HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-City of Miami Agency Report on FPL Turkey Point Units 6 and 7 ProjectCITY OF MIAMI AGENCY REPORT ON FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT TURKEY POINT
UNITS 6 & 7 PROJECT SITING APPLICATION PA03 45A3 AND TRANSMISSION LINE
CORRIDOR BETWEEN DAVIS AND MIAMI SUBSTATIONS (FPL "EAST PREFERRED
CORRIDOR")
FLORIDA DOAH CASE NO: 09-003575 DEP
1. CORRIDOR LOCATION ISSUES:
The proposed Florida Power and Light (FPL) transmission line Corridor, known as. FPL's "East Preferred
Corridor" (Corridor) runs directly through the City of Miami (City). The corridor runs through US Highway
1 (US1) as it approaches downtown Miami through the Roads neighborhood and the West Brickell area
before ending at the Downtown. substation. Due to the significance of US 1 as a gateway to the City and the
Central Business District within the City, as the economic engine of South Florida, several agencies have
invested heavily in improving the appearance of this corridor.
The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is one such agency which has invested heavily in the
implementation of ornate and lush landscape, in addition to a maintenance plan along the Corridor.
Similarly, the Miami -Dade Transit Agency (MDT) has also focused on the Corridor implementing the M-
Path, a bicycle/pedestrian corridor along US 1 with improved landscaping and signage. The City has also
invested heavily in the appearance of this Corridor through the .implementation of two roadway
improvement projects along US1 replacing the dilapidated "pink wall" with a modern pre -cast post and
panel wall and improved landscaping.
The FPL Corridor calls for gigantic and out of place poles measuring up to one hundred and twenty (120)
feet in height and four (4) feet in diameter to support the proposed transmission lines. The incorporation of
these poles within the dense and urban Corridor is incompatible and significantly impacts its appearance
and counteracts the investments of the public agencies .described above. This Corridor runs along the main
thoroughfare of Miami -Dade County, and is at the center of commercial, mixed -use, and residential
developments in the heart of the City.
Once the proposed Corridor reaches I-95, it runs through a predominantly residential area that has recently
benefitted from redevelopment initiatives with new buildings providing underground electric lines. The
construction of new over -head transmission lines and large diameter poles would negatively impact this
community in the following manner:
• Negative aesthetic impacts to residential areas resulting from the transmission lines and large
diameter poles
• Negative aesthetic impacts to high-rise developments that invested significantly to assure that
distribution lines were constructed underground.
• Right -of -Ways in this area are already narrow— existing widths are needed to accommodate
sidewalks and bicycle paths and bicycle .facilities which are in high -demand given the urban nature
of the .area. Construction of transmission lines and large -diameter poles would negatively impact
mobility in the area.
• The overhead transmission lines would cause the property values to plummet, in an already
depressed market. Please see the attached Economic report as Exhibit A.
The negative impact of the project on the City would be lessened if the lines were buried underground. The
proposed corridor will bisect several high -density residential and mixed use areas, including Palmetto Bay,
Pinecrest, Dadeland Station, South Miami, Sunset area, Coral Gables, West Brickell, and Downtown. The
County's main Metro -Rail and Bus Line will also be negatively impacted. The Corridor is designed to go
through the heart of Miami's Commercial District, which is adjacent to or in close proximity to hospitals,
single family residential, and multifamily residential .units. The negative impacts to these residential cores
and mixed use developments must be considered.
I I 0 0 40 Page l
II°LioS�btal-fit�f�f �i,wi
II-oogooc rA e�cu Report° FPL
Tor€ ivnT5
(o and 7 I'r9jeC1-
u r
. • .3
o. c
fa la
o
o
u
• c
•E
o
n i• .
• •
The existing . Metro -Rail Line is at least 25 feet above ground, and would expose all travelers to
electromagnetic fields from the proposed transmission lines. No documentation or scientific studies have
been distributed to the community to alleviate the concerns arising from the electromagnetic field exposure
at that height.
