10 29 The assumptions made about transit services and increases in transit fares, and road and bridge tolls over time are indicated. 10 30 All projects for each of the transportation plan's horizon years (including exempt projects) are listed in Appendix C of this report. 10 31 The report explains (as applicable) how the travel demand model VMT used as the basis for the 1990 base year emissions inventory has been adjusted to HAMS VMT and shows the results of the analysis. 10 32 Copies of the input files for the MOBILE model and the EMIS output files are included. 11 33 Projects exempt from the regional emissions analysis are highlighted in the project listings, or shown on a separate table. 11 34 Projects that have not completed a major step as defined in 40 CFR §51.394(c) are highlighted in the project listings, or shown on a separate table. 11 35 Off -model methodologies used to estimate emissions reductions from projects and programs not reflected in the transportation model are fully documented and each project or program is fully described. 11 36 The VMT from projects which are not regionally significant have been estimated in accordance with reasonable professional practice. 11 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report vi • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report documents the conformity determination of the Year 2030 Miami -Dade County Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the conformity redetermination for the FY 2005-2009 Transportation Improvement Program (T.IP), a subset of the Year 2030 LRTP, in fulfillment of the requirements of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments, This Conformity Determination Report (CDR) documents that implementation of projects listed in Appendix C. the Cost Feasible Plan Project Lists by Conformity Horizon Year, will contribute to emissions in the analysis years of: • Year 2005 "Cost Feasible;" • Year 2015 "Cost Feasible;" • Year 2025 "Cost Feasible;" and • Year 2030 "Cost Feasible." This report also establishes that as adopted the following: • The TIP is a subset of the Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan. The LRTP is consistent with 23 CFR Part 450, Subpart C in that it is financially constrained. The contents of the LRTP meet the requirements of 40 CFR 93.106 governing the required content of transportation plans. The emissions from the implementation of the LRTP are consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the MPO as shown in the approved maintenance plan. The 2030 LRTP conforms to the purpose of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) by eliminating the number of violations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and achieving expeditious implementation of such standards. During the Maintenance Period, the emissions from the implementation of the LRTP are consistent with the motor vehicle emission budgets in the approved maintenance plan. Both the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, air quality conformity determination were locally approved by the Miami Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Governing Board on November 18, 2004. • The plan documents that the emissions budgets used in the conformity analysis are those contained in the SIP's approved maintenance plan, and the conformity analysis meets the analysis requirements of 40 CFR 93.118. Projected emissions were calculated using the travel demand model and Mobile6. The results of the air quality conformity analysis are summarized in the table below. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report i • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Table 1: Air Quality Conformity Analysis Results 2000 Base Year 2005 .Interim Cost Feasible 2,204,700 2.316,900 1,183,300 1,283,800 VOCOx* 2005 &2015 (2005 &. 2015 udge1 C1)cge€=1127 )_ 89.95 64.37 2015 Interim Cost Feasible 2,721,700 1,425,400 35.51 45.62 2025 Interim Cost Feasible 3,006,700 1,535,300 27.35 26.49 2030 Interim Cost Feasible 3,149,300 1,590.200 28.27 24.27 *All emissions are in tons per day 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Miami -Dade Long Range Transportation Plan must conform to the provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendment (CAAA) of 1990 in addition to being financially feasible. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) designated Miami -Dade County as a moderate non -attainment area for national ozone standards. In 1995 the USEPA re -designated Miami -Dade County to attainment status, which means that for a twenty-year period, Miami -Dade County must demonstrate conformity to the maintenance plan through its Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan. Effective in June. 2004, the EPA transitioned to the 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM25) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for transportation conformity. The new standard is based on averaging air quality measurements over 8- hour blocks of time for a three year periods, instead of the I -hour time period mandated by the previous standard. The 8-hour standard is more representative of conditions occurring over a long-term exposure. As a maintenance area under the 1-hour rule, Miami -Dade County is subject to conformity for a statutory one-year grace period after being re -designated as attainment by the new standards (June, 2005 the end of the one- year period). The Air Quality analysis for the 2030 P1an is based on the new 8-hour NAAQS. The highway and transit projects included in the air quality anaylsis are listed by priority in the LRTP Summary Document and by conformity horizon year (open -to -traffic year) in Appendix C of this report. Projected emissions were calculated using the travel demand model and Mobile6. The emissions calculated by the emission program (EMIS) are to be converted by a factor in order to be consistent with the highway statistics collected for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). This HPMS factor is the ratio of the HPMS total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the VMT calculated for the same year by EMIS. The reported HPMS VMT value for Miami -Dade County for 2000 (validation year), adjusted to account for the peak ozone season (45,216,790). is Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 2 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 divided by the EMIS VMT (45,258,452) resulting in an adjustment factor of 0.999079. This factor is referred to as the EMISFAC and it is found in the PROFILE.MAS, the file use by the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure software to define Miami -Dade County specific model parameters. 2.0 CONFORMITY REQUIREMENTS The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has outlined thirty-six items to be addressed by this conformity determination report in order to fulfill the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. This section provides a detailed response to each of the thirty-six items identified in the District Review of Conformity Determinations (Topic 525-0I0-014-g).) Item 1 The MPO certifies that the Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, meet the criteria for air quality as set forth in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Item 2 Emissions Reduction Summary Tables are included herein on page 18. To illustrate the conformity determination, a brief synopsis of results are presented on page 4 for the Emission Budget Test and the Conformity of the Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP. Item 3 This conformity determination documents that implementation of the projects listed in the Miami -Dade County Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, will contribute to emissions reductions when compared to the 1990 base year network, and that the same is true for each analysis or horizon year. The entire Southeast Florida airshed (.Miami -Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties) has used 2000 as a common base year for coordination purposes. The horizon years were selected by the MPO through the consultation process while following all applicable state and federal guidelines. Item 4 Furthermore, this report documents that the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005- 2009 TIP, are in conformance with the emissions budgets contained in the State Implementation Plan (SIP), the metropolitan planning regulation, and the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. Florida Department of Transportation, Office of Policy Planning (July 9, 1998) District Review of Conformity Determinations, FDOT: Tallahassee, FL (525-010-014-g). Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 3 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Item 5 The Plan is consistent with 23 CF.R Part 450, Subpart C in that it is financially constrained. Further detailed discussion of the financial constraints is offered in the Year 2030 LRTP document. Item 6 The dates the MPO's Technical and Citizens' Advisory Committees (TPTAC and CAC, respectively) reviewed the conformity finding, and the date the MPO adopted the transportation plan and its Conformity Determination Report, are indicated below. The Transportation Planning Council (TPC) membership includes the directors and representatives from: the transit operator (MDT), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the Miami -Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM), the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District 6, the Florida Turnpike Enterprise, the Miami -Dade Expressway Authority (MDX), the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, and Miami - Dade County Departments of Public Works, Aviation, Seaport, Information Technology ([TD), and South Florida Regional Transportation Aurhority (SFRTA); plus, representatives from the most populous cities in the county (Miami, Hialeah, Miami Beach, North Miami, Miami Gardens) and the Dade League of Cities representing citizens from all municipalities. The TPC was presented with preliminary Year 2030 LRTP documentation at its September 20, 2004 and October 12, 2004 meeting. At the November 8, 2004 meeting, the TPC approved the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP. The Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) advises the MPO Governing Board and the Board of County Commissioners on achieving quality transportation facilities and programs for the citizens of Miami -Dade County. CTAC participated in the review and development of the Year 2030 LRTP starting at its March 23, 2004 meeting. CTAC hosted a series of public meetings with the Miami -Dade citizenry, for the development of the 2030 LRTP as follows: July 20`" (North and Northwest areas) — July 21s` (Beach/CBD and West areas) -- July 22nd (Central and South A.reas), July 26th (Joseph Caleb Center), Item 7 The contents of the transportation plan meet the requirements of 40 CFR 93.106 governing the required content of transportation plans. Item 8 The emissions expected from the implementation of the transportation plan are consistent with the motor vehicle emission budgets for the MPO as shown in the approved maintenance plan; emissions for each horizon year are less than the 1990 base year inventory by any non -zero amount. No goals, directives or recommendations contained Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 4 Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 within the adopted Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan will be in conflict with the goals and intent of the SIP. The Year 2030 LRTP will conform to the purpose of the SIP by eliminating the number of violations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Projects in the Year 2030 LRTP will contribute to the expeditious implementation of the NAAQS and wilt not cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard, increase the frequency or severity of any existing violations of any standards, or delay the timely attainment of any standards or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in the area. Item 9 On April 25, 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) redesignated the Southeast Florida Airshed (made up of Miami -Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties) from moderate non -attainment for the pollutant ozone to attainment status. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) submitted the redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Southeast Florida Airshed on November 8, 1993, as an amendment to the SIP. On December 20, 2002, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) submitted revisions to the State Implmentation Plan (SIP) to the USEPA. The USEPA issued a final rule effective April 13, 2004, approving the revisions. The adjusted emissions budgets in the SIP for Miami -Dade are the caps used here to demonstrate conformity of the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005- 2009 TIP, with the requirements of the CAAA. Item 10 The Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, will conform to the purpose of the SIP by eliminating the number of violations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and achieving expeditious implementation of such standards. Emissions resulting from the implementation of the Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan were compared to the emission budgets established by the redesignation request maintenance plan. Implementation of the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset. the FY 2005-2009 TIP, is estimated to result in emissions which fall below the emissions budget set for the analysis years of 2005, 2015, 2025, and 2030. During the Maintenance Period, the emissions expected from the implementation of the long-range plan are consistent with the motor vehicle emission budgets in the approved maintenance plan (51.428 and 51.430). Item 11 Even though there are no required Transportation Control Measures (TCMs ) in the Florida SIP, voluntary TCM strategies are recommended. No off -model air quality emission benefits are claimed as part of this Air Quality Conformity Determination Report. While no CMAQ projects are TCMs. the long-range plan identified some TCM-type strategies, programs or projects. These TCMs are intended to reduce single occupant vehicles (SOV), reduce traffic congestion and increase transit usage and the use of high occupancy vehicles (HOVs). Existing TCM activities include: Metrobus (72 routes), Metrorail (21 miles), Metromover (1.9 miles), Park -and -Ride and HOV Parking .Lots, Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 5 • Miami -Dade Transportation Flaw Update to the Year 2030 Exclusive Bus and Carpool Lanes, Miami -Dade Traffic Control System, Bikeways, Transportation System Management (TSM). intelligent Transportation System (ITS), Incident Management, and Transportation Demand Management activities (TDM). Item 12 Federal Conformity findings on the FY 2005-2009 TIP and re -determination of conformity of the Year 2025 LRTP Conformity (previous Plan), by FHWA/FTA were approved September 30, 2004. The approval letter from FHWA/FTA is in Appendix J. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) recommended to FHWA/FTA approval of the Miami -Dade County's program in a letter dated August 11, 2004. Florida's Secretary of Transportation, on letter dated August 31, 2004, submitted the State TIP to FHWA for review and approval. These letters are included in appendices J and K, respectively, of this report Item 13 FDOT District 6 and FHWA Florida Division Office provided comments and input which have been incorporated to this report. No other significant concerns were received by the MPO from outside parties, state or local air quality agencies. These comments can be found in Appendix Q of this report. Item 14 Relevant interagency and/or interlocal agreements necessary to implement the conformity process and the parties to the agreements and the dates executed are cited as follows: Memorandum of Agreement (MDA) At its June 2, 1998 meeting, the MPO Governing Board passed Resolution # 13-98 approving an amendment to the MOA. The County Manager executed the MO.A by signing, on behalf on the MPO, the local air agency (DERM) and the local transit operator (MDT), on June 6, 1998. Previously, the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Miami Urbanized Area had approved, on September 22,1994, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) implementing the conformity criteria and consultation procedures revision to the Florida State Implementation Plan (SIP) pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. This MOA was amended to reflect revisions published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on November 15, 1995. The MPO Governing Board approved the proposed amendment by MPO Resolution #46-96 of July 11, 1996. Item 15 Data collection, analysis, and development of the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, was coordinated with the other MPOs in the same airshed, and the interagency consultation process was implemented to ensure consistency between emissions and conformity analyses. Once the consultant team was on -board, and the scope of services established, the Broward County LRTP Project Manager was invited to participate in the selection committee, and data was exchanged between the counties to Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 6 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 ensure that roadway and transit projects were in sync across the county line. Similarly. concepts, methods and results were exchanged, as the respective plans were developed. Both the Broward County MPO and Pahn Beach County MPO were consulted throughout the process through the :Inter-MPO for Air Quality (IMAQ) Subcommittee Meetings. These regularly scheduled meetings allowed for consultation and coordination between the MPOs within the Southeast Florida Airshed. A teleconference meeting of the Air Quality Interagency Consultation Partners was held on September 24, 2004. At this meeting Air Quality results for the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005- 2009 TIP. were discussed. Item 16 The plan documents that the emissions budgets used in the conformity analysis are those contained in the SIP's approved maintenance plan, and the conformity analysis meets the analysis requirements of 40 CFR 93.118. Item 17 The long-range plan describes the future transportation system specifically enough to allow a determination of confo,tuity. The 2030 LRTP Summary Document report contains the plan's project priority listings (pages 22 through 37). The lists in Appendix C of this report contain the projects in the Cost Feasible Plan, listed by conformity horizon year. The map in Appendix D of this report visually displays the projects' general geographic location and depicts highway and transit improvements included in the Year 2030 Cost Feasible Plan Item 18 The public involvement process is fully documented in Section 3.0 of this document (pages 12 through 17), including a listing of all public involvement activities undertaken throughout the Plan development process. Item 19 The MPO consulted with FDOT, FDEP, the local air quality program, transit providers, and local transportation agencies before adopting the transportation plan Conformity Determination Report. A teleconference meeting of the Air Quality Interagency Consultation Partners was held on September 24, 2004. The MPO was not available to participate in the teleconference, however communication and coordination with air agencies occurred after the teleconference via e-mail. At this meeting Air Quality results for the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP, were discussed. Membership of the Air Quality Interagency Consultation partners include EPA Region IV (Atlanta), FHWA Florida Division Office, FTA Region IV (Atlanta), FDEP Central and Regional Offices, FDOT Central Office, FDOT Districts 4, and 6, the MPOs in Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 7 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Broward, Palm Beach and Miami -Dade and their respective local air agencies and local transit providers . Item 20 Up to September 30, 2004, no significant changes were made in the conformity analysis after the TPC review. Reviews by other committees are still ongoing. The CDR was adopted by the MPO Governing Board at its November 18, 2004 meeting. Item 21 No significant concerns were received by the MPO from other outside parties, and no major concerns needed to be addressed verbally or in writing to any significant (non - editorial) concerns of any other state and local air quality agencies. Item 22 No regional model was used for emissions analysis. Each County within the Southeast Florida Airshed used their own urban model for emission analysis. Item 23 The MPO through the consultation process with Broward and Palm Beach Counties and FDOT Districts 4 and 6 and the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority has coordinated to identify a number of corridors of regional significance included as part of the Regional chapter of the 2030 plan. Item 24 No projects identified through the consultation process have undergone a significant change in design concept and scope from the Year 2025 LRTP, which is the previous conforming transportation plan and its subset, the FY 2002-2006 TIP. Item 25 No particular methodologies, such as off -model techniques to determine emission reduction benefits from Transportation Control Measures (TCM) or Transportation Systems Management (TSM), were used as part of this Plan Update. No emission benefits or emission reductions resulting from implementation of TCMs or TSMs in the plan are claimed. No particular exempt project was evaluated to determine if they should be treated as non-exempt because of potential adverse impacts on air quality. Item 26 All parties to the consultation process were notified by the MPO when revisions or amendments to the transportation plan added or deleted exempt projects, and the dates of such notification. The 2030 LRTP was approved by the MPO at its meeting of November 18th,2004. The previous plan, the 2025 LRTP, was originally adopted at the December 6, 2001 the MPO Governing Board Meeting. The previous 2025 Plan was amended as follows: Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 8 • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 ✓ October 24, 2002 by MPO Resolution to advance the North Dade Transit Corridor to Priority 1. V. February 6, 2003 by MPO Resolution to advance East-West Multimodal Corridor to Priority 1 from Priority IV Unfunded. ✓ March 13, 2003 by MPO Resolution for US-1/Dixie Highway Premium Transit Corridor for purposes of preparation of preliminary studies only. Project construction remains in Priority IV Unfunded. ✓ April 24, 2003 by MPO Resolution advancing to Priority 1 (from Priority :IV) the widening (from 2 to 4 lanes) of SW 56 Street from SW 158 Avenue to SW 152 Avenue. In addition the amendment approved the future widening of SW 56 Street west of 164 Avenue to be funded by Developer. ✓ October 23, 2003 by MPO resolution, a series of amendments requested by Public Works Department were approved as follows: removal from plan of the project NW 170 St widening from 2 to 4 lanes (from NW 87 to NW 77 Ay); adding traffic calming measures South Miami Avenue (from SW 25 Rd. to SW 15 Rd); lane reduction (from 5 to 2 lanes) for SW 62 Ave from SW 70 to SW 64 St; widening SW 160 Street from 2 to 4 lanes (from SW 147 to W 137 Ave); adding a new 4-lane bridge at NW 138 Street over Miami Canal. No other amendments to the 2025 LRTP (the previous plan) were made. Amendments made to the previous 2025 LRTP were all advertised as public hearings before being adopted by the MPO Governing Board. Item 27 The EPA -approved emissions model was used, coordinated with FSUTMS and EMIS. The use of MOBILE6 was coordinated with FDOT, FHWA, FDEP, and other regional and local parties. Projected emissions were calculated using the travel demand model and Mobile6. The emissions calculated by the .EMIS program are to be converted by a factor in order to be consistent with the highway statistics collected for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). This HPMS factor is the ratio of the HPMS total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the VMT calculated for the same year by EMIS. The reported HPMS VMT value for Miami -Dade County for 2000 (validation year), adjusted to account for the peak ozone season (45,216,790), is divided by the EMIS VMT (45,258,452) resulting in an adjustment factor of 0.999079. This factor is referred to as the EMISFAC and it is found in the PROFILE.MAS. Item 28 The Year 2030 LRTP documents that the most recent planning assumptions, derived from the estimates of current and future population, employment, travel. and congestion were used in its development. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 9 • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 The Miami -Dade County .Planning Department developed the socioeconomic data for the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset, the FY 2005-2009 TIP. This data included population. employment, school enrollment, and other data for the base year 2000 and the horizon year 2030. This data serves as input into the travel demand model and is used to forecast future travel demand and future congestion. The .Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS), the travel demand model supported by the Florida Department of Transportation and used by MPOs and transportation agencies throughout the State of Florida, is the travel demand model used for the Miami -Dade Transportation Planning Model (MTPM). The model used for this 2030 plan update utilizes a "lifestyle" based trip production model and double-digit facility type and area type coding (first used for the 2025 update). Data collected from the Southeast Florida Regional Travel Characteristics Study have been incorporated into the model to facilitate these enhancements. The model was validated to 2000 base conditions and used to predict future year travel and congestion. Item 29 There were no changes in the assumptions .made about transit services and increases in transit fares, and road and bridge tolls. Item 30 All projects included in the Plan are listed in separate tables for each air quality conformity horizon year in Appendix C. Appendix D depicts highway and transit improvements that will be open to traffic by the year 2030, including projects funded in the 2005 TIP. Item 31 Projected emissions were calculated using the travel demand model and Mobile6. Compliance with VMT FACTOR: The emissions calculated by the EMIS program are to be converted by a factor in order to be consistent with the highway statistics collected for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). This HPMS factor is the ratio of the HPMS total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the VMT calculated for the same year by EMIS. The reported HPMS VMT value for Miami -Dade County for 2000 (validation year), adjusted to account for the peak ozone season (45,216,790), is divided by the EMIS VMT (45,258,452) resulting in an adjustment factor of 0.9990794. This factor is referred to as the EMISFAC and it is found in the PROFILE.MAS VMT Factor = HPMS VMT: = 45,216,790 = 0.9990794 EMIS VMT: 45,258,452 The Highway Performance Monitoring Systems (HPMS) VMT data is required to be used for estimating all emission values (40 CFR §51.452 (b) (2)). Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 10 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Item 32 Copies of the input files for the MOBILE model and the EMIS output files are included in appendices E through H of this report. Item 33 There are no projects exempt from the regional emissions analysis included as part of this Year 2030 LRTP Update. Item 34 There are no projects that have not completed a major step as defined in 40 CFR §51394(c) highlighted in the project listings, or shown on a separate table. §51.394 Applicability (B) During the transitional, control strategy, and maintenance periods, the applicable implementation plan (or implementation plan submission) established a budget for such emissions as part of reasonable further progress, attainment or maintenance strategy. (c) Limitations: (1) Projects subject to this regulation for which NEPA process and a conformity determination have been completed by FHWA or FTA may proceed toward implementation without further conformity determinations if one of the following major steps has occurred within the past three years: NEPA process completion; start of final design; acquisition of a significant portion of the right-of-way; or approval of the plans, specifications and estimates. All phases of such projects which were considered in the conformity determination are also included, if those phases were for the purpose of funding, final design, right-of-way acquisition, construction, or any combination of these phases. Item 35 EPA -approved emissions estimating model MOB.I.LE6 was used. The emissions calculated by the EMIS program are to be converted by a factor in order to be consistent with the highway statistics collected for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). This HPMS factor is the ratio of the HPMS total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the VMT calculated for the same year by EMIS. The reported HPMS VMT value for Miami -Dade County for 2000 (validation year), adjusted to account for the peak ozone season (45,216,790), is divided by the EMIS VMT (45,258,452) resulting in an adjustment factor of 0.999079. This factor is referred to as the EMISFAC and it is found in the PROFILE.MAS. Item 36 The VMT from projects which are not regionally significant have been estimated in accordance with reasonable professional practice. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 11 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 3,0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public involvement is an important aspect of all transportation planning projects. Prior to the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) approval, MPOs must provide citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of transportation agency employees, freight shippers, providers of freight transportation services, private providers of transportation, representatives of users of public transit and other interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the LRTP, as required by federal requirements. The Miami -Dade MPO was committed to assure that opportunities for public involvement were available throughout the duration of the project for other public agencies, stakeholders, property owners, business interests, community groups, environmental agencies and the general public. The Miami -Dade MPO offered open, frequent, and effective public participation activities throughout the project. The input obtained from the public was considered during the development of the 2030 Plan Update. In December 2003. the Long Range Transportation Plan Update (to the Year 2030) Public Involvement Plan & Program was developed as a project specific Public Involvement Program (PIP) to complement the MPO Public Involvement Program. The project PIP identifies the mechanisms that were available to interested individuals and groups to participate in the planning process of the 2030 Plan. The project PIP also identifies the methods of project coordination that were employed, business and community groups, public organizations, elected and appointed officials and agencies having jurisdictional responsibilities over planning and transportation issues. Public Involvement goals were developed to guide the consensus building process. Goal 1: Provide sufficient opportunities of various types for stakeholders to participate in the project and provide input. Objectives: Facilitate an active role for citizens in the planning process at key decision points throughout the study period. Minimize misinformation through accurate and two-way public communication and active listening. Strive for consensus on project decisions, products, and recommendations. Goal 2: Promote effective intergovernmental coordination. Objectives: Identify and provide information linkages to crucial community interests. Build credibility and support for the study process and foster an attitude of cooperation. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 12 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Inform project participants in order to provide a working knowledge of transportation. land use, and community development concepts. Goal 3: Present public information in a clear, concise, and understandable formate Objectives: Minimize the use of technical jargon in public informational materials and presentations. Encourage the use of effective graphics to illustrate project concepts. Provide opportunities for one-on-one discussions with knowledgeable project personnel to answer specific questions about the project and address community concerns. The following direct communication techniques were employed to notify the public about the 2030 Plan, to inform the public about the current status of the project and future activities and to solicit public input during the study. Internet Addresses The MPO maintained and published an internet address at <www.miamidad.e.uov-napo> used by the public to transmit questions and comments concerning the Plan Update to the project team. All comments were documented. Countywide Mailing List The MPO maintained a permanent mailing list of all elected officials, MPO committee members, federal, state, and local agencies. community groups, and individuals interested in long-range transportation planning issues in Miami -Dade County. This mailing list was used as a basis for the dissemination of projects brochures, special notifications, and other messages that are appropriate for this group. Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) Meetings MPO staff presented information about the July 2004 LRTP Public Workshops to the CTAC at the May 26, 2004 meeting. Transportation Planning Council (TPC) Meetings Three presentations were made to the TPC during key points in the study process and included the following: ■ April 2004 — Travel Demand Model ■ September 2004 — Cost Feasible Plan information item • October 2004 — Cost Feasible Plan approval All comments provided by the TPC concerning the 2030 Plan Update were documented. Mr Quality Conformity Determination Report 13 • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Newspaper Advertisements Under Horida law, all public meetings and workshops must be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation so that the public has an opportunity to attend such meetings. These advertisements were used to announce the date, time, and location of area -specific public meetings. Special efforts were made to make the announcement in local publications such as the Miami Herald, El Nuevo Herald and En Marche, with high levels of readership in the respective study area. News Releases to Local Media A press release was prepared and sent to the local media requesting citizen participation in the future of Miami -Dade County's transportation system by attending the Long Range Transportation Plan Workshops held in July 2004. The date, time and location of the workshops were provided. Radio and Television Shows Community involvement in the LRTP process was discussed during radio and TV shows. The M.PO produced a radio show with the Haitian AM station. WRHB Radio Carnivale on February 7th, 2004. This broadcast was taped live and was translated from English to Creole. The show began with a brief introduction on the role of the MPO and discussed how the Haitian community can become involved in the LRTP process. The MPO taped a television program that aired on the Haitian Television Network (HTN) on February 8th, 2004. The program was taped in English and translated to Creole to provide transportation information to the Haitian community. The broadcast featured an introduction on the MPO and how the community could become involved in the LRTP process. In addition, Phillip Brutus interviewed MPO project managers on transportation issues affecting the Haitian community. Multi-lingual written materials, project brochures, and graphic displays Written materials and graphic displays with easy -to -understand text, maps, photographs, and other media were used to convey technical information in dear terms to the general public concerning the project. Large -size, colorful graphics, and maps were used during public meetings to facilitate the public's understanding of the 2030 Plan its issues. Brochures were developed at key points in the project including at the project start, prior to the public workshops and after the adoption. The first brochure explained the purpose and importance of the Long Range Transportation Plan Update, and how to get involved. This brochure was produced in English, Spanish and Creole. The second brochure explained the future socio-economic (population and employment) conditions that are expected in the Year 2030, Miami -Dade County's associated travel needs within the 21-year horizon, and the potential opportunities to improve the County's highway and public transportation system to meet those needs. This was a countywide brochure produced in English, Spanish, and Creole. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 14 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Individual planning area brochures were produced for the six planning areas including: North, Northwest, Beach/CBD, Central, West and South in conjunction with the countywide brochure for the public workshops. These brochures were produced in English and Spanish. The third brochure will summarize the findings of the study process and will identify the final recommendations for the 2030 Plan. This brochure will be used after the 2030 Plan is adopted to document the final plan development process. This brochure will be produced in English and Spanish and may be used as an insert for the Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald newspapers. Environmental Justice The Transportation Equity Act for the Twenty-first Century (TEA-21) defines the traditionally underserved as "...including, but not limited to. low-income and minority households." Special outreach efforts were made to the traditionally underserved population groups by holding community workshops throughout Miami -Dade in locations convenient to these individuals. These special efforts were attempted to encourage participation and input including minorities, senior citizens. low income, non- English speaking, and illiterate. Community Workshops A series of community workshops were held in the summer of 2004 at the time when the Plan's goals, objectives, and policies, and the technical information concerning the future travel needs were available for discussion by the public. Project staff from the consultant team and the MPO staff were available to explain the 2030 Plan, its issues and implications as well as answer questions from attendees. Homeowner Associations were contacted to attend the workshops. All public comments were documented. The workshops were held as follows: • July 20, 2004 -North Dade Regional Library • July 20, 2004 -Miami Lakes Library • July 21, 2004 -Miami Beach City Hall • July 21, 2004 -West Kendall Regional Library • July 22, 2004 -South Miami City Hall • July 22, 2004 -Homestead City Hall • July 26, 2004 -Joseph Caleb Center MPO Public Hearing Near the end of the 2030 Plan development process, a public hearing was held at a regularly scheduled MPO Governing Board meeting to meet the federal and state transportation planning requirements. This public hearing was advertised and the 2030 Plan documents will be available for inspection by the public. The public hearing for the 2030 Plan Update adoption was held at the November 18, 2004 MPO Governing Board meeting. Air quality Conformity Determination Report 15 • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Additional Activities The MPO has researched and developed several additional activities to increase public participation in the Plan Update. These innovative activities include presenting the information to locations where people gather and distributing information through new channels. These proposed additional activities included the following: ■ Cultural Events - The MPO coordinated bi-monthly public outreach events with some taking place at local cultural events. During these events. the M.PO provided information on the development of the 2030 Plan to the public. ■ 2030 LRTP Update Website - The MPO dedicated a section of their website <www.miamidade.govimpo> exclusively for the 2030 Plan that provided both written and visual information. The 2030 Plan section contained up-to-date progress of the project including meeting agendas, meeting summaries, and maps. The public was able to provide comments on the 2030 Plan to the MPO through this portal. • Miami -Dade County Library - The countywide brochure was distributed throughout the Miami- Dade County Library system. ■ Interactive Town Hall Meeting - The CTAC hosted a Town Hall Meeting in the County Commission Chambers that allowed the general public to comment via e- mail, fax, telephone, or in person in March 2004. Project staff was available to answer questions. This meeting was held in conjunction with the public comment period on the draft Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). ■ MPO Newsletters - The countywide brochure was turned into a newsletter and mailed to over 2000 entities. In addition, the Spring 2005 Newsletter will focus exclusively on the outcome of activities associated with the LRTP cycle. • Accommodations for the Disabled - The MPO encouraged participation in the 2030 Plan by disabled individuals by providing special accommodations. All public workshops and the public hearings were held in buildings that are physically accessible to the disabled. All meeting announcements included information directing any disabled individuals that need special accommodation to participate in the public meetings to call the MPO Office for assistance. Table 2 shows a list of community outreach events sponsored by the MPO through the development of the 2030 LRTP. Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 16 • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Table 2: Public Involvement Activities Associated with the Year 2030 LRTP Community Outreach Events Even Name' Address C State fie;f ` Event Commissioner Moss' Park Dedication SW 164 Street and Miami SW 157 Avenue FL 6/7/2003 Ludlam Trail Event South Miami FL 8/9/2003 WQBA Palmetto Station Remote Miami FL 9/4/2003 Orange Ribbon Day Miami Beach FL 10/14/2003 Transportation Conference 2003 400 SE 2nd Avenue Miami FL 11/8/2003 Miami Lakes Bike Radio Miami Lakes FL 11/8/2003 Bike and Ride Day Miami FL 11/14/2003 District 6 Annual Holiday Toy Drive and Party 351 SW 4 Street Miami FL 12/6/2003 Delcalzi vs. Brown 7400 NW 75 Street Medley FL 12/8/2003 Commissioner Moss's Open House 111 NW First Street Miami FL 12/20/2003 Project ANA Coral Gables FL 1/22/2004 SIS Public Workshop Miami FL 1/23/2004 MDPD Animal Services Unit Miami FL 2/21/2004 South Dade Immigrant Rights Fair Florida City FL 2/28/2004 "Directors Meeting Miami FL 3/17/2004 The Department of Human Services Directors Meeting 2340 SW 32nd Avenue Miami FL 3/17/2004 Barry University Commuters Services Open House Miami Shores FL 3/18/2004 Barry University Commuter Services Open House Miami Shores FL 3/19/2004 Mickosoukee Indian Tribe Health Fair Mickosoukee Reservation FL 3/24/2004 Coral Gables Methodist Church Silver Club Miami Beach Fitness Festival 536 Coral Way Coral Gables Miami Beach FL 3/25/2004 FL 3/27/2004 Directors Meeting for Department of Human Services 1701 NW 30th Avenue Miami FL 4/2/2004 St. Brendan High School Career Day Miami FL 4/2/2004 8th Annual Miami Riverday Miami FL 4/10/2004 Orientation Resource/Club Fairs Miami FL 4/13/2004 FIU Earth Day FIU Preserve Miami FL 4/14/2004 Neighborhood P.R.I.D.E. Week Miami FL 4/24/2004 Men's Health Fair 16900 SW 100th Perrine Avenue FL 6/19/2004 Commissioner Rebeca Sosa's Community Outreach Even 901 east 10 Avenue Hialeah FL 7/8/2004 Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 17 • • • Miami -Dade Transportation Plan Update to the Year 2030 Conimuni Outreach Events The Shops at Sunset Mail 5701 Sunset Drive Head Start Annual Training Conference Florida City/ Homestead Neighborhood Service Cente 400 SE 2 Avenue 1600 NW 6 Court South Miami Miami Florida City FL FL FL 7/13/2004 8/9/2004 8/24/2004 Jackson Memorial Hospital 1611 NW 12 Avenue Miami FL 8/27/2004 Community Council Area 12 9101 SW 97th Miami Avenue FL 9/15/2004 4.0 STATEMENT OF CONFORMITY Emissions resulting from the implementation of the Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan were compared to the emission budgets established by the designation request maintenance plan. Table 3 illustrates that implementation of the Year 2030 LRTP and its subset. the FY 2005-2009 TIP, is estimated to result in emissions which fall below the emissions budget set for the analysis years of 2005, 2015, 2025 and 2030. During the Maintenance Period, the emissions expected from the implementation of the long-range plan are consistent with the motor vehicle emission budgets in the approved maintenance plan 051.428 and §51.430). To establish conformity, the MPO has followed the Florida Department of Transportation, Topic No. 525-010-014-g of July 9, 1998 and titled "District Review of Conformity". This procedure supplements USEPA`s transportation conformity regulation (40 CFR Part 51) and was prepared by the FDOT Office of Policy Planning. The FDOT Directive addresses the transportation and air quality planning methodology to be employed by the State's urban areas using the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS) and the Mobile Emissions Series Models to assess the status of air quality compliance efforts. Table 3: Cost Feasible Plan Emissions Reduction Summary Population 1,937,800 34,349,104 2 117.70 156.60 1 2005 & 20E. Emission =' Budget' ... 127.50 74.60 2,316,900 49,912,500 2 109.99 2 64.37 2 2,721,700 57,367,700 2 45.62 2 3,006,700 64,664,200 2 26.49 2 1111111111111 3,149,300 68,639,800 2 24.27 2 28.27 2 'Source: Approved Air Quality Maintenance Plan (2005-2015) — Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties 'Source: EM1S.OUT Air Quality Conformity Determination Report 18 • • • QUFSTION. j FNV TRONMFNT AND NATURAL RESOURCES. AIR A. DESCRIBE EXISTING AIR QUALITY, MONITORING PROGRAMS, AND TRENDS. INCLUDE MONITOR LOCATIONS, TYPE OF EQUIPMENT USED, AND POLLUTANTS MONITORED; AND SPECIFY THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING AIR QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAMS. SPECIFY WHETHER OR NOT ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA WILL CAUSE EXCEEDANCE OF AIR QUALITY STANDARDS. INCLUDE POLLUTANTS MONITORED ON A MACRO LEVEL OUTSIDE THE STUDY BOUNDARY IN THE DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS (E.G., OZONE MONITORING ON VIRGINIA KEY). IDENTIFY ANY ADDITIONAL ACTIONS OR FACILITIES NEEDED TO PROPERLY MONITOR AND ABATE THE IMPACT OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON AIR QUALITY. I. Introduction Congress enacted amendments to The Clean Air Act in 1970. These amendments required the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate national ambient air quality standards for known air pollutants. In 1971, EPA promulgated primary and secondary ambient air quality standards for six criteria air pollutants. National primary standards were designed to protect the public health, whereas, secondary standards were designed to protect public welfare. Since the initial promulgation of air quality standards, standards for hydrocarbons were rescinded and standards for lead adopted. The six criteria air pollutants and their respective standards are shown in Table 4.1. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has the ultimate responsibility for protecting the ambient air quality. To achieve the goal of clean air, EPA has required each state to prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that attains and maintains ambient air quality standards. The agency responsible for implementing the SIP in Florida is the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER). To assist the State in maintaining air quality standards, the State has entered into inter -local agreements with municipalities to allow local agencies to act as an arm of the State. The Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) has entered into agreement with the FDER and is the local air pollution control agency responsible for the enforcement of air quality regulations and monitoring of the six criteria air pollutants in Dade County. II. Dade County Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network Exhibited in Figures 4.1 thru 4.6 is the location of each air monitoring site operated by DERM. For consistency, site numbers coincide with Dade County station numbers. Table 4.2 lists the address of each monitoring site. Dade County's ambient air monitoring program meets EPA's network design criteria for State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) and National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS). In addition, station probe siting meets federal ambient air quality monitoring regulations. 4-1 (Revised) Dade County uses either federal reference or designated equivalent methods to monitor air pollution levels. A quality assurance program has been implemented to validate the air monitoring data generated by DERM. Dade County follows the FDER's Quality Assurance Plan and is audited annually by the State to ensure that the air monitoring program has been operated in accordance with standard operating procedures. III. Air Quality Monitoring Data Ambient air quality data generated by DERM is validated by the FDER prior to submittal to the state data bank and ultimately to the national data storage and retrieval system. Air quality data developed for this report is prepared from the State's air quality ALSUM statistical report. Tables 4.3 thru 4.8 summarize Dade County's air quality for the years 1983, 1984, and 1985. a. Particulate Matter Table 4.3 summarizes Dade County's particulate matter air quality data. There appears to be no dramatic change in TSP concentrations over the past three years. The differences in concentration could be attributed to year to year variations in meteorology and local conditions. The exceedance of the 24-hour standard in 1985 at Station 32 can be attributed to a muck fire in the northwest portion of the county. The cause of the exceedance of the 24-hour standard at Station 10 is undetermined at this time. Because neither station exceeded the 24- hour standard twice, a violation of the 24-hour TSP standard has not occurred in 1985. The exceedance of the annual geometric mean standard at Station 34 is a violation of the state standard. The cause for consistently high values at this site is due to local construction activities. When construction is complete, particulate concentrations will probably return to pre -construction levels of 40 to 50 micrograms per cubic meter. The high annual geometric mean measured at Station 38, which is the only TSP air monitoring station within the City of Miami, is based on nine months (April -December) of data. Therefore, no violation of the annual standard has been recorded. The reason for consistently high concentrations at this site has not been determined to date. The existing TSP network (Figure 4.1) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. The network is adequate to monitor particulate concentration trends in Dade County. However, the TSP network should be expanded to include one site in the central business district of Miami for trend analysis. b. Led Table 4.4 summarizes lead levels in Dade County. There have been no exceedances of the lead standard for the past three years. The trend 4-2 (Revised) in lead concentrations for Dade County appears to be a county -wide decrease. The most dramatic reduction has occurred at Station 44. In 1983, the maximum concentration is 1.4 micrograms per cubic meter, whereas, the maximum concentration in 1985 is 0.6 micrograms per cubic meter. Because the automobile is the major source of lead In Dade County, it is generally believed that the reduction in ambient lead levels can be attributed to the phasing -out of leaded gasoline. The existing lead network (Figure 4.2) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. The network is adequate to monitor lead concentrations in Dade County. However, the lead network should be expanded to include one site in the central business district of Miami for trend analysis. c. Sulfur Dioxide Table 4.5 summarizes sulfur dioxide concentrations in Dade County. There have been no exceedances of the sulfur dioxide standards for the past three years. The trend appears to be a small reduction in ambient sulfur dioxide levels. However, the lower concentrations measured in 1985 could be due to variations in meteorology. The existing sulfur dioxide network (Figure 4.3) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. The network is adequate to monitor sulfur dioxide concentrations in Dade County and the City of Miami. The network should not be expanded unless new major point sources of sulfur dioxide locate in Dade County. d. Nitrogen Dioxide Table 4.6 summarizes nitrogen dioxide concentrations in Dade County. There have been no exceedances of the nitrogen dioxide standard for the past three years. The trend appears to be a reduction in ambient nitrogen dioxide levels. Decreases in nitrogen dioxide concentrations could be attributed to improved emissions controls on automobiles. The existing nitrogen dioxide network (Figure 4.4) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. The network is adequate to monitor nitrogen dioxide concentrations in Dade County and the City of Miami. The network should not be expanded as it would not be a cost-effective expenditure of government funds. e. Ozone Table 4.7 summarizes ozone levels in Dade County. There have not been violations of the ozone standard from 1983 through 1985. However, if either station 36A or 50 measures another exceedance of the_.12 parts per million standard in 1986, then Dade County will be re -designated a nonattainment area for ozone. 4-3(Revised) • • • In 1979, Dade County was declared a nonattainment area for ozone by EPA. As a result of that designation, Dade County was required to submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan to show how they would attain and maintain the ozone standard by 1982. Through point source emissions controls, as well as, implementing transportation control measures, such as, exclusive bus and carpool lanes, park and ride fringe lots, doubling the bus fleet and adding auto -free zones, Dade County was able to achieve and maintain the standard through 1984. However, it appears that Dade County will again be designated nonattainment for ozone. At this point, DERM is waiting until the end of 1986 to determine their compliance status. Additional traffic generated by development will increase hydrocarbon emissions, which are precursors for ozone formation. Since ozone is an area -wide problem, implementation of county -wide transportation control measures, such as, a vehicle inspection and maintenance program, additional expressways, and improved public transit will be necessary to abate elevated levels of ozone. Traffic flow improvements that coincide with major development will provide only small reductions in area -wide hydrocarbon emissions. The primary benefit of widening roadways, improving intersections, and adding traffic signals in the primary impact area of a development is mitigation of carbon monoxide hot spots. The existing ozone network (Figure 4.5) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. The network is adequate to monitor ozone concentrations in Dade County and the City of Miami. f. Carbori.,Monoxide Table 4.8 summarizes the carbon monoxide levels in Dade County. From 1983 through 1985, two monitoring sites, Stations 41 and 42, have recorded violations of the eight -hour standard. However, since 1986, neither site has recorded a violation of the carbon monoxide standards. Because violations of the carbon monoxide standard were recorded, the FDER is required to revise the State Implementation Plan (SIP) to show attainment and maintenance of the carbon monoxide standard. The carbon monoxide modeling study for the SIP revision concludes that the Flagler Street site (Station 42) and Little Havana site (Station 42) will shown attainment of the standard by 1987, which is the EPA mandated deadline. The modeling study analysis is supported by the fact that violations of the carbon monoxide standard have not been recorded at the Flagler Street site in 1985, 1985 and the first three months of 1987. Monitoring data for the Little Havana site also shows no violations for 1986 and 1987. In addition to the SIP revision modeling study, a recent carbon monoxide emissions density study was conducted In December 1986 for the areas surrounding the Flagler and Little Havana monitoring sites. The conclusions of the study were that the carbon monoxide levels at the Flagler Street site will decline through the year 2000, and carbon monoxide emissions at the Little Havana site will show no change from 4-4 (Revised) • • • 1987 to 1992. From 1992 to year 2000, emissions at the Little Havana site could possibly increase under the high traffic growth scenario. Since the decline in carbon monoxide emissions at the Flagler Street site is primarily attributed to the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, it is reasonable to assume that the entire downtown area will also see a decline in carbon monoxide levels over the next ten to fifteen years. Therefore, planned development for the City of Miami should not cause violations of the carbon monoxide standards. The existing carbon monoxide network (Figure 4.6) meets the design criteria for SLAMS and NAMS. However, the network is not adequate to monitor neighborhood or microscale trends for the entire county. Two existing neighborhood scale sites, Stations 1 and 44, should be relocated to new growth centers in the Southwest and Northwest portions of the county. Also, several additional microscale sites are needed to adequately characterize maximum ambient carbon monoxide levels in the City of Miami. 4.5 (Revised) TABLE 4.1 NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS A. National Primary Standards for Sulfur Dioxide 80 micrograms per cubic meter - annual arithmetic mean. 365 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 24-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. B. National Secondary Standard for Sulfur Dioxide * 1300 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 3-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. * 260 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 24-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. 60 micrograms per cubic meter annual arithmetic mean. C. National Primary Standards for Particulate Matter 75 micrograms per cubic meter annual geometric mean. 260 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 24-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. D. National Secondary Stafdards for Particulate Matter 60 micrograms per cubic meter annual geometric mean. * 150 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 24-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. E. National Primary and Secondary Standards for Carbon Monoxide * 10 milligrams per cubic meter - maximum 8-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. * 40 milligrams per cubic meter - maximum 1-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. 4-6 (Revised) TABLE 4.1 (CONTINUED) • F. National Primary and Secondary Standard 14r Qzone 235 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 1-hour concentration. G. National Primary and Secondary Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide 100 micrograms per cubic meter annual arithmetric mean. H. National Primary and Secondary Standard for Lead 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum arithmetric mean averaged over a calendar quarter. Florida Ambient Air Quality Standards 4_7{Revised} • • • TABLE 4.2 AIR MONITORING STATION LOCATION Stati9n Saroad Na, Address 1 10-2700-002 864 N.W. 23rd Street 10 10-0860-001 6400 N.W. 27th Avenue 11 10-1760-001 251 E. 47th Street (Hialeah) 15 10-2720-007 2100 Washington Avenue (Miami Beach) 23 10-1880-001 325 N.W. 2nd Street (Homestead) 24 10-3040-001 17011 N.E. 19th Avenue (N. Miami Beach) 31 10-3560-002 9201 S.W. 152 Street (Perrine) 32 10-0860-020 7050 N.W. 36th Street 33 10-0860-022 6135 S.W. 66th Street 34 10-0860-019 S.R. 821 and U.S. 27 (Pennsuco) 35 10-0860-021 Thompson Park 36 10-0860-023 Virginia Key 36A 10-0860-027 Rosenstiel School 38 10-2700-016 1200 N.W. 20th Street 41 10-2700-019 2201 S.W. 4th Street 42 10-2700-018 101 E. Flagler Street 44 10-0860-024 S.R. 826 & S.W. 4th Street 45 10-0860-025 S.W. 104th Street & U.S. 1 46 10-2700-020 2121 N.W. 21st Street 49 10-0860-028 Hau.love.r.Bea..ch. 50 10-0860-029 Perdue Medical Center 4_8 (Revised) • • • D.,a Pa Twi rl. Ate A«.r ck.«.. ++� Ili I L..I I1 Figure 4.1 SP SITE LOCATIONS e._ Kirk( And v.rs. ►,a .N...rPa.w And .ictrwort. r,c co ercim•wirgc SOUTHEAST OVERTOWNIPAR'K WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY Of U6A)44 DEPART k„T • • • .« =?�'"` f p..td Plisrmr Aryl Aromelattas.- inc. - 6rnrN4 KsA1 And V. 1-5 Figure 4.2 f —,-LEAD SITE LOCATIONS SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY OF WAM 4 DEF.ARTAb4EMT • ,Zri VP • Figure 4.3 1 SO2 SITE LOCATIONS., O.;.id Menwor And /woodmen. e..mao, %Litt rrc.Vows, to Wlformr4tagrol And ..than n ►+G E•..tO+ Ercallieeng CCNVIRit..ea SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY OF wAYN OEP ARTAa+ENT L�91 (Revised) • • • "\; J • 36 Figure 4.4 NO2 SITE LOCATIONS, �t+erki f'ks.r+.K Are a�aseaR Mc .Kati And Yea ►c. "a And Jarman. Inc- Fswtc +'^rMai Ercinortem Gmailio tu. Yic SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY Of 1A1A OEP*RTW4MT 4-12 (Revised) • • a• _ animitimena- AMUR WIMP . A MAID • P • Figure 4.5 AOZONE SITE LOCATIONS.? O. norreor And 94r++11164 Karla hd Ito.. ►+4 Ifflimpro•-flawd Md Johmari. Envircentirtai Ercinamortro Correa kr— SOU T HEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY Of iMA6.44 OEP AF13IL N 4-13 (Revised) • etNnAe Poem And A oncia r. SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CITY Qf W AM1 DEPART AGENT 4-14 (Revised) • • pasLna>J) S117 Station No. TABLE 4.3 ANNUAL TSP CONCENTRATIONS MICROGRAMS/CUBIC METER 1983 1264 .85 24-hr. Maxima Geo. 24-hr. Maxima Geo. 24-hr. Maxima Geo. 1st 2nd Mean 1st 2nd Mean 1st 2nd Mean 10 11 15 23 24 31 32 33 34 35 38 45 46 ** 97 96 56 88 84 49 161 122 56 89 83 46 84 80 46 109 97 50 123 86 38 74 70 40 * * * 130 88 44 86 82 45 121 77 47 138 84 40 75 71 39 95 79 39 * * * 67 63 34 84 65 36 ** 141 108 50 104 89 50 212 118 52 141 106 46 111 78 45 60 60 38 ** 130 79 40 113 111 48 131 124 61 124 63 27 56 50 27 70 64 31 ** * * * * * * 116 107 73 123 76 35 69 65 37 64 60 36 148 103 48 86 86 50 87 85 51 * ** Not available Exceedance of standard • • • (pesLAa!) 91.y17 Station No. TABLE 4.4 QUARTERLY LEAD CONCENTRATIONS MICROGRAMS/CUBIC METER 1251 12aA 18. Quarter Quarter Quarter II III IV I II III IV I II III IV 10 11 15 23 24 31 32 33 34 35 38 44 45 46 * Not available 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 * * * 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 * * * * 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 * * * * * * * * 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.8 1.2 1.3 1.4 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.0 • • • TABLE 4.5 ANNUAL SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS MICROGRAMS/CUBIC METER 1983 1. Maxima Maxima Maxima 3-Hour 24-Hour Arth. 3-Hour 24-Hour Arth, 3-Hour 24-Hour Arth. Station No. lst 2nd 1st 2nd Mean 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Mean 1st 2nd lst 2nd Mean 26 26 25 23 6 35 31 19 17 6 22 17 12 11 • / • TABLE 4.6 ANNUAL NITROGEN DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS MICROGRAMS/CUBIC METER I9$3- Station No. Arith. Mean 1984 198.5 Arith. Mean Arith. Mean 1 42 35 31 36 34 17 13 • • Station No. 983 TABLE 4.7 ANNUAL OZONE CONCENTRATIONS PARTS/MILLION 1984 12115. 1-hr. Maxima No. of 1-hr. Maxima No. of 1-hr. Maxima No. of 1st 2nd Exceed. 1st 2nd Exceed. 1st 2nd Exceed. 35 .115 .095 0 .090 .085 0 .106 .105 0 36 .110 .110 0 .110 .095 0 36A * * * .100 .090 0 .150 .125 2 49 * * * * * * .124 .114 0 * * * * * * .135 .131 2 50 * Not available • 1983 4110 TAU__ 4.8 ANNUAL CARBON MONOXIDE CONCNETRATIONS MILLIGRAMS/CUBIC METER 1984 1985 Maxima Maxima Maxima 1-Hour 8-Hour Exceed. 1-Hour 8-Hour Exceed. I -Hour 8-Hour Exceed. Station No. 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 8-Hour lst 2nd 1st 2nd 8-Hour 1st 2nd lst 2nd 8-Hour I 17 16 9 8 0 18 18 15 9 1 20 17 9 8 0 41 23 21 11 10 1 22 22 17 10 1 30 23 15 11 2 42 24 21 14 13 13 17 17 12 11 3 14 14 12 10 1 44 17 16 8 7 0 14 13 10 7 0 17 17 8 8 0 • • • SPECIFY THE STRUCTURAL AND OPERATION CONDITIONS THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN ALL DEVELOPMENT ORDERS TO MINIMIZE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS; AND SPECIFY WHAT ADDITIONAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN, AND BY WHOM, IF AN EXCEEDANCE(S) OF AIR QUALITY STANDARDS OCCURS. To ensure that planned growth for the City of Miami does not cause a violation of the State Ambient Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide, the city will implement a carbon monoxide monitoring network. The network will consist of one monitoring site for each of the following sub -areas: Brickell, Central Business District, Omni and Southeast Overtown/Park West. The carbon monoxide monitors will be placed at the worst case intersection in each sub -area. The locations of the monitoring sites will be selected by FDER and DERM with the assistance of city consultants. In addition to the monitoring program, the city will implement a program of Transportation Control Measures (TCM) that will be staged according to the level of carbon monoxide concentrations measured by the monitors. A list of potential TCMs is shown in Table 4.9. The TCM program will be described in the Development Order. The updated analysis required for Phase II development, which will take place sometime between 1992 and 1997, will include an evaluation of carbon monoxide data and the effectiveness of the TCM program. If necessary, adjustments to the monitoring and TCM programs will be implemented as a Development order condition in Phase II. 4-21 (Revised', TABLE 4.9 POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES (TCM'S) EQR ,SOUTHEAST . ff RTCN+ N/PARK l F. I Ridersharing related A. Participate in locally sponsored ride -matching service. B. Conduct in-house ridershare matching. C. Provide preferential parking for HOV's. D. Reduce parking cost for HOV's. E. Operate vanpool or buspool service. E. Monitor employee travel modes. II. Public transit related A. Employer -subsidized transit passes. B. Elimination of parking cost subsidies. C. Private developer shuttle service: irr:plementation or expansion. D. Developer transit amenities: bus shelter, intermodal terminal, Metrorail or Metromover station. E. Enhanced bus service. E. Park and Ride parking facilities. III. Traffic flow related A. Peak hour restriction of on -street parking. B. Peak hour restriction of on -street loading zones. C. Roadway capacity improvements. D. Reduced bus route circulation through downtown streets/ increased bus interface with Metrorail/Metromover stations or consolidated bus terminals. E. Strict enforcement of traffic laws by Miami Police Department. IV. Parking related A. Downtown fringe parking. B. Developer shuttle services to off -site parking. C. Limitations on on -site parking. V. Other TCM actions A. Computer bicycle and pedestrian facilities: showers and lockers. B. Employment or designation of an employee transportation coordinator (ETC). C. Implementation of flex -time or other work schedule conducive to ridersharing and transit use. D. Enhanced enforcement of Dade County anti -tampering and fuel switching ordinance. E. Mandatory emissions control device inspection program. �� (Revised) • • • C. SPECIFY REGULATORY AND PERMITTING CHANGES AND/OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS NEEDED TO MINIMIZE ADVERSE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS, ENSURE THAT ABATEMENT MEASURES DESCRIBED IN B. ARE IMPLEMENTED, AND ENSURE THAT AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. I. Monitoring Er giam: Four monitoring stations are recommended for the carbon monoxide monitoring network. Each sub -area should have one monitoring site located at the worst -case intersection. The CBD sub -area has an existing worse -case microscale carbon monoxide monitoring site operated by DERM. This site is located at 101 East Flagler Street and is adequate to characterize maximum carbon monoxide levels in the CBD. The other three sub -areas, Brickell, Omni, and Southeast Overtown/Park West do not have an existing worse -case monitoring station. The location of the Southeast Overtown/Park West site will be described in the Development order. Since Dade County has an EPA approved air monitoring program, operation of the Southeast Overtown carbon monoxide site by DERM would be the most cost-effective solution to site operation. In addition, data collection would be consistent with the EDER quality assurance plan and standard operating procedures. II. Program Budg t 1. Salary and Benefits (1/8 man-year) 2. Analyzers (2) 3. Calibrators (2) 4. Data Loggers (2) 5. Recorders (2) 6. Misc. Supplies, Expenses and Equipment 7. Annual Operating Expenses: electric, rent, telephone and supplies 8. System fabrication, installation, and initial operation by contractor (3-6 months) 9. Site Selection (Consultant) Total Capital Costs Annual Costs $3,000.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $3,000.00 $10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $39,000.00 $6,000.00 4-23 (Revised) • • III. Sources, of Funding The city will fund the capital and annual operating costs for the one additional carbon monoxide air monitoring station. To recuperate expenses for the monitoring program, the city could assess a development fee based on the number of parking spaces required for the development project or the number of vehicle trips generated by the project. Also, monies committed by existing development for carbon monoxide monitoring could be diverted to assist in funding the monitoring program. IV. Air Quality Standards, Local Ordinances and Inter -local Agreements. The City of Miami should not adopt by ordinance carbon monoxide ambient air quality standards. The State of Florida has adopted national standards as state air quality standards and has the responsibility for attainment and maintenance of those standards. DERM is an arm of the state and has the responsibility for enforcement of those standards in Dade County. The city should enter into an inter -local agreement with Dade County specifying responsibilites for carbon monoxide monitoring. This agreement should delineate funding responsibilities, as well as administrative responsibilities. 2z. 4-24 (Revised) • QUESTION 5, WATER QUALITY/DRAINAGE EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. DESCRIBE THE COMPOSITION AND QUANTITY OF RUNOFF CURRENTLY BEING DIRECDRCED TO ANY ANY STOP WATERRFACE WATERMANAGE ENT A Y OTHE BISCAYNE AQUIFER. ©DEVDESCRIBEDEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS DUE ALSO, TO EXISTING SOILS OR HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS. COMPOSITION AND QUANTITY OF RUNOFF Stormwater runoff is generally known to contain contaminants in varying concentrations. The amount of contaminants is a function of the type of surface coverage producing the runoff and the nature of activities which have left residues on impervious areas that can be carried by flowing water. The contaminants are the residuals of the following activities. 1. Street surface deterioration. 2. Motor Vehicle Waste (Fuels, lubricants, fluids, coolants, tire and brake particles, exhaust emissions, collision scrap, dirt and rust.) 3. Careless public and private solid waste collection. 4. Atmospheric fallout. 5. Vegetative droppings (Including leaves, grass, herbicides and pesticides). 6. Animal and bird droppings. 7. Particles from windblown dirt. 8. Soil from erosion of land surfaces. 9. Construction debris. Source: Sartor, et al 1972, Lazaro 1979 The amount of the material carried in the runoff is also determined by street cleaning practices, street slopes, the intensity and duration of rainfall, the season and the time elapsed from the last rainfall event. It is estimated that 90% of the surface pollutants are removed by runoff in the first 0.5 hour of a storm event of 1.0 in/hr intensity (Overton and Meadows). Many studies have been performed around the country in urban settings to determine the constituents of urban runoff. A selection of the results from some of the most pertinent studies appears in Exhibit 5-1. These pollutant load concentrations are based on lbs/acre/day as a means of comparing the differing areas and land uses. The chief task herein is to 5-1 • • • select those studies most closely allied to the project study area in function and characteristics to best determine the stormwater runoff load. The loadings estimated for the downtown area shown in Exhibit 5-2 are selected from studies in Tampa, Fort Lauderdale and Miami. The existing land use and area is shown in Exhibit 5-3. Existing and projected pollutants loads are shown for Existing, Phase 1, Phase II and Phase III in Exhibits 5-4, 5-5, 5-6 and 5-7 respectively. Water laden with these pollutants could be expected to produce intense, short term water quality violations at the outfall. Zones rcirculation e mixing have not been established for these outfalls, yet good and tidal flushing provide dilution of these contaminants. The predominant mode of runoff disposal is through positive outfall drainage to surface waters. The entire study area runoff flows east to Biscayne Bay. Map G indicates the major drainage outfalls to surface waters. Projects in the study area that have undergone development or redevelopment since 1980 have had to meet new design standards for stormwater runoff and these projects have minimal effect on the surrounding surface waters. These developments collect stormwater and discharge, as a minimum, the first inch of runoff to on -site drainage wells. In addition, some streets have been retrofitted with sub -surface exfiltration systems which divert street flow to the water table aquifer for attenuation of surface water pollutant discharge. Approximately 1.19% of the study area flows to the various depths of the Biscayne Aquifer in 1986. By Phase III it is estimated that 94.24% will be directed to the aquifer. See Exhibits 5-4 through 5-7. There is a high water table in the study area which inhibits percolation as a means of total stormwater runoff disposal. The design rainfall accumulation of 60 inches per year is significant and forces development to augment percolation systems with underdrain facilities or drainage wells. • • DESCRIBE ANY STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS DUE TO EXISTING SOIL OR HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS. Based on available recent soil borings, percolation tests and other geo- technical studies conducted by local soils engineering and testing firms, there are no subsurface conditions throughout the study area and environs, which should pose any unusual limitations or constraints to storm water management and development. The subsurface materials encountered through - ought the study area are consistent with South Florida's geologic environ- ment and are similar to those encountered throughout the Miami area as discussed below: Dade County is located on the southern flank of a stable carbonate platform on which thick deposits of limestones, dolomites and e vaporites have accumulated. The upper two hundred feet of the soil profile is composed predominately of limestone and quartz sand. These sediments were deposited during several glacial and interglacial stages when the ocean was at elevations higher than present. Florida can be divided into two geologic provinces - the Central Highlands and the Coastal Lowlands. The Coastal Lowlands encompass all of South Florida and consist of plains representing marine terraces which have been modified by erosion. The coastal lowlands can be further subdivided into regions called Everglades, the Big Cypress Swamp, The Mangrove and Coastal Glades, the Sandy Flatlands and the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. The Atlantic Coastal Ridge and the Sandy Flatlands represent the majority of the Miami area. The Atlantic Coastal Ridge approximates U.S. High- way #1 or a high elevation ridge. The Sandy Flatlands are bordered by the Atlantic Coastal Ridge on the east and by the Everglades on the south and the west. In many portions of Dade County, surface sand deposits of the Pamlico Formation are encountered. The Pamlico sands have a thick- ness of two to five feet and overlie the Miami Limestone. The Miami Limestone is a soft to moderately hard, white, porous to very porous, sometimes sandy, oolitic calcareous cemented grainstone. The Miami Limestone outcrops in portions of Dade County. The Miami Limestone has a maximum thickness of about 35 feet along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge dnd thins sharply near the coastline and in a westerly direction. The Miami limestone was formed about 130,000 years ago at a time when the sea level was twenty-five feet higher than it is today. This environment facilitated formation of concentrically • • • layered sand sized carbonate grains called oolites. These grains formed by repeated precipitation of calcium carbonate around the nucleus of a sand or shell grain. The Miami Limestone can be separated into two facies: the barrier bar oolitic facies and the tidal shoal limestone facies. The barrier bar facies is characterized by lenses of oolitic limestone separated by intermittent, one inch thick or less, uncemented sand layers (cross -bedded limestone). Zones of higher porosity are characteristic and parallel to the bedding plains of the cross -bedded limestone. The tidal shoal limestone facies is characterized by a distinct lack of bedding planes. In addition, burrowing organisms have churned pre- viously deposited sediments, which has resulted in high porosity channels in the rock. These ancient channels give the rock an ap- pearance of a hardened sponge in some areas. The Miami Limestone is underlain by the Ft. Thompson Formation. The Ft. Thompson Formation includes sand, sandstone and limestone. The upper reaches of the Ft. Thompson Formation contain non -cemented sand. The Ft. Thompson Formation is wedge shaped, having a thick- ness of about sixty feet in the Miami area and thinning to a thick- ness of about ten feet in western Dade County. The top portions of the Ft. Thompson Formation consist of sand having a thickness ranging from five to twenty-five feet. The remainder of the formation con- sists of coralline limestone, quartz sandstone, sandy limestone and freshwater limestone. The type of material within the formation and the degree of cementation is variable with lateral extent and depth. Within the Dade County area the Ft. Thompson Formation is underlain by the Tamiami Formation. The Tamiami Formation consists of sands, silts and clays and sometimes fossiliferous limestone. The upper portions of the Tamiami Formation are permeable and make up the lower Biscayne Aquifer. This Formation ranges in thickness from zero to three hundred feet in South Florida. Throughout the study area the subsurface conditions may be sum- marized as consisting of five (5) geologic layers: Layer 1, Fill Soils - Surface soils to depths of one to 5 feet consists of silty fine to medium sand fill. Deposits of sand fill up to 10 feet. Layer 2, Miami. Limestone Formation - Directly beneath the fill and persisting to a depth of about 25 feet is the Miami Limestone Forina- tion. The Miami Limestone (also known as Miami oolite) is a Pleisto- cene deposit which underlies much of southeast Florida. It is a soft, • • • porous sandy to oolitic carbonate rock which has been extensively solutioned. As a consequence of solutioning, the rock mass con- tains many sand filled vugs, small voids, and depressions. Layer 3, Fine to Medium Sand - Immediately underlying the Miami Limestone is a layer of fine to medium carbonate sand. The thickness of the sand layer varies from 2 to 10 feet. The sand is in a medium condition and contains shells and small limestone fragments. Layer 4, Fort Thompson Formation - Occurring below the carbonate sands is the limestone of the Fort Thompson Formation. The limestone of this formation varies from sandy to shelly and contains some dis- continuous sand filled zones, small voids and channels. It is a compact rock with unconfined compressive strengths near those of con- crete. The bottom of the Fort Thompson limestones is approximately 150 feet below grade. Layer 5, Tamiami Formation - Beneath the Fort Thompson limestones lies the Tamiami Formation. In this area, the Tamiami Formation is composed of well -cemented sandstone. The Miami limestone provides adequate bearing capacity to shallow spread foundations or mats which support light to moderately heavy structural loads. For large to heavy structural loads, deep foundations established in the Fort Thompson Formation and consisting of driven piling or drilled cast in place caissons would be appropriate. Depending on the specific location, ground water will be generally found anywhere from 5 - 7 feet below existing grade. Due to the proximity to Biscayne Bay and resulting salt water intrusion problems, ground water throughout the study area is unfit for potable water supply. The study area is also outside the "cone -of -influence" of any existing or proposed well fields or other water supply sources. consequently, developments within the study area will not present any significant effects on water quality or quantity. The accompanying soils map (Map E) illustrates the various soil formations and soil boring locations utilized as base data for this analysis. 