Moreover, the City is aware of the economic damages analysis presented by the Village of Pinecrest
(Pinecrest) as part of an alternate corridor application. The economic detriment forced upon the entire
US 1 via this Corridor is documented as extensive. The City is concerned about conflicts with existing and
proposed homes and businesses in the Corridor, a highly dense Corridor, that is one of the main thoroughfares in the
County. The City is concerned about where potential line locations could limit future development.
2. OUTSTANDING ISSUES AND THE DETERMINATION OF NEED HAS CHANGED:
It is the City's position that several factors have changed since FPL began its Certification Process two years ago.
Since then FPL's Nuclear Plant Certification has not progressed as fast as the Transmissions Lines Certification
process, with reports from some FPL insiders that the Nuclear Plant Construction may not advance at all nor may
be constructed. Thus, leaving the City, stuck with Transmission Lines FPL really does not need but rather wants in
order to fortify the existing Grid. Frankly, it is the City's position, that but for the Nuclear Plant project, the City is
not in need of these transmission lines at all, and the Transmission Line Certification should be halted or travel
with the Nuclear Plant.
3. RECOMMENDATION FOR CERTIFICATION: The City of Miami finds that the FPL Application
does not meet the requirements of the City's Code and Ordinances. Moreover, the City recommends DENIAL of
Certification atthis time. If the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), were not to agree with the City, and felt that the
City was incorrect, at a minimum, the Conditions of Certification (Conditions) outlined herein should be adopted.
Staff analysis is contained herein. This recommendation is made contingent upon the Conditions contained herein
be satisfactorily addressed during the Post -certification review process.
4. VARIANCE TO STANDARDS: The City requests, that should the Corridor proposed by FPL go
forward, that FPL be required to underground and shield the Transmission Lines regardless of the cost. FPL is
entitled to reimbursement for the construction expenditures and as the lines benefit the entire state. FPL should be
required to protect electrical power for all residents of the state by ensuring (1) that the dense residential/commercial
corridor of USl is protected; (2) that Miami -Dade County as it is affected more frequently by hurricane events
than any other County in Florida and has faced catastrophic damage due to various hurricanes in the past 20 years
causing downed power lines and power outages, as such, undergrounding the Transmission Lines would benefit all
electrical Rate Payers as the Transmission Lines would not be affected by wind storm events; and (3) the US!
Corridor would be protected from the economic downturn projected in the Pinecrest report.
At a recent appearance before the City of Miami Commission May 26, 2011, FPL representatives stated that FPL
could only bear the cost of constructing the Transmission Lines underground if it were the only technically feasible
alternative. Given the importance and investments made to improving the appearance of the Corridor by multiple
agencies, the importance of safety from storms and hurricane events, and the density of this area, constructing over-
head lines is not feasible given the substantial negative impacts. The new transmission lines must be approved by
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as part of the Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 Site Certification.
This federal agency decision must be based on the results of a corresponding study to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as dictated in United States Code Title 42, Chapter 55:
SUBCHAPTER I $ 4331 states that... it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal
Government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of
Page 2
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
0 0
national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to
the end that the Nation may...5) achieve a balance between population and resource use which
will permit high standards of living.
Construction of overhead Transmission Lines in lieu of buried underground lines negatively impacts the character
and aesthetic value of this corridor, thereby having a negative impact on the standard of living and quality of life of
the residents of the City.
SUBCHAPTER I $ 4332 states that
c) include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major
Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement
by the responsible official on—
(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action,
(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be
implemented,
(iii) alternatives to the proposed action
The provision of underground lines would avoid .the significant adverse environmental impact resulting from the
construction of the overhead Transmission Lines that have been identified in this report. As such, the only feasible
alternative to be considered within the City is construction of underground lines. Since this is the only technical
feasible alternative on such a monumental project, the cost shall be borne by FPL.
5. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF CERTIFICATION:
5.1 Definitions:
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) shall mean the Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) Judge assigned
to this matter.
Application shall mean the Application for Corridor Certification for the Florida Power & Light Company "East
Preferred Corridor between Davis and Miami Substations" project.
City Commission is the governing body of the City of Miami.
Conditions of Certification or Conditions shall mean the conditions placed by this Agency Report.