1 • li LL I.11 I LI r� Hill APO IVA Ft VI • Lti kdU UqUiV 1317Dt. IMMI MAP E - SOILS MAP SYMBOL SOIL IDENTIFICATION & DESCRIPTION ROCKDALE FINE SAND, LEVEL PHASE - LIMESTONE COMPLEX MADE LAND SOIL BORING LOCATION source/soils data; u.s. dept. of agriculture, soil conservation service. 'minims „nom rem vidajui weal 111111 I111� 1111111111 i Mann WHIM, El:" mu 'PaA"lica Millif ra ,tea:-•.3:zA r°11-7717-177717 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT David Plummer And Associates, Inc. Bermello. Kurkl And Vera, Inc. Williams -'Russell And Johnson. Inc. Environmental Engineering Consultants, Inc. N,Ctatlhwtkt PARR CITY OF MIAM DEPARTAMENT OF DEVE OP ENT !III 2. DESCRIBE THE COMPOSITION AND SPECIFY THE QUANTITY OF ANY NON- STORMWATER DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATER BODIES OR THE BISCAYNE AQUIFER. COMPOSITION OF NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES The types of non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater conveyance system have been identified as follows: A. Construction Dewatering: This intermittent contribution would have the predominant characteristics of the water table aquifer, typically this is fresh water comprised of surface runoff infiltration which mixes with the salt water aquifer underlying the downtown area. To the extent the water is pumped via street surface prior to discharge to the storm system it could contact and entrain residual components. However, after flushing and assuming continuous flow it would resume its groundwater characteristics. If erosion and turbidity controls are not taken suspended solids could be a significant component of this non-stormwater discharge. B. fire Hydrant Flushing: This process could be expected to produce generally high quality water with perhaps abnormal concentrations of iron and hardness due to scaling and decomposition of iron water distribution pipes. This is not considered a significant overall contribution. C. Street Washing: To the extent streets are purged of contaminants without retrieval by street cleaning operations, runoff from street washing can approximate the first flush concentrations of stormwater. D. Garage .dashdown: This wastewater would have many of the characteristics of normal runoff from streets except that it could be expected to have more oil, grease and other drippage associated with parked cars. Building code requirements now dictate this waste to be discharged to the sanitary sewer. E. Cross Connections: Wastes from permitted and illegal discharges of sanitary and commerical/industrial waste to the stormwater system must be considered as a possibility, however, documentation is difficult. Interconnection of storm and sanitary sewers for highwater overflow is an ongoing national problem of older urbanized areas. The City of Miami Drainage Atlas indicate points where sanitary and storm lines join though these are to be phased out. Recent evidence from Schmidt and Spencer, 1986 indicate large municipal drainage systems may have far more point source discharges than would normally be expected. The direction of these non-stormwater discharges must be assumed to be predominately to the surface water. However, some isolated septic systems or seepage pits could be making discharges to the water table aquifer. • • QUESTION 5: WATER QUALITY/DRAINAGE A. Existing Conditions 2) DESCRIBE THE COMPOSITION AND SPECIFY THE QUANTITY OF ANY NON- STORMWATER DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATER BODIES OR THE BISCAYNE AQUIFER. Quantity of Mon-Stormwater Discharges to Surface Water Bodies or the Biscayne Aquifer. The quantities of non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater conveyence system have been identified as follows: A. Construction Dewatering: Discharge due to construction is a major contributer of non-stormwater to surface waters. Due to the nature and frequency of this type of operation it is very hard to quantify the water volume produced from construction dewatering. If proper erosion and turbidity controls are taken, utilizing filtering systems as required by the Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management and the City of Miami Public Works Department, this type of non-stormwater discharge will not deteriorate the water quality. B. Fire Department Practices: The Fire Department contributes to non-stormwater discharges under the following conditions. 1. Regular Fire Hydrant Flushing: Fire hydrant flushing is done every 4 months using 200 gallons per operation for approximately 200 fire hydrants within the study area. Fire hydrant flushing will generate approximately 160,000 gallons on non-stormwater discharge a year. 2. Flow Tests: Flow tests are performed every 5 years for two minutes using an average flow of BOO GPM per hydrant. This practice will generate a volume of 320,000 gallons of non-stormwater discharge every 5 years or 64,000 gallons of non-stormwater discharge every year. 3. Water From Fires: Based on information from the City of Miami Fire Dept., an estimated average flow of 180,000 gallons of water a year is used in extinguishing fires. The amount varies considerably every year and is very hard to be quantified. 4. System Flow Test: System Flow tests are performed on a regular basis by the City of Miami Fire Department prior to issuing of water permits. An estimated average of 150,000 gallons per year is discharged through the 5- 8,(R) ( June, 1987) • • drainage sytem into the Biscayne Aquifer or Biscayne Bay. C. Street Washing: Street washing on a regular basis is presently limited to Fl agl er Street between Biscayne Boulevard and Government Center, this area is outside of the boundaries of the Southeast Overtown/Park West DRI study area. Any water discharged to surface water bodies or the Biscayne Aquifer due to any occassional street washing operations within the study area is impossible to measure or quantity. D. Garage Washdown: Building code requirements dictate that water from garage washdowns is discharged to the sanitary sewer. However, older building's garages discharge through floor drains into the storm sewer and eventually into the Biscayne Aquifer or to surface waters. There are several service/repair type garages and one parking garage connected to a hotel within the Southeast Overtown/Park nest DRI study area. Most of the garages do not perform washdowns on a regular basis making it impossible to quantify water dis- charged to surface water bodies or the Biscayne Aquifer due to garage washdown. E. Cross Connections: It is extremely difficult to quantify waste discharge from connection of sanitary and commercial/ industrial waste to the stormwater system. The majority of connections were either permitted a long time ago or were done illegally by different parties. Recent inquires to the Department of Environmental Regulation concluded that it would be very hard to identify every connection to be able to calculate the discharged volume. 5-- 9(R)Y, June, 1987) 3) COMPLETE TABLE 5.1 (EXISTING WATER QUALITY) AND DESCRIBE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING WATER QUALITY MONITORING. SPECIFY IF EXISTING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS HAVE BEEN EXCEEDED AND WHAT PROGRAMS, IF ANY, ARE IN PLACE TO IMPROVE EXISTING WATER QUALITY. ALSO, SPECIFY WHETHER OR NOT CURRENT WATER QUALITY CAN TOLERATE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA WITHOUT EXCEEDING STANDARDS. Surface Water Biscayne Bay has been the subject of numerous studies related to its physical, chemical and biological integrity. The Bay is defined and regulated in Chapter 17-3 as Outstanding Florida Waters. It is also a designated Aquatic Preserve by Florida Statute. The primary ongoing water quality characterization is being conducted by the Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management (GERM). A monthly sampling of a 48 station surface water monitoring network has been conducted by DERA1 since 1979. A baseline data and trend analysis report was issued for the first four years of operation 2 (Alleman 1985). Along the eastern shore of the study area GERM operates monitoring stations which detect discharge impacts of stormwater runoff (see Figure 5-2). These stations are effective in monitoring the existing water quality from the study area. The overall water quality of Biscayne Bay is good and meets the most stringent of EPA, State and Dade County standards (See Exhibit 5-9). However, within the bay some of the "poorest water quality was located at the mouth of the Miami River". This was characterized by elevated levels of nitrogen, copper, iron, lead, turbidity and bacteria. Additionaly, there were infrequent occurances of low dissolved oxygen. These water quality problems have been associated with urban stormwater runoff some of which originates in the study area. Many ongoing and short term programs are underway which water quality or advocate plans to improve it. There has Biscayne Bay Management Committee (BBMC) which annual condition of the bay. The 1985/86 "State of the Bay" "stormwater runoff represents one of the largest pol Biscayne Bay". Some of that organizations stated goals study area are: relate to existing been established a ly reports on the report indicates lution threats to which relate this 1. Initiate comprehensive program to clean up tributaries to the bay. 2. Remove toxic sediments in the Miami River. 3. Redesign detrimental stormwater outfalls and eliminate all outfalls by 2005. A Biscayne Bay Hydrocarbon Study was commissioned and executed. The final report of Corcoran, et al indicated that the greatest threats of hydrocarbon sediment pollution stemmed from two sources: 1) shipping and boating activities and 2) urban runoff. Surface waters in canals draining developed areas contained petrogenic (fuel and oil derived) hydrocarbons. Some of the highest levels were observed in the Miami River. In summary, there is ample water quality data available on Biscayne Bay. Evidence points to the conclusion that general water quality is not a • • Groundwater: (1984) (1986) TABLE 5.1: EXISTING WATER QUALITY (R) Sample Location Groundwater USGS Well G -3143 (Index #391) USGS Well F-45 (N.W. 58th St. & 5th Avenue) Parameters Oil and Grease 1 mg/1 Total Nitrogen .90 mg/1 Total Phosphorus .01 mg/1 Cobalt 3 ug/1 Copper 3 ug/1 Iron 340 ug/1 Salinity 100 mg/1 Surface Water: Sample Location: Bay Station #16 #19 Bay Station #16 #19 D.O. TNR Turb. mg/1 mg/1 NTU 5.3 4 2.8 5.3 4 3.1 5.24 4.63 2.35 5.30 N/A 2.73 For Water Quality Standards See Exhibit 5-9 Fecal Col. MF/organisms per 100 mil. 17 63 134 334 Lead 2 ug/1 Nickel 3 ug/1 Strontium 1200 ug/1 Zinc 20 ug/1 Aluminum 60 ugl/1 Phenols 23 ug/1 Outfalls to Surface Water: No existing analytical data, See Exhibit 5-4 for existing stormwater pollutant loads. See Figure 5-2 for monitoring sites. problem, however, the bottom sediments in some areas have been adversely affected by stormwater runoff. In addition, short term water quality OB� problems arise at outfall points prior to diffusion and tidal mixings has in place adequate sampling stations to determine the long term impact of the study area on water quality. Current development guidelines to be outlined later, require any project in the study area to contain stormwater that is currently being discharged to surface water. For this reason, additional development in the study area is seen as a means of improving surface water quality. Groundwater The Biscayne Aquifer is a hydrologic unit of water bearing rock that carries unconfined ground water in southeastern Florida. In the Miami area the aquifer is approximately 120 to 130 feet thick and is located at virtually ground level. The base of the aquifer can be determined in the Miami area by an impervious marl of the Tamiami formation. This unconfined aquifer is recharged mostly from local rainfall events. An average of 60 inches of precipitation annually fall in Dade County. Of the 60 inches it is estimated that 22 inches are discharged by evapotranspiration and surface runoff. Of the 38 inches reaching the water table, 20 inches is discharged as groundwater flow and 18 inches is discharged by evapotranspiration of groundwater and by pumping from wells (Schroeder, et al). Water table in the study area fluctuates about 2.0 ft. on an annual basis. The only other recharge to the Biscayne Aquifer comes from contaminated stormwater runoff that filters through retention pond sands and exfiltration systems to the aquifer or overland flow of stormwater that enters canals which recharge the aquifer. The quality of the water is one of the most troublesome factors for the aquifer. Contaminants are easily transported into the aquifer by various means. One of the most troublesome mineral constituents in the aquifer is iron. The other is salt water. In the Miami area salt water has encroached the fresh water aquifer by leaking in to contaminate the aquifer along the coast and canal systems. Other contaminants found in the aquifer are characterized by a USGS well in the study area (see Table 5.1 and Figure 5-2). The presence of these contaminants indicate man induced pollution may be occuring. This 1977 sample indicates none of these contaminants exceed maximum contamination levels; and since the aquifer in the study area is east of the salt barrier line there is no existing regulatory concern for pollution of this portion of the aquifer. It is unlikely that potable aquifers could be affected. However, the long term effects of introducing polluted stormwater into this aquifer are unknown. A freshwater curtain of drainage wells in the study area could help inhibit further salt water intrusion, or it could provide a pool of contamination which might eventually migrate inland or seaward. These pollutants introduced into the surficial aquifer could also empty into the canals that discharge to surface waters and the Biscayne Bay. • • • w. • �r. say i !11111N1H SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST CiL1J 6.1 M.f. 11 it. le . ,a IT. sNIX1NMISMI01MwIM.I1sMIMsw1 1 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT David Plummer And Associates, Inc. Bsrmello, Kurkl And Vera, Inc. • M. t.► 11. t.- -� MINN tits I IIIIMO • �-- OUTFALL 36" AND UNDER Q' OUTFALL OVER 36" • M M.E.i 11. 1. EXISTING DRAINAGE Williams—Russeil And Johnson, Inc. O M t • CITY OF MiAMI DEPARTAMENT OF DEVELOP N T 40 Environmental Engineering Consultants, inc. LILIA ow INMill MS el IOW UM MI MI 6 • 7 1DJ • • 1 \> ,I Z m Z 1 Z 1► INN Fl aimD -his 1 16 11111111. kit t4111-1 -- I— ED= 3►- ON r WWI tifttir ■ 19 GROUNDWATER USGS WELLS •# SURFACE WATER ■ STATION 16 - INTRACOASTAL WATER WAY (ICW) MARKER 44 (RED). STATION 19 - 30.5 m (100) SOUTH OF SRIDGE TO DODGE ISLAND IN ICW {O4+4d PSnFwr And Aawdlrtw. Sr1a 04WMA Kartf And Vrrr< Pc. WRimr- iwnE And Johnocn. h. EnOrcrowntsii fircineoprirg Cannata 4A. 3n . SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT B. I1ZE all WOGS 1. SPECIFY HOW THE WATER QUALITY PLAN WILL MITIGATE OR ELIMINATE EXIS'1ING ADVERSE IMPACTS FROM SIOR!W TER RUNOFF INCORPORATING SOME OR ALL OF THE FOW WING: 1) ELIMINATING ALL DIRECT DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATERS, 2) INCREASING ON -SITE RETENTICN OF STORM TATER, 3) REMOVIM POLLUTANTS FROM SI'ORW7ATER RUNOFF THROUGH OPERATIONAL MEASURES (E.G., PARKING LOT AND STREET VACUUMING) AND STRUCTURAL MEASURES (E.G., USE OF GRASS SriAL' ES FOR RUNOFF RETENTION), AND 4) REQUIRING ALL CATCH BASINS TO BE OONS'I'RUCrbD Sfl THAT OILS AND GREASES ARE SEPARATED FROM RUNOFF AND POLLUTANTS ARE PERIODICALLY REMOVED FROM CATCH BASINS FOR PROPER DISPOSAL. In order to answer this question completely it will be beneficial to review the development procedures as they exist in terms of stormwater permitting. It has been a Dade County requirement since 1974, limited in sane instances due to poor soils, that the first inch of runoff be retained on -site in Dade County. This policy was further defined by DERM in "Design of Drainage Structures" 1980 which prohibited the discharge of the first inch of stormwater runoff and encouraged total on -site retention where feasible. No direct "positive drainage" to surface water was to be allowed. Since it has been estimated that 90%-100% of the pollutant loading is carried by the "first flush" in the first inch of runoff, this was seen as a major step toward preventing further water quality degradation from this source. In 1983, the FDER further accelerated stormwater treatment requirements with the addition of Chapter 17-25 Stormwater Permitting of. the Florida Administrative Code. The implementation of the permitting of this rule has been delegated to the South Florida Water Management District (SFGvi++D). In April 1982, the City of Miami Public Works Department adopted rules that are more restrictive than the Florida Administrative Code. City regulations prohibit the direct and/or indirect flow of rainwater from new development to public storm sewers. Also, existing development is required to have an on -site storuwater disposal system when the property is unproved in the value of $5,000.00 or more by addition or renovation. In the study area, the City of Miami, Dade County and the State of Florida all have transportation and associated drainage systems which flaw to surface water. If the City's stormwater disposal criteria are met, then usvatly the SFWMD and DERM permitting requirements are satisfied as well. Through the use of on -site stormwater collection systems, two -stave sedimentation tanks, drainage wells and pop -off overflow, new developments have been able to meet the Public Works Department's regulations. These developments have greatly reduced the discharge of stormwater pollutants to surface waters. These pollutants are being discharged into the Biscayne Aquifer at depths where the chloride content is greater than 1500 ppn. This portion of the aquifer is not considered to be a potential source of drinking water and therefore not harmed by the discharge. There may also ........... be some benefit to retarding further saltwater intrusion through increased use of drainage wells. The SFWMD had promulgated new groundwater rules affecting discharges to Outstanding Florida Waters, however after implementation of these regulations upon development it has been determined for this planning area they will not be anymore stringent than FDER or DERM, Therefore, treatment of the stormwater prior to discharge to saltwater aquifers will not be required beyond the use of sedimentation tanks and oil skimming baffles. It is apparent that any new development or re -development within the study area will require a substantial emphasis on stormwater retention which will greatly reduce the pollutant load currently going to surface waters. Improved techniques and equipment for litter control, street and parking lot cleaning will help remove pollutants at the source so they are not carried into the stormwater system. The City of Mimi is constantly upgrading its public works cleaning equipment and private developers by development order will be required to clean their parking facilities. Within the study area there remains a rather large segment of surface area dedicated to road right-of-ways for street, sidewalk and utility purposes. About 50 acres of the study area is dedicated to this purpose. No substantial water quality improvement plan could be offered without dealing with the existing roadways and their associated drainage systems. Current DERM interpretation of the 1980 drainage criteria treats the existing roadways as a "grandfathered" entity and exexpL from the current prohibition on positive drainage. However, when any substantial reworking of the roadway or utilities within the roadway occurs, the segment is required to upgrade in terms of stormwater retention. This process has already occured on a segment of N.W. 2nd Avenue by the County and a portion of FDOT's right-of-way being refurbished to include french drains (see Exhibit 5-12). The City of Miami Public Works Department currently has plans to re -work 11.52 acres of streets in the next 5 years. Outfalls to which these areas are tributary can expect an improvement in water quality. Once roads are refurbished, a maintenance program through Miami Public Works will insure that any french drains or other control devices will be operational to remove the maximum. Improved designs such as adding floating debris baffles to french drains or utilizing underdrains will keep the amount of oil and grease and other insoluble pollutants retained to a maximum. Exhibit 5-10 indicated the generic types of stormwater options ays13able for downtown Miami and they are listed in decreasing order of preference. Due to poor soils and lack of economical space the first two options may be more difficult to attain. The third and fourth are the prevailing options at this time utilizing discharge to the deep and shallow aquifers respectively and upon which all study area pollutant load projections are made. Exhibits 5-5, 5-6 & 5-7 show the projected stormwater loads by sub - districts for the Phase I, II and III milestones. • • • • 2. DEFINE A WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM THAT WILL ADEQUATELY MONITOR THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON SURFACE AND GROUND WATER QUALITY. IDENTIFY CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS. There are currently 2 surface water monitoring stations in proximity to the study area (see Figure 5-2). These stations are adequate in number and location to give information as to general surface water quality trends in the study area. It would seem prudent to further definethe extent of stormwater impact in these areas by correlating data shifts at DERM's established stations for samples taken after significant rainfall events. This information would help determine the extent of impact of stormwater. To further define the impact it would also be critical to quantify flow at the largest outfalls from the planning area during the same storm events. Map G-1 indicates the location of all outfalls and especially those 36" and greater. It is recommended these largest outfalls be checked for stormwater flow at six separate storm events. The coordination of this type of sampling could help define the impact on surface waters. The estimated capital and operating costs are listed on Exhibit 5-11. The Biscayne aquifer currently has several monitoring wells operated by the USGS in the study area. The number and sampling of these wells is not deemed adequate for proposed water quality impacts. It is proposed that 3 existing USGS wells in the study area be tested twice a year for parameters indicative of stormwater runoff so that the overall impact and movement of these contaminants may be monitored. The USGS currently has other studies on -going concerning french drains which should provide useful data for the water quality impact of these systems proposed' in downtown Miami. It is also recommended that one short term monitoring project be instituted by development order to evaluate the efficiency of future retention systems. Since USGS data will address french drains, one drainage well installation should be evaluated in the study area as to groundwater impact. The system should have an upgradient and two downgradient wells to be rronitored for specified parameters monthly for the first year of operation and thereafter semi --annually for a total of 5 years. The results of these studies can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of design standards (see Exhibit 5-11 for capital and operating costs) . The data generated in the above sampling should be coordinated by DEEM at the request of the City of Miami and should be reported to USGS, SFWMD and FDER. It should also be evaluated by these and the City of Miami toward possibly modifying the retention systems design criteria. 3. SPECIFY WHAT STRUCTURAL AND OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS ARE NECESSARY FOR INCLUSION WHA AD ADDITIONAL ACTION DEVELOPMENT ERS WIIOL SEMINIMIZE TAKEN,WATER ANCQUALITY IMPACTS; AND SPECIFY WMC3MIFWATER QUALITY DETERIORATION OCCURS. All new development and redeveloped areas in the Southeast Overtown/Park€ West study area are required to retain all runoff on -site from a six inch rainfall event. Where percolation is not adequate to provide the required 48 hour drawdown of this storage volume then underdrains should be utilized. Drainage wells or covered exfiltration trenches could be utilized to dispose of the underdrain volume. This volume could also be discharged back to stormwater outfal is according to DERM guidelines. The new SFWMD stormwater rule may require the first one-half inch of runoff to be pre-treated in the above manner prior to discharge to the aquifer. This would enhance existing drainage well designs and keep pollutants out of the aquifer. However, pre-treated water may be discharged to surface waters and may eliminate the need for costly drainage wells. Developers that cannot practically comply with the above should be allowed to consider the drainage well as another option. However, at least one such project should have a monitoring program as discussed previously to determine the long term effects of aquifer discharge. The existing acreage committed to street right -of --ways must have a priority 1 ist of refurbishments which are to take place. The list can be made up of projects currently budgeted by the City of Miami, Dade County and the FDOT. To this list can be added the streets under which existing outfal is that cause the most water pollution as determined from the intensive surveys outl ined above. If public lands abut an existing street with an outfal 1 slated for upgrading then grassed retention areas should be considered as the optimum treatment mode (see Case I Exhibit 5-13). However, due to the lack of availability of such land, and the depths at which outfalls exist this may not be practical. In lieu of this approach, the existing streets to be refurbished should have detention areas designed to accept the first inch of runoff with drawdown by percolation or exfiltration underdrains which could flow back to the outfalls (see Case II Exhibit 5-13) . The system must be designed to allow maintenance of the percolation area or underdrain surface to insure periodic removal of sediment that will inhibit outflow and render the unit ineffective. Drainage wells should be considered the retrofit option of least preference. As a secondary choice the refurbished streets could utilize the french drain or covered trench exfiltration systems discharging to the shallow aquifer. Maintenance of these systems is essential so that accumulating contaminants do not breakthrough absorptive layers and flow to surface water. Outfalls carrying substantial flows that do not originate in the planning area, but yet, which discharge in it must also be addressed. Mitigation of these outfalls must be studied by the City of Miami to further determine if upstream retention of the first inch of runoff is feasible. Once collected, however, the only downstream alternatives are costly retrofit programs to provide sedimentation and retention basins or more costly treatment designs. Non-structural control measures such as litter control programs: street sweeping operations and stormwater system maintenance within the authority of the appropriate municipalities primarily the City of Miami should be maintained and upgraded if practicable. It is not anticipated that any surface water quality deterioration will occur. Impacts to the groundwaters must be monitored accurately and as soon as feasible so that any undesirable changes could be detected early and further stormwater treatment be required in following development orders. • • C. SPECIFY REGULATORY AND PERMITTING CHANGES AND/OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS NEEDED TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY; ENSURE THAT ABATEMENT MEASURES DESCRIBED IN B.3 ARE IMPLEMENTED AND THAT COUNTY AND STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ARE NOT VIOLATED. The current regulatory framework encompassing the South Florida Building Codes, DERM's I980 Design Policy, and SFWMDis Design Criteria regarding stormwater control of new development is deemed adequate to improve water quality during the planning period. The extent to which contaminants taken off surface water systems and deposited in the goundwater systems have a detrimental effect on the aquifer must be monitored by future developers. A monitoring program for the major stormwater outfalls is recommended to be undertaken by the City of Miami to help prioritize them for further abatement action. The sequence and extent of street refurbishment must be coordinated between Miami, Dade County and FDOT so that designs might be standardized and assessed for water quality impact. In addition, the major outfalls which are scheduled to be retrofitted for pollution control must be coordinated with the agency that owns the right-of-way that system lies in. It is recommended that the City of Miami assist the FDOT and County in coordinating the transfer of data, scheduling and permitting of retrofit through DERM, SFWMD, FDER and other regulatory entities. Should water quality violations persist further sampling efforts could be undertaken to isolate the causes and a plan of action developed toward a specific location. Further work must be done to concentrate efforts to prioritize the existing outfalls for retrofit. The logical entity for this task is the City of Miami Public Works Department since the majority of outfalls to Biscayne Bay are under their authority. The city currently has a $30,000,000 bond for upgrading the storm sewer system. Some of these funds are earmarked for pollution control in the form of french drains and outfall retrofitting. Other outfall improvement programs may be eligible for future FDER water quality project grants. Toward further action on abatement work it must be planned that the levels of retrofit of existing outfalls, dictated by outfall monitoring and prioritization, will be limited by funds available. Sources of State funds have been found and more are sought. As part of the development orders for individual future projects within the planning area it must be stipulated that not only are the stormwater management systems to be designed to meet DERM and SFWMD standards, but that these must also be maintained in a routine program to insure their efficiencies. Detention/Retention exfiltration, french drain and drainage wells with two -stage separators will not function properly without sustained maintenance. In so far as the stormwater pollutant load to Biscayne Bay is mitigated by the redevelopment of private and public tracts meeting new standards and the potential for groundwater contamination is minimized by further monitoring, the Southeast Overtown/Park West development area should only see enhancement of water quality. These efforts will be accelerated by the investigation, planning and funding of pollution control retrofit for • • • existing stormwater outfailsm implementing these measures will insure that no degradation of the unique Biscayne Bay water resource will result from the continued development of the downtown area. • QUESTION 5 WATER QUALITY/DRAINAGE EXHIBITS • • • EXHIBIT 5-1 STORMWATER POLLUTANT LOADS lbs/acrelday Oil & SS TNR BOO. TOC COD TN TP Cl Pb Zn Fe Cu Cd Cr Ni TVS Grease dy 6 Runoff ward County way nercial I dents al lam N.C. unoff cinatti jnoff URP hway me rc i al idential Adge USGS 14.0 --- 0.88 2.1 6.9 0.84 0.05 13.0 0.06 0.02 0.50 0.006 0.002 0.003 0.27 9.34 2.0 ---- 0.41 0.94 0.02 0.002 ---- 0.007 0.002 ---- 3.6 ---- 0.40 1.8 0.02 0.002 ---- 0.010 0.003 ---- 3.9 ---- 0.42 0.70 0.046 0.009 ---- 0.003 0.003 ---- 18.3 --- ---- 0.51 2.57 0.02 0.013 2.0 --- 0.09 ---- 0.66 0.024 0.007 ---- 3.02 0.008 0.005 0.28 0.004 1.18 0.07 ---- ---- 0.036 0.005 ---- 0.007 0.004 0.001 1.55 0.14 ---- ---- 0.036 0.005 ---- 0.007 0.003 ---- 0.001 ----- * 0.295 0.052 0.025 0.005 ---- 0.0007 0.0007 ---- 0.0001 0.004 0.003 3.99 2.87 8.3 0.153 0.006 ---- 0.025 0.014 ---- 0.002 BDL BDL :mole rcial ;e 9.9 --- 0.447 0.031 0.011 nwater Management, an update" Wanielista and Yousef - July 1985 per City Miami Public Works ;low Detection Limit 7.26 0.26 EXHIBIT L SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DRI ST0RMWATER POLLUTANT LOADING FACTORS lbs/acre/yr O i l & Impervious % COO TNR/SS TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease c/Open Areas(3) 10% 7.4(4) 15.1(4) 3.99 0.69 0 0 0 0 Density Residential(2) 30% 256 1424 16.8 3.29 1.09 1.09 0 0 col/Institutional(3) 60% 23.0 377 3.99 0.69 0 0 0 0 ium Density Residential(3) 40% 23.0 377 10.9 2.27 0.29 0.31 0.06 0 mercial/Office(2) 90% 657 1314 7.3 0.73 3.65 1.10 0 0 h Density Urban(2) 95% 657 1314 7.3 0.73 3.65 1.10 0 0 elopment ihway(1) 95% 3030 1102 55.8 2.19 9.13 5.11 0.73 94.9 USGS I-95 Bridge Study - Close to study area, only hydrocarbon data available, recent sampling. USGS Broward County - Close to study area, commercial district similar to highly developed urban area. 1 Tampa NURP Study - Only proximate data available for these land uses, recent sampling. Estimated from Wanielista and Yousef, July 1985. • • • EXHIBIT 5-3 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DRI LAND USE ESTIMATES -1986 Study Area Icres I Toitia1 Park/Open Space 59.61 28.4% Low Density Residential 8.10 3.9% Institutional/Schools, Churches 5.54 2.6% Med/Density Residential 32.38 15.5% Commercial/Off ice 26.40 12.6% Industrial 25.90 12.4% Transportation, Communications, Utilities 51.45 24.6% Total - 209.38 100% Per City of Miami Public Works and David Plummer & Associates • .existing 411 EXHIBI J-4 STORMWATER POLLUTANT LOADS lbs/yr • 011 & Surface Water Discharge Acres COD TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease Park Open/Space 59.61 441 900 238 41 0 0 0 0 8.10 2074 11534 136 27 9 9 0 0 ILow/Density'Resd.89 22 4 0 0 Medium/Density nsit Resd. 32.38 745 12207 353 74 9 10 2 0 Medium/Dens y 0 Commercial/Office 25.90 78477 28542 1445 57 236 132 19 2458 Industrial Transportation 48.95 148319 53943 2731 107 447 250 36 4645 Sub Totals. 206.88 247528 143905 5118 329 797 430 57 7103 Oil & Groundwater Discharges Acres COD TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease Park Open/Space 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Low/Density Resd. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Institutional 0 0 0 0 Medium/Density Resd. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial/Office 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial 0 0 237 Transportation 2.50 7575 2755 140 5 23 13 2 Sub Totals 2.50 7575 2755 140 5 23 13 2 237 Totals 209.38 255103 146660 5258 334 820 443 59 7340 Based Upon: Industrial land use equaling highway runoff generation. EXHIBI r5 STORMWATER POLLUTANT LOADS lbs/yr Phase. I 011 & Surface Water Discharge Acres COD TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease 0 0 Park Open/Space 46.08 1556 8658 102 20 7.72 353 721 190 33 7 70 0 0 0 Low/Density Resd. 0 0 0 0 Institutional 4.15 95 1565 17 3 2 0 Medium/Density Resd. 24.29 559 9157 265 55 7 80 Industrial 19.43 127Commercial/Office 009 26017 145 14 72 22 0 66 25531 142 14 71 21 0 0 indust Transportation 36.70 111201 40443 2048 80 335 188 27 3483 Sub Totals 158.17 139539 112092 2909 219 492 246 29 3483 Groundwater Discharges Oil & Acres COD TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease 0 0 Park Open/Space0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 Low/Density Resd. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Institutional 1.39 32 524 6 1 0 24.04 553 9063 262 55 7 7 1 0 Medium/Density Resd. 0 Commercial/office 10.92 7174 14349 80 8 400 12 0 0 Industrial 1.11 729 1459 8 1 Transportation 13.75 41663 15153 767 30 126 70 10 1305 Sub Totals 51.21 50151 40548 1123 95 177 90 11 1305 Totals 209.38 189690 152640 4032 314 669 336 40 4788 Based Upon: 'Industrial land use equaling highway runoff generation. • EXHIB1 411 '=6 STORMWATER POLLUTANT LOADS lbs/yr • Surface Water Discharge Acres COD TNR TN 0i1 & TP Pb Zn Cu Grease Park open/Space Low/Density Resd. Institutional Medium/Density Resd. Commercial/Office Industrial Transportation 35.84 4.05 2.77 16.19 13.20 12.95 24.48 265 1037 64 372 8672 8508 74174 541 5767 1044 6104 17345 17016 26977 143 25 0 0 0 0 68 13 4 4 0 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 176 37 5 5 1 0 96 10 48 15 0 0 95 10 47 14 0 0 1366 54 224 125 18 2323 Sub Totals 109.48 93092 74794 1955 151 328 163 19 2323 Groundwater Discharges Acres COD TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu 011 & Grease Park Open/Space Low/Density Resd. Institutional Medium/Density Resd. Commercial/office Industrial Transportation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.77 64 1014 11 2 0 0 0 0 48.09 1106 18130 524 109 14 15 3 0 21.83 14342 28684 159 16 80 24 0 0 2.22 1459 2917 16 2 8 2 24.99 75720 27539 1394 219 228 128 18 2372 Sub Totals Total s Based Upon: 'Industrial land 99.90 92691 78314 2104 346 330 169 21 2372 209.38 185783 153108 4059 497 658 332 40 4695 use equaling highway runoff generation. • Eil.tig III EXHIBi J-7 STORMWATER POLLUTANT LOADS lbs/yr • Surface Water Discharge Acres COD Oil & TNR TN TP Pb Zn Cu Grease Park Open/Space Low/Density Resd. Institutional Medium/Density Resd. Commercial/Office Industrial Transportation Sub Totals 12.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 182 48 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.06 89 182 48 8 0 0 0 0 Groundwater Discharges Acres COD TNR TN Oil & TP Pb Zn Cu Grease Park Open/Space Low/Density Resd. Institutional Medium/Density Resd. Commercial/Off ice Industrial Transportation Sub Totals Total s Based Upon: 0 0 5.54 96.19 43.66 4.44 47.49* 0 0 127 2212 28685 2917 143895 0 0 0 0 2089 22 36264 1048 57369 319 5834 32 52334 2650 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 218 28 30 6 0 32 159 48 0 0 3 16 5 0 0 104 434 243 35 4507 197.32 177836 209.38 177925 'Industrial land 153890 4071 361 637 326 41 4507 154072 4119 369 637 326 41 4507 use equaling highway runoff generation. Based on 1.9 miles of right-of-way refurbishment per 5 years. • • • EXHIBIT 5-B SOUTHEAST OVERT( ►N/PARK WEST DRI PUBLIC AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS WITH WATER QUALITY INTERESTS Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management, DERM Florida Department of Environmenal Regulation, FDER United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA South Florida Water Management District, SFWMD Florida Department of Natural Resources, FDNR - Florida Marine Patrol Florida Coastal Zone Management South Florida Regional Planning Council, SFRPC United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Geological Survey, USGS United States Department of Interior National Parks Service, NPS United States Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, NOAA Biscayne Bay Management Committee, BBMC Miami River Management Committee, MRMC City of Miami Public Works Dade County Public Works Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT Waterfront Control Board Port of Miami Downtown Development Authority University of Miami Rosenstiel Institute of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences • • • EXHIBIT 5-9 BISCAYNE BAY WATER QUALITY STANDARDS MARINE WATERS Aluminum 1.5 mg/1 Amonia 0.5 mg/1 as N (1) Antimony 0.2 " Arsenic 0.5 " (1) Bacteria 200 / 100 ml - 70/100 ml Shellfish Waters (1) Beryllium 1.1 mg/1 Biological Integrity >75% Bromine 100 mg/1 Cadmium 5.0 " Chlorides <110% background (1) Chromium 0.05 mg/l (1) Copper 0.015 Cyanide 5.0 " - None detectable (1) Is Dissolved Oxygen 5.0 Dissolved Oxygen 4.0 Flouride 5.0 Iron 0.3 " Lead 0.03 " Mercury 0.1 Pesticides: ft 1, 11 (daily average) No Event < Nickel 0.1 mg/1 Nutrients No Imbalance of natural flora and fauna Oil and Grease Pthalate Esters 3.0 ug/1 Polychlorinated Biphenyls 0.001 ug/1 Radioactive Substances - Gross Beta <1000 Uuc (1) Selenium 0.025 mg/1 Silver 0.05 ug/1 Specific Conductance <200% Background (1 Sulfides 1.0 mg/l (1) Total Dissolved Gases <110% saturation Transparency >90% background Turbidity 50, except after heavy rains Zinc 0.03 mg/1 Source: Chapter 17-3.121 FAC (1) Dade County Standard where more stringent (Fresh water standard) - 0.35 (1) ug/1 - None Detectable (1) Aldrin 0.003 ug/1 Chlordane 0,004" DDT 0.001" Demeton 0.1" Endosulfan 0.001" Endrin 0.004" Guthion 0.01" Heptaclor 0.001 ug/l Lindane 0.004" Malathion 0.1" Methoxychlor 0.03" Myrex 0.001" Parathion 0.04" Toxaphene 0.005" EXHIBIT 5-10 STORMWATER OPTIONS WATER QUALITY IMPACT SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DRI Most Desirable 1. On -site Retention in grassed swales/dry retention area with infiltration by percolation. 2. On -site Detention in grassed swales/dry retention area with infiltration by underdrain to stormwater outfalls. 3. On -site Retention with grease interceptor and drainage well to saltwater aquifer. 4. On -site Retention with seepage systems (french drain, exfiltration trench, soakage pit) to shallow freshwater aquifer. Note: 1. Systems required for regulatory compliance. 2. Ongoing maintenance of system and periodic water quality testing for efficiency is required of all systems • • • • EXHIBIT 5-11 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER MONITORING CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST Surface Water Monitoring: I. Capital Expense : $ i,000 Flow measurement equipment II. Operating Expense: First Year Operation Total $ 1,000 Note: Flow measurements at 5 outfalls will be carried out by Public Works Staff. Groundwater Sampling: Deep well and retention system - 5 year test. One Site (Four sample points each: 1 surface water, 3 wells) Sampling schedule 1 per quarter for 1 year then twice per year for 4 year. I. Capital Expense: $ 6,000 3 wells @ $2,000 = II. Operating Expense: A. First year sampling 4 (4 x 750) = $12,000 Next 4 year 4 (2 x $750) = $ 6,000 Sampling parameters: COD, TNR, TN, TP, Pb, Cu, Zn, C1, TDS, and Oil and Grease B. Upgrade USGS Annual Well Sampling Expense 10 parameters Cost of sampling and reporting 1,000/sample $ 6,000 3 existing wells 2 times/year x $F,000 = irst Year Operation Total $18,000 Year 2-5 Operation Total $12,000 Annual $ 6,000 Note: Groundwater Investigations to be Private Developer Responsibility per Development Order. OF DEVELOPMENT FRAME AND GOVER (S.D.- 2.3)- TYP. 15" PIPE CROSS DRAIN I PLASTIC FILTL O '" ,Milne (SEE NQTE BELOW) CORRUGATED METAL C,B (sEE SO 1.3 SHEETS 2 03 PERFORATED PIPE SECTIDNS.(SEE NOTE 3) FOR OPEN JOINT I I/2" USE 12" WIDE BANDS W/NO GASKET. BALLAST ROCK- 4.* pp.mmmegamorri. EXFILTRATION TRENCH LENGTH LONGITUDINAL SECTION NOTES: 1.PLASTIC FILTER FABRIC, EACH SIDE, OVERLAPPED 011 TOP, SHALL BE USED IN SANDY AREAS AS NOTED ON PLANS AND/OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER, 2. TUE CONTRACTOR HAS THE OPTION OF INSTALLING THE FOLLOWING PIPE TYPES A. CONRUGATED STEEL - BItUMINOUS COATED BOTH SIDES (1'fRFORATEat. COnnUGATED AtUMtHUM (PETIFORATEDI. anAIIHAGE PIPE SEEPAGE DR COIIST 0E51GH WATER TABLE OES.MAH BALLAST ROCK PAV'T RESTOitAT1a1I ITfiu 3011 ,—ROOFING FELT 6"PEA ROCK SLOPE AS REQUIRE.O A5 EQUIRED� TRANSVERSE SECTION 3. PERFORATIONS 1 ACCORDING TO AASHTO SPECIFICATIONS M36-71 AND M196-74. 4. EXFILTHATION TRENCH BOTTOM ELEVATION (-) 6.0 DR AS OTHERWISE DETERMINED THROUGH APPROVED DESIGN METHODS AND TESTS. 5. PIPES FROM 15 UP TO 24 0 DIAMETER CAN BE USED, * FIELD CONDITIONS PERMITTING. METRO DADE PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS FRENCH DRAIN DETAIL STREET RUNOFF UPGRADE DETAIL 'NOTE: DESIGNED TO CAPTURE TO. 1st INCH FLOW FROM DRAINAGE WA T ERSHED. CASE I STORMWATER DETENTION _U.NDERDRAIN 1 FLOW OVERFLOW GRASSED :RETENTION AREA OUTFALL TO CASE LL BAFFLED SHUNT FLOW SURFACE WATER EXISTING STORMWATER OUTFALL REFURBISHED STORM COLLECTION SYSTEM SIDEWALK EXISTING ROAD EXIST.\i STORM OUT FALL SIDEWALK ;o F=- of TO SURFACE WATER PROPOSED PERCOLATION OR EXFILTRATION UNDERDRAIN OR DEEP DRAINAGE WELL ALTERNATE. J Der1d rkrarroor And Arrocieara Ina Meaasa PEuAd Peed Yore. f+e iMlsnae—Pur i lead Jel*+saat k+a ET Mexea inul 6ciemwMtp Taroks, Ina. SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST • • Exhibit 5-14 Water Quality Bibliography Alleman, R, Biscayne Bev Water Quality, Report 1979-1983, DERM 1985. Beaven, T.R., and McPherson, B. near ., major_ highway interchange, 1977, U.S. Geological Survey Open Biscayne Bay Management Committee, 1985/86. City of Miami Storm Sewer Program ( Storm Outfall Modifications) City of Tampa, IAM2A Nationwide Urban Runoff Program Phase Report, October 1983. Corcoran, Eugene F., Brown, M.S., Braddour, Baseline Data and Trend Analysis F., Quality f the Water, in borrow ponds Dade County, Florida, October - November File Report 78-1029. Annual Report "State DI the Bavt' F., Chasens, S.A., Biscayne Bay Hydrocarbon Study final Report, December 1983. Dade County Public Works, Section DA Water Control A portion Public Works Manual. Struct urcy or Duni fn dr ©aQenasstructures, e Dade upCountdate yolDepafrtmente ofSiEnvronmental gn of storm runoff drainage Resource Management, December 1980. Development .Qf gegional Impact Reports()velrtownSPar�l�est,Brli'ishman/Speyer. Masher/Lincoln, Port of Miami, S.E. Library - South Florida Regional Planning Council (SFRPC). Dyer, Riddle, Mills and Precourt, Inc. for City of Orlando, Orlando Urban Storm Water Management Manual (OUSWMM) Volume 2. Envirex, Inc., Constituents g:E Highway Runoff Volume 11; Procedural Manual for monitoring of highway runoff, Federal Highway Administration, PB81- 241903, February 1981. Envirex Inc., Constituents of Highway Runoff Volume �,, Federal Highway Administrator P681-241895 1981, State of the Art Report. Environmental Committee of the Miami River task force - Miami River Outfall Study. ERCO, a division of Enseco, Inc., Ecological Evaluation of proposed oceanic discharge of Dredged Material Districtm Corps ofMiami Engineers, September Department of the Army Jacksonville 20, 1985. ERCO, a division of Enseco, Ecological Evaluation of proposed oceanic discharge of Dredged Material from the Miami Harbor Turning Basin, Florida Department of Army Jacksonville District, Corps of Engineers, September 20, 1985. II Final Freay, A.D. of Part-2 Haire, W.J., Miller, T, Price, C., Haye, D., Water Resource .Data Florida, Water 1983 Volume 2A, South Florida Surfee Water USGS, WDR FL-83-2A. Haire, W.J., Price, C., Hayes, D., and Sonenshein, R. Water Resourcesr USGS Da a Florida Water Year 1983_, Volume 2B, South 83-2B. Hardee, Jack, Miller, Robert A., Mattraw, Harold, Jr., C., Stormwater - Runoft Data for, a Highway, Area Broward County, Florida Judge, Robert M., Le_ Distribution of Cadmium, Lead, Mercury and Zin- Biscayne ,Bay Sediments, Department of Engineering Technology, School of Technology, Florida International. University, May 1, 1980. la Kohout, F.R., and H,ofJ•H., Dade County©gic Flofida,s�ESAreC�ologFl��d Control Finn s Urbanization Survey Report of Investigations Number 47. Lamb, Berton L., Water Quality .Administration, A Focus c ,,ten Section 208, Ann Arbor Science 1980. Lazaro, T., Urban Hydrology 1979, Ann Arbor Science. Mattraw, H., R. Miller, Stormwater Quality Processes for Three ,Land - Use Areas. jl. Broward County, Florida, USGS WRI 81-23. Metro Dade Environmental Resource Management - ,yII Miami Canal Storm pat . Metropolitan Dade County, Public Works Department, Part 1 Standard Details. McKenzie, D.J. and G.A. Irwin, Water As essment 4f Stormwater Runoff from a heavily used urban highway bridge in. Miami, Florida : U.S. Geological Survey WRI 83-4153. Miami River Management Committee, Miami River, Yesterday, Tommorrow, Annual Report of the Miami River Management Committee 1985. Miami River Management Committee, Final Recommendations of the Miami River Management Committee, December 14, 1984. National Oceanic and Atmospheric No.lAdministration 1g85,(NOAA), olume gglNo�tol2giand Data January 1985 Volume Annual Summary 1984. National Oceanic and tApspheric Nealth AandnCoolangoDegreeMonthly 1951 rma1�980, of Temperature, Precipiaton Climatography of the United States No. 81. Overton, D., and Mcdaws, M., Stormwater Modeling, Academic Press, Inc. 1976. Foley, R., AD. Inventory of Pollutant Discharges and their loadings into major surface water bodies, Metro Dade DER1, 1981. Ryan, Jr. et al., The Environmental Chemistry of Florida Estuaries - Deepwater Ports Maintenance Dredging _Study - Technical Report Number .: Port of Miami and the Miami River, FDER 1984. Santon, et al., yiater Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants 1972, EPA PB-214 408. Savannah Laboratories and Environmental Services, Inc., .6 Study of the effects f drainage from the Black Creek,_ Gould's and Mowry Canals of Trace Met 1 and. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Levels -in. Molluscs and Sediments L Lowe r Biscayne Bay, Funded by Jacksonville, Florida U..S. Army Corps of Engineers Contract No. DACW 17-85-M-0908, February 1985. Schmidt, Stacy D., Spencer, Douglas R., The Magnitude of improper waste discharges ja m urban storwater system, Journal Water Pollution Control Federation 58 No. 9, July 1986, PP. 744-747. South Florida Regional Planning Council, Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Rules, November 1978. South Florida Regional Planning Council, Natural Systems Policy Szuide, July 1982. Urban Systems Policy Guide, July 1982. South Florida Water Management District, Conceptual Approval.Rules Draft February 27, 1986. South Florida Water Management District, ,Management and Storage.Qf Surface Waters, Permit Information Manual Volume IV, January 1984. South Florida Water Management District, .summary o.f.South Florida Water Manageeent Permit Process for Surface Water Management (Drainage) Systems& Basis of review for surface grater management permit applications within the South Florida Water Management District, May 1, 1986. Thorhaug, Anitra ed, Biscayne Bay: Past, Present. Future, A symposium presented by the University of Miami, April 2-3, 1976. U.S. Army CorpsEngineers CQuntycFlorida.�eMa�rchtrict, 1985. Draft Feasibility report paMiami River Nydrography af. FVorth Biscayne Bay E rt I University of Miami Rosenstiel School of January 1984, Van de Kreeks and Wang, J.0., Results Q. Field Measurements, Marine and Atmospheric Science, • Van de Kreeks and Wang, J.D., itvdrography .,Qf North Biscayne Bay part Modeling, University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, January 1984. Waller, Bradley, G., Klein, H., Lefkoff. J., Attenuation .of Stormwater in rated Florida, USs for iHighway f WaterhResourceuInvesitgationse Reporte84-4083. Florida, Geological Survey Wanielista, Dr. Martin, P.E., Yousef, Y., P.E., Golding, B., P.E. Cassagnol, E.I., Stormwater Management Manual, DER, University of Central Florida 1981. • QUESTION 6: WETLANDS This question was deleted pursuant to the "Downtown/Areawide Agreement to Delete Question." There are no wetlands within the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Project area. • • • • • QUESTION 7: FLOOD PRONE AREAS A. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF FLOOD ELEVATION FOR THE AREA. INCLUDE MAP AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REVISION, AWELL AS EXISTING AND IDENTIFY SOURCE OF INFORMATION. The base flood elevations for the study area are shown on the Flood Zone Map. The majority of the project area is classified as Zone C and lies outside the 100 year flood and is subject to mimimal flooding. There is an area at the eastern end of the project, mostly east of N.E. 1st Avenue, that is categorized as Zone A-15 and varies in base flood eleva- tion between 11 and 12 feet above mean sea level. Flood Zone A-15 is part of the 100 year flood area. At the southwest corner of the project, west of N.W. 2nd Avenue and south of N.E. 9th Street, there is an area that is categorized as Zone A-14 with a base flood elevation of 10 feet above mean sea level. Flood Zone A-14 is part of the 100 year flood area. There is also a very small area of the project at the southeast corner of the project south of N.E. 6th Street, that is categorized as Zone A-17 with a base flood elevation of 11 feet above mean sea level. Flood Zone A-17 is part of the 100 year flood area. The source of the flood elevations, referenced above and in the map ex- hibit, is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Dade County, January 5, 1984 edition. • • • 1 1l..i 71 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT David Plummer And Associates, Inc. Bermello, Kurkl And Vera, Inc. MAP C — FLOOD PRONE AREAS SYMBOL ZONE �7 likat WV •IL im=..•_ ■ -� 1ai .�,).�4• 04- "►� =1 111 ►►. o. +i! !:1►14*i.4:". ►,►.i►., i> A_ 15 '! MIMIC ,/E''rAI��4►1 S/ va* Atai raw r MOAN! 1904: h'ill:h12: :1:59,f. 5116 41�1►* 14: I 1.1.3 Orr VIP 3t,t4$74. i' Wag A14 A15 A17 mmuse moms DESCRIPTION AREAS Or MINIMAL FLOODING ZONES A14 TIIRU A17 ARE WITHIN THE 100 YR. FLOOD. THE FL000 HAZARD FACTOR IS INDICATED BY THE NUMERICAL SUFFIX. THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION IS SHOWN IN PARENTHESIS. 100 YR. FLOOD BOUNDARY 4 ": CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTAMENT OF DEVELOP EN !nil 1 � Williams —Russell And Johnson. Inc. Environmental Engineering Consultants, Inc. • • B. PROVIDE FINISH FIRST FLOOR ELEVATIONS FOR STRUCTURES, ROADS AND PARKING LOTS In accordance with FEMA guidelines the lowest floor is defined to mean the lowest level of a building including a finished or unfinished base- ment, if any. However, it is important to note that the determination of the lowest floor elevation for a structure in a V-Zone, varies markedly from that of an A -Zone. For example, in a V-Zone the lowest floor eleva- tion is the underside of the supporting structure at the lowest level; whereas in an A -Zone it is the "finished floor" of the lowest level. The lowest floor elevation, or base flood elevation as shown on Map C, is 10 ft. for Zone A-14, 11 ft. for Zone A-17, and varies from 11 to 12 ft. for Zone A-15. Grade elevation throughout the project areas varies from a low of 5 ft. above mean sea level to a maximum elevation of 14 ft. Although FEMA regulations do not apply to roads and other impervious sur- faces such as plazas and surface parking lots, Metropolitan Dade County requires that these types of surface improvements be at or above 5 ft. above mean sea level. The minimum elevations for roads and surface parking lots, based on the County standards mentioned herein, are enforced by the City of Miami's Public Works Department. Presently the Metropolitan Dade County Department of Environmental Re- sources Management (DERM) will review and interpret Federal guidelines on a project by project basis when construction involves the establishment of floor areas beneath the minimum or base flood elevation as illustrated in Map C. Essentially, non -habitable spaces such as a lower parking level, mechanical equipment rooms, elevator landings and machine rooms, and simi- lar type spaces are customarily accepted as exceptions to the Federal guidelines by DERM. It is possible that a large unobstructed assembly hall or a dining area, enclosed by "break -a -way" walls, would also be permitted below the base flood elevation. However, other types of deviations from the base floor elevation will require the procurement of a variance from the Metropolitan Dade County Environmental Review Board (ERB). The ERB consists of five members appointed by the County Com r ssion: (2) engineers and (3) scientists. The ERB meets monthly; and its decisions at County level are final. Appeals to the decision of the ERB must be filed with the Third District Court of Appeals. • • • C. PROVIDE APPLICABLE STORM SURGE ELEVATIONS FOR THE AREA AND IDENTIFY SOURCE OF INFORMATION. The State of Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Bureau of Beaches and Shores; the U.S. Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the Metropolitan Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) were contacted in connection with a request for storm surge data relative to the study area. DNR provided storm surge data relative to the study area. DNR provided storm surge data for Biscayne Bay and barrier islands (i.e. Miami Beach, Key Biscayne, etc.) but had no information regarding the mainland. DERM had no storm surge data available; and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration advised that a storm surge analysis is currently begin prepared and is scheduled for completion in 1988 (see letter from Mr. Brian R. Jarvinen, Research Meteorologist, Research & Development Unit included as Appendix 7-1). The "1983 Technical Data Report - Lower Southeast Florida Hurricane Evaluation Study", prepared by Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, Inc., in cooperation with the Army Corps of Engineers (pages 43 and 44) does not incorporate a detailed storm surge analysis. This report simply deals with storm surge and storm tides on a theoretical basis. The report only offers a general guide of possible storm tides in Dade County reaching up to 15 feet above mean sea level during a Saffir/Simpson Hurricane No. 5. However, the report does not specify whether the 15 ft. in Dade County refers to the barrier island or the mainland. In conclusions, this report offers no specific storm surge analysis relative to the study area. 7-4(R) (June, 1987) • • • D. IDENTIFY CHANGES IN REGULATIONS AND PERMITTING PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO PROTECT PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND STORM SURGE 0n 0ctober 1, 1981, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) imple- mented a revised rating system for new or substantially improved buildings constructed in coastal high hazard areas of Regular Program communities, identified on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) as V-Zones. The rating system within the project area applies to: 1. Buildings in special flood hazard Zones V21 with building permit applications dated on or after October 1, 1981; and 2. V21 Zone buildings on which the building permit was issued before October 1, 1981 whose construction did not begin within 180 days of the permit date, but begins after September 30, 1981. Under the new Coastal V-Zone Rating requirements, revised or calculated flood elevations, adjusted for wave height, are used in determining ac- tuarial insurance rates for new construction. Thus to avoid very high insurance rates, new construction should be elevated above these ad- justed flood elevations. On March 4, 1986, Metropolitan Dade County Board of County Commissioners adopted Dade County Ordinance 86-16 amending Chapter 23 of the South Florida Building Code (SFBC) to comply with the Florida Coastal Zone Pro- tection Act of 1985. The adopted ordinance requires that all construction within V-Zones, com- ply with the Coastal Zone Protection Act as a pre -requisite for obtaining a building permit. In addition to the above mentioned regulations the following is a listing of possible municipal regulations which could be of assistance in as- suring that private property will be properly protected from flooding and storm surge damage: 1. Building Permit Application Submittals: a. Letter from Department of Environmental Resources Management, stating the applicable base flood elevation for the subject property (currently not required). • b. Provide a topographic survey, prepared by registered land sur- veyor establishing the elevations at critical points of the property and the elevation of adjoining streets, at their center- line (currently required). c. Provide a certificate signed and notarized, whereby the owner and applicant, if different than the owner, attest that the lowest floor elevation is in accordance with F.E.M.A. guide- lines and the 1985 Coastal Zone Protection Act. (Currently not required.) d. Provide a certificate from a land surveyor, registered in the State of Florida, certifying the elevation of the lowest floor, prior to the construction of upper levels (currently required). In the cases where the property falls within a V-Zone, the appli- cation mist also incorporate a certification by either the struc- tural engineer or architect of record, providing evidence of the depth of structure at the lowest level (i.e. difference between finished floor elevation and the bottom of supporting structural members). This would amount to a "Post Construction Elevation Certificate". (currently not required) 2. Structural and Architectural Certification All construction which falls within a V-zone, should be certified as to its capacity in regards to the following: (1) capacity of the structure to withstand velocity waters and hurricane wash; (2) condition of any non -habitable areas which may lie beneath the base flood elevation, as being "water -tight". The certification for item (1), is to be provided by a structural engineer registered in the State of Florida; and the certification for item (2), is to be provided by an architect registered in the State of Florida. 3. Grade and Basement Elevation Permits All surface related improvements (i.e. plazas, surface parking lots and roads) which fall within the V-zone, should be at a minimum 5 ft. elevation above mean sea level. In cases where the basements or lower parking levels of buildings are located below the minimum, 5 ft. level, pumps connected to the build- ing's emergency generator must be provided to remove any potential water seepage. 4. Structural Flood Proofing, In the event that the lowest floor elevation of a structure, or por- tion thereof, used for habitable purposes is situated below the minimum base flood elevation, then that portion of the structure below the min- imum base flood elevation rust be designed in accordance with struc- tural flood proofing guidelines entitled "Floodproofing Non -Residential Structures", May 1986 Edition, published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Copies of this report may be obtained at the Dade County Department of Public Works. In particular, structural flood proofing of ground floor retail areas may be achieved through the utilization of "drop -in" panels at openings such as doors, breeze -ways, etc. Display windows and store- front may be protected through the use of watertight aluminum flood shields. Property owners who can not meet the FEMA guidelines for structurally flood proof construction of areas below the minimum base flood elevation must apply for a waiver or variance with the Department of Environmental Resources Management, Dade County. • • QUESTION:8: VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE A. IDENTIFY EXISTING VEGETATION IN THE STUDY AREA. SPECIFY ANY PLANT SPECIES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT ARE LISTED AS RARE, ENDANGERED OR THREATENED. Due to the highly urbanized character of the S.E. Overtown/Park West area, there is virtually no original natural vegetation present. Landscape plants and ornamentals occur in various open spaces throughout the project area, but no significant vegetative associations can be identified. The majority of the vegetation in the project area can be found at Gibson Park, the only municipal park which is in the area (refer to Map F, Vegetation Map). The remainder of the vegetation throughout the project area is extremely localized and falls into one of the three following categories: 1. Planting_ Along Public Right -of -Ways: The most prominent street tree plantings occur along Biscayne Boule- vard in the Bicentennial Park area. Throughout the project area, either the median or the median and sidewalk areas are planted with royal palms, queen palms and Washingtonian palms. These tall speci- mens provide this portion of the project area with a distinguished landmark quality and an element of design continuity which should be enhanced and protected. A well coordinated tree planting program throughout the project area's public right-of-ways, could have a most dramatic effect in enhancing the scale and comfort of the street environment for pedestrians. Street tree planting programs are the single most im- portant vegetation element in urbanized areas. The City of Miami's proposal to develop NW 9th Street as a pedestrian mall could provide the setting for native vegetation and ornamentals. 2. Planting Along Major Public Capital Improvements: The planting of trees, shrubbery and ground cover as part of major public improvements represents the second category of localized vegetation. The following projects lend themselves to the imple- mentation of planting programs: a. The Downtown People Mover Station Areas. b. The Sports Arena. c. The Interstate Expressway/Ramp System Right -of -Ways. d. Metrorail Right -of -Way & Station. • • 0, tip •t GIBSC7[d PARK r e \N mom \• Am NA,1 hi. ... vvste 1 ' \itl s s ht. 1 1 1i fl[w it iit1 III 111.17"1"-6,1717.717 SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN /PARK WEST DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT Barmelia, Kurk) And Vsra, 1 1 1 • raniblfm. ! N 11 •1 1 11 • 1 141111,414, 11 1111111111 �11I1T1 1111l1111 David Plummer And Aasolcistea, Inc. 11 IT moo Nam a a 11.1- SHIM ■1_ iu c !1 1111111111 1111 1/11111111 1111111111 1um MAP F - VEGETATION SYMBOL DESCRIPTION PUBLIC PARKS PUBLIC PARKS OUTSIDE DRI BOUNDARIES source: city of miami planning dept., d.d.a. and 1986 windshield study. FI 1 x 0 x W\1\ • •. 1• IT !• • t\al • !.1 4 •T { S 44 u 0 '"1u11m 1111//11 MIMEVH.ifl AIMS111111111 �Bra Inc. IT _1\ i 110 } +aY CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTAMENT ©P DEVELOP lull I 3 1 Williams -Russell And Johnson, Inc. Environmental Engineering Consultants, Inc, NT S. Plantings as Part of Major Private Projects: Except for certain nearby projects such as Bayside and Bicentennial Park, the attention to vegetation and tree planting has played a minor role in private developments throughout the project area. A greater attention to street level planting and the use of natural vegetation to provide focal points, shade, transition and buffer ones, etc., should be encouraged in all new construction. There are no endangered or threatened vegetation associations throughout the study area. However, City of Miami records and surveys conducted as part of this study indicate that the following species can be found in the following public parks: 1. Gibson Park: Red Mahogany, Gumbo Limbo, Silk Oak, Black Olive, Gold Malayan, Coconut Palm and Cocos Nucifera. 2. Bicentennial Park: Bicentennial Park once featured a rich variety of plant specimens such as the following" Tabebuia Argentias, Tabeburia Pallida, Delonix Regia, Sabal Palmetto, Ficus Nitida, Cocos Nurifera, Swietenia Mahogany, Roystonea Regia, etc. However with the development of sport fields and the track for. the Miami Grand Prix, the majority of these specimens have been removed by the City. B. IDENTIFY WILDLIVE SPECIES, INCLUDING BIRDS, REPTILES, AMPHIBIANS, FISH, INVERTEBRATES AND MAMMALS, THAT USE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA. SPECIFY ANY WILDLIFE SPECIES WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT ARE RARE, ENDANGERED OR THREATENED. Because of the urbanized nature of the project area, no significant, rare, endangered or threatened wildlife occur. Wildlife in the project area is restricted to species which are adaptable to an urban environment. A visual inspection of open spaces throughout the project area confirmed no evidence of burrows or nestings which might be an indication of certain rare, endangered or threatened wildlife. The only wildlife that has been seen throughout the project area has been limited to pigeons, detected mostly around the Freedom Tower building. Pelicans also inhabit the Miamarina basin marina and Plaza Venetia Marina next to the Venetian causeway. Migratory birds such as blue jays, cardinals, ducks, and on several oc- casions squirrels and possums have been seen at Bayfront Park and Bicentennial Park. • C. SPECIFY ACTIONS WHICH WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO MITIGATE OR MINIMIZE IMPACT ON VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE Due to the non-existence of any rare, endangered or threatened vegetation or wildlife throughout privately owned properties within the project area, there are no specific actions which will be required to protect or mini- mize impact on such species. Existing trees planted in the public right-of-ways should be protected by the use of temporary guards during periods of construction. The temporary guards are to be furnished and installed by the contractor so that the trees in question may be protected against damage resulting from contact with moving equipment or deposits of soil/fill above exposed root systems or trunks. No specific actions need to be taken in regards to possible impacts re- garding wildlife species which inhabit the urbanized portions of the project area. • • • • D. SPECIFY THE REGULATIONS, PERMITTING PROCEDURES AND OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT WILL PROTECT SIGNIFICANT VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE. A11 construction plans for projects which adjoin a landscaped public right-of-way or open space system. should incorporate the following draw- ings, details and notations as a part of the permit set of construction documents as a pre -requisite to the issuance of a building permit by the City of Miami: a. Temporary tree guards are to be furnished and installed by the Con- tractor at every tree location within the public right-of-way, situated within twenty-five feet of the construction activity or limit of construction (i.e. construction fence or barricade). Exceptions would apply to interior renovations; and exterior reno- vations where the cost of construction is under ten thousand dollars ($10,000). b. Adjoining public right-of-ways and open space system are to be kept free of any dust, debris or foreign substances. All landscaping material (i.e. tree planting, shrubbery and ground cover) should meet the City of Miami standards, as per Sections 2022.2 and 2008.8 of City of Miami Zoning Ordinance 9500. Chapter 17 of the Miami City Code, entitled Environmental Preservation requires a tree removal permit for any tree removal, relocation or development activity affecting trees on pri- vate property within commercial and multifamily districts. The Criteria for Tree Removal in Section 17-9(A) should be strictly enforced and the conditions for tree relocation and replacement in Section 17-9(B) should be maximized. The standards for tree protection during construction, contained in Section 17-10 should be enforced. Dade County Ordinance 1182-68 prohibiting the planting of cajeput (Melaleuca Quinquenervia), Australian Pine (Casuarina Spp) & Brazilian Pepper (Schinus Terebinthifolius) should also be strictly enforced. It is recommended that landscaping design guidelines be established to assist in the development of well balanced landscaped treatments along public right-of-ways and private property. The design guidelines should provide for type of planting, spacing, etc. for different urban locations. Specific attention should be paid to edge conditions: curb/pavement; sidewalk/private property; median planting; corner & intersection; pedestrian crosswalks, plazas, etc. A suggested landscaping list of native plants and ornamentals suitable for use in South Florida urban environments developed during the planning and design process of the Dade County mass transit system' by the County con- sultants (i.e. KTG) and staff: • • • SUGGESTED PLANT LIST (DADE COUNTY MASS TRANSIT) BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER (COMMON NAME) Achras zapota Sapodilla Allamanda hendersoni Brown Bud Allamanda Alpinia nutafs Shell Ginger Anthurium huegelii N.C.N Archontophoenix alexandraw Alexandra Palm Bauhinia Blaleana Hong Kong Orchid Bougainvillea (variety) Bougainvillea Caladium bicolor (Hort. Var) Caladium Callistemon rigidus Stiff Bottlebrush Callistemon vi,inalis Weeping Bottlebrush Calophyllum antillanum Calaba 12 ft. 30 in. 5 ft. 30 in. 12 ft. 6 ft. 24 in. 6 ft. 24 in. 10 ft. 3-1/2 in. 8 ft. 3-1/2 in 3ft. 3ft. 12 in. 12 ft. 6 ft. 12 ft. 8 ft. 12 ft. 8 ft. 3 in. • • • BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS (COMMON NAME) HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER Cassia beareana Bears Shower Cassia fistula Golden Shower Chamaedorea erumpens Bamboo Palm Chamaedorea seifritzii N.C.N Chamaerops humilis European Fan Palm Chrysalidocarpus lutescens Areca Palm Chrysobalanus icaco (green) Coco Plum Chrysotalanus Icaco (Red Tip) Red Tip Coco Plum Chrysophyllum oliviforme Satin leaf Ci tri s mi ti s Calamondin Coccolobis diversifolia (Floridana). Pigeon Plum Coccolobis uvifera Seagrape Cocos nucifera (Malayan Green) Malayan Coconut Codiaeum variegatum (Broadleaf) Croton (variety) Conocarpus erecta Green Buttonwood 8 ft. 8 ft. 14 ft. 9 ft. 3 in. 8 ft. 5 ft. 8 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 6 ft. _12 ft. 24 in. 18 in. 12 ft. 12 ft. 12 ft. 8 ft. 9 ft. 18 in. 12 in. 7 ft. 7 ft. 6 ft. 5 ft. 24 in. 15 in. 12 ft. 9 ft. 2 1/2 in. 3 in. 3 1/2 in. • • • BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER (COMMON NAME) Cortaderia selloana Pampasgrass Crinum asiaticum Crinum lily Delonix regia Royal Poinciana Dizygotheca elegantissima Threadleaf Falsearalia Dracaena aborea N.C.N. Dracaena draco Dragon dracaena Dracaena marginata Dracena Eriobotrya japonica Loquat Eugenia jambos Rose Apple Ficus Jacquiniaefolia Jacquinia fig Ficus rubiginosa Rusty fig Garcinia spicata Garcinia Gymnanthes lucida Oysterwood 11 ex vomitoria (nana) Dwarf Yaupon Holly Ixora coccinea Jungleflame Ixora 3 ft. 3 ft. 4 ft. 4 ft. 16 ft. 16 ft. 4 in. 10 ft. 5 ft. 4 ft. 2 ft. 4 ft. 3 ft. 6 ft. 3 1/2 ft. 12 ft. 8 ft. 2 1/2 in. 12 ft. 8 ft. 2 1/2 in. 12 ft. 10 ft. 3 in. 12 ft 8 ft. 3 in. 8 ft. 4 ft. 6 ft. 3 ft. 10 in. 16 in. 24 in. 16 in. • • • BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS (0014MON NAME) . HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER Jacaranda acutifolia Jacaranda Jasminum multiflorum (putescens) Furry Jasmine Lagerstroemia indica Crapemyrtle Lagerstroemia speciosa Queen Crapemyrtle Leea coccinea N.C.N. Ligustrum lucidum Glossy Privet Liriope muscari (evergreen giant) Malpighia coccigera Holly Malpighia Mimusop roxburghiana Mimusops Murraya paniculata Orange Jasmine Murraya paniculata (Lakeview) N.C.N. Myrica cerifera Southern Waxmyrtle Noronhia emarginata Noronhia 12 ft. 7 ft. 2 1/2 in. 18 in. 20 in. 12 ft. 7 ft. 12 ft. 8 ft. 4 ft. 12 ft. 14 in. 16 in. 12 ft. 30 in. 36 in. 12 ft. 12 ft. 3 ft. 10 ft. 16 in. 8 ft. 20 in. 30 in. 10ft. 7 ft. 3 in. • • BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS (COMMON NAME) .HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER Ophiopogon japonica Monco Grass Paurotis wrighti Paurotis Palm Philodendron selloum Self -heading Philodendron Phoenix roebeleni Dwarf Date Palm Pittosporum tobira (green) Pittosporum Pittosporum tobir (Variegata) Varigated Pittosporum Pleomela reflexa N.C.N. Podocarpus graciliar Weeping Podocarpus Podocarpus macrophyllus Podocarpus Psidium cattlelanum Cattley Guave Ptychosperma macarthuri Macarthur Palm Quercus virginiana Live Oak Raphiolepsis Indica Indio Hawthorn Ravenala madagascariensis Travelers Palm Rhoeo bermudiana Dwarf Oyster Plant Sabal palmetto Sabal Palm 8 in. 8 in. 20 ft. 15 ft. 2 ft. 5 ft. 24 in. 24 in. 6 ft. 8 ft. 8 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 12 ft. 24 in. 12 ft. 10 in. 3 ft. 5 ft. 24 in. 24 in. 3 ft. 5 ft. 3 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft, 24 in. 10 ft. 10 in. 3 in. Spathyphyllum (clevelandii N.C.N. 12 in. 12 in. • • • BOTANICAL NAME PROCUREMENT SPECIFICATIONS (COMMON NAME) HEIGHT SPREAD CALIPER Strelitzia nicolai White Bird of Paradise Strelitzia reginae Bird of Paradise Swietenia mahagoni Mahogany Tabebuia argentea Gold Tree Tabebuia pallida Cuban Trumpet Tamarindus indica Tamarind Thrinas parviflora Thatch Key Palm Trachelospermum jasminoides Confiderate Jasmine Viburnum suspensum Sandankwa Washingtonia robusta Washington Palm Wedelia trilobata Wedelia Yucca elephantipes Bulbstem Yucca Zamia floridana Coonti e Zamia Furfuracea Scurfy Zamia Zebrina pendula Wandering Jew Sodding (Bahia)/Bitter.Blue Grass Seed (Bahia) / Argentine 30 in. 18 in. 12 in. 12 ft. 16 ft. .12 ft. 12 ft. 5 ft. 3 ft. 30 in. 18 in. 6 in. 6 ft. 18 in. 18 in. 24 in. 30 in. 6 in. 7 ft. 3 in. 8 ft. 7 ft. 4 in. 7 ft. 2 1/2 in. • • • Another list of suggested native landscape material that has been prepared by the Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) of Dade County follows: NATIVE LANDSCAPE MATERIAL AVAILABLE IN SOUTH FLORIDA (Compiled by DERM) TREES Acacia, Sweet Alvaradoa Bald Cypress Blolly Buttonwood Cat's Claw Crabwood Dahoon Holly Fiddlewood Geiger Tree Guiana Plum Gulf Licaria Gumbo Limbo Hercules Club Inkwood Jamaica Caper Jamaica Dogwood Joewood Lancewood Lignum Vitae Mahogany Mangrove, Black Mangrove, Red Mangrove, White Maple, Southern Red Marlberry Mastic Milkbark Myrsine Myrtle of the River Oak, Live Palm, Cabbage Palm, Brittle Thatch Palm, Florida Thatch Palm, Paurotis *Highly salt tolerant (Acacia farnesiana) (Alvaradoa amorphoides) (Taxodium distichum) (Pisonia discolor)* (Conocarpus erecta)* (Pithecellobium unguis-cati)* (Gymnanthes lucida)* (Llex cassine)* (Citharexyium fruitocosum) (Cordia sebestena)* (Drypetes lateriflora) (Licaria triandra) (Bursera simaruba)* (Zanthoxylum clava-herculis)* (Exothea paniculata) (Capparis jamaicensis) (Piscidia piscipula) (Jacquinia keyensis)* (Nectandra coriacea) (Guaiacum sanctum)* (Swietenia mahogoni)* (Avicennia germinans)* (Rhizophora mangle)* (Laguncularia racemosa)* (Acer rubrum) (Ardesia escallonioides) (Mastichodendron foetidissimum) (Drypetes diversifolia) (Myrsine guianensis) (Calyptranthes zuzygium) (Quercus virginiana)* (Sable palmetto)* (Thrinax microcarpa)* (Thrinax parviflora)* (Acoelorraphe wrightii) • Palm, Royal Palm, Silver Paradise Tree Pigeon Plum Pine, Slash Pitch Apple Pop Ash Red Bay Red Mulberry Satinleaf Seagrape Soapberry Soldierwood Spicewood Stopper, Redberry Strongbark, Rough Sweet Bay Tamarind, Wild Tawnyberry Holly Torchwood West Indian Cherry West Indian Trema Wild Cinnamon Wild Coffee Tree Wild Dilly Wild Lime Willow Rustic * Highly salt tolerant • (Roystonea elata) (Coccothrinax argentata) (Simarouba glauca) (Coccoloba diversifolia)* (Pinus elliottii) (Clusia rosea)* (Fraxinus caroliniana) (Persea borbonia) (Morus rubra) (Crysophyllum oliviforme) (Coccoloba uvifera)* (Sapindus saponaria)* (Colubrina elliptica)* (Calyptranthes pallens) (Eugenia axillaris) (Bourreria succelenta var. (Magnolia virginiana) (Lysiloma latisiliqua)* (Llex krugiana) (Amyris balsamifera or A. (Prunus myrtifolia) (Trema lamarckiana) (Canella alba) (Colubrina arborescens) (Manilkara bahamensis) (Zanthoxylum fagara) (Bumelia salicifolia) revoluta) elemifera) SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS Bay Cedar Beauty berry Bitterbush Blackbead Black Torch Boston Fern Christmas Berry Cr copl um Coontie Coral Bean Darling Plum Fi rebush Florida Boxwood Florida Key Lily Florida Privet Gaillardia Golden Dewdrop Hibiscus Ironwood, Black Ironwood, White Key Lime Lantana Leather Fern Limber Caper Locust Berry Moss Rose Peperomia Railroad Vine Rhacoma Sea Lavender Sea Oats Sea Oxeye Scaevola or Inkberry Seven -Year -Apple Shield Fern Snowberry Stopper, Red Stopper, Simpson Stopper, Spanish Strap Fern Tetrazygia Varnishleaf Velvetseed Wax Myrtle White Indian Berry Wild Coffee Wild Coffee Yellow Elder *Highly salt tolerant (Suriana maritima)* (Callicarpa americana) (Picramnia pentandra) (Pithecellobium guadelupense)* (Erithalis fruticosa) (Nephrolepsis biserrata) (Lycium carolinianum)* (Chrysobalanus icaco) (Zamia floridana) (Erythring herbacea) (Reynosia septentrionalis) (Hamelia patens) (Schaefferia frutescens) (Hymenocallis keyensis)* (Forestiera segregate) (GaiIlardia pulchella) (Duranta repens) (Hibiscus eetveldeanus) (Krugiodendron ferreum) (Hypelate trifoliata) (Citrus aurantiifolia) (Lantana camara) (Acrostichum aureum)* (Capparis flexuosa) (Byrsonima cuneata) (Portulaca pilosa) (Peperomia floridana and P. obtusifolia) (Ipomoea pes-caprae)* (Crossopetalum rhacoma) (Tournefortia gnaphalodes)* (Uniola paniculata)* (Borrichia arborescens)* (Scaevola plumieri)* (Casasia clusiifolia)* (Dryopteris ludoviciana) (Chiococca alba) (Eugenia rhombea) (Myrcianthes fragrans var. simpsonii) (Eugenia foetida)* (Campyloneurum angustifolium) (Tetrazygia bicolor) (Dodonaea viscosa) (Guettarda elliptica) (Myrica cerifera)* (Randia aculeata) (Psychotria nervosa) (Psychotria sulzneri) (Tecoma stans) 8-14