Corridor shall mean the East Preferred. Corridor between Davis and Miami Substations down US 1.
Department of Environmental Resource Management shall mean the environmental division of Miami -Dade
County (DERM).
Transmission Lines shall mean the overhead transmission power lines generating out of the Turkey Point Units 6
& 7 Project and the "East Preferred Corridor" proposed by FPL between the Davis Substation and the Miami
Substation under Plant Siting Application PA03-45A3, under DOAH Case No.: 09-3575-EPP.
Feasible or Practicable shall mean reasonably achievable considering a balance of land use impacts,
environmental impacts, engineering constraints and costs.
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP or Comprehensive Plan) is the City's comprehensive growth
plan for future development.
Page 3
f Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
0
Miami 21 Code is the City's Land Development Code or Zoning regulations.
Nuclear Plant shall mean Turkey Point Project 6 and 7.
Post -Certification Submittal shall mean a submittal made by FPL pursuant to a Condition of Certification.
Rate Payers shall mean all those in Florida that pay FPL a usage fee to consume electric.
Right- of- Way (ROW) shall mean the transmission line right-of-way to be selected by FPL within the certified
corridor in accordance with the Conditions of Certification.
5.2 Quality of Life, Aesthetics and Location
The City Commission is particularly concerned about the location of FPL's proposed Eastern Preferred Corridor.
The City already has in place a policy pursuant to resolution stating that no overhead installation of electrical
devices should be allowed in any of its zoning districts. It views the proposed Project as being subject to this
same requirement. Given the significant investment undertaken by FDOT, Miami -Dade County, and the City to
improve the appearance of the US1 corridor, the City hereby requests that all transmission poles be removed and
that all lines, both new and proposed, be placed underground. Undergrounding is a grid -wide safety and aesthetic
improvement. It serves a broader benefit that extends far beyond the City; it benefits all of Miami -Dade County.
As such, any and all costs incurred to underground the Corridor should be borne exclusively by FPL or by all the
rate payers accessing the electric.
5.3 LocationofROW and Appurtenances
1. FPL shall co -locate the transmission line ROW to the extent feasible within or adjacent to
existing public ROW for those portions of the corridor that include such existing public
ROW. A Pre -Certification submittal of FPL to the City shall include a final
design plan including pole locations and locations of underground lines throughout
the entire Corridor and additional details as to locations and specific route segments as
requested by the City Commission to enable the City to review and provide
appropriate and intelligent comment for maximizing, to the extent
practicable, the location of the poles outside of the existing and the proposed public
ROW, for the roads within the City. FPL shall be responsible for the costs to
relocate any transmission line poles located within any existing City public
ROW to the extent required by Section §337.403, Fla. Stat., and Rule 14-46,
F.A.C.
2. To the extent feasible FPL shall locate the Transmission Lines in the ROW so as to
avoid the taking of property from private citizens. FPL shall comply with Chapters
361, 73 and 74, Fla. Stat., to exercise the power of eminent domain for a public
purpose, if necessary. Further, FPL shall fully compensate the City for any
property and/or property rights taken from it.
3. Utilization of State and County Road Right- Of- Way
In the construction of the Transmission Line on or crossing State Road and/or
County Rights -of -Way, FPL shall:
A. Comply with the requirements of the FDOT's Utility Accommodation
Manual. A separate FDOT permit is required; and
B. In regard to County Rights -of -Way, the quality and placement of all
utility installations from FPL within the proposed corridor shall be
detailed on the Certification submittals to the City to demonstrate
compliance with the Miami -Dade County design standard and criteria.
C. Place Transmission Line structures at crossings of State Roads in such a
Page 4
.c
0
a)
c
c
u
-a
0
u
d
• •
manner as to accommodate future road widening, to the extent
practicable. If future widening of any State Road in the area of the
Transmission Line is required, the cost of relocating the transmission line
shall be borne by FPL to the extent required by Section 337.403, Fla.
Stat., and Rule Chapter 14-46, F.A.C.
4. Transmission line poles shall be free standing without any guide wires and as small in
diameter as technologically feasible.
(Miami 21 Code, Article 4, Tbl. 12)
5. Rights- of- Way Location:
A. FPL shall locate the Transmission Line to the extent feasible within or
adjacent to existing public ROW for those portions of the corridor which
include such existing public ROW. A post -certification submittal of FPL to
City of Miami shall be a final design plan including pole locations throughout
the entire route and additional details as to locations and specific route
segments as requested by the City Public Works Department to enable the
Public Works Department to review and provide comment on maximizing to
the extent practicable the location of the poles to comply with visibility and
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) clearance requirements. FPL shall be
responsible for all costs to relocate any utility facilities, water mains, sanitary
sewers or storm sewers located in conflict with the proposed Transmission
Line infrastructure. FPL shall be responsible for obtaining any necessary
easements.
B. To the extent feasible FP&L shall locate the Transmission Line ROW so as to
avoid the taking of homes.
6. Stormwater Pollution Prevention. Plan:
A. Prior to commencement of construction activities as part of the post -certification submittal, FPL
shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) to the City of Miami NPDES
Section for approval. The ESCP shall identify construction sequencing, Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion and sedimentation and to manage the quality and quantity
of stormwater runoff during and after construction and other practices employed to protect all
stormsewer systems and minimize fugitive particulate emissions during and after construction.
The ESCP shall at a minimum include the following information:
1. Details of construction sequencing, dewatering activities and sump locations, stockpile area
and/or deposition areas for excavated materials:
a. Description of land clearing/disturbing activities, stormsewer locations, existing
site conditions including the location of the stormsewer system and adjacent land
uses/areas that might be affected by land clearing disturbances;
b. Identification of stockpile areas and/or deposition areas for excavated materials;
c. Description of potential on -site problem areas such as steep grade changes, highly
erodible soils, areas adjacent to wetlands, surface waters, or upland preservation
areas;
d. Construction scheduling, including the expected starting and stabilization dates;
e. Identification of all stormsewer systems adjacent to the construction site.
f. Protect all stormsewer inlets adjacent to the construction site during and after
construction.
g. If a sedimentation tank is needed for any type of approved de -watering activity, the
location of the tank must be approved by the NPDES Section and must be
Page 5
-
0
'.o
0
coordinated with DERM and the Public Works Development and Roadway Plans
Section.
2. Details of Best Management Practices and Fugitive Particulate Abatement Methods:
a. Details, drawing and cross -sections of erosion and sediment control devices;
b. Maintenance program for erosion and sediment control devices including
inspection frequency and maintenance activities; and the location of the
stormsewer system affected by the construction.
c. Haul routes and details of apron stabilization at ingress/egress points to rights -of -
way;
d. Details/location of equipment washing area:
e. Details of fugitive particulate abatement methods;
f. Contractors information, including a twenty-four hour, seven day contact and
phone numbers.
3. Details of dewatering activities and locations, drawing and cross -sections of dewatering
pumps. A separate de -watering permit is required. Protect all stormsewer inlets around
construction site.
4. Water Quality Monitoring Plan and monitoring stations if applicable. FPL shall be
responsible for scheduling an on -site meeting with staff from the City of Miami NPDES
Section, including the Engineer of Record and Contractor. Prior to scheduling the on -site
meeting, FPL shall:
a. Obtain all applicable approvals (DERM, Public Works De -watering permit and
NPDES Permit);
b. Stake the boundaries of the wetland buffers, upland preservation areas or other
environmentally sensitive areas, as indicated on the approved Final Design Plan, if
applicable;
c. Stake all silt screen locations as needed to prevent turbidity and erosion off the site
as indicated on the Final Design Plans.
d. Install 6-foot high wind screens as required by City of Miami Ordinance No.
13081.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan shall include the location of all proposed erosion and
sediment -control devices and a point -by -point response to the NPDES requirements in this section.
7. Access Road And Drainage
FP&L as a post -certification submittal to City of Miami shall submit detailed design plans showing all
access roads and drainage plans after right-of-way surveys and final design plans are completed.
ci s
5.4 Zoning Requirements :I-'
1. The proposed use of "infrastructure and Utilities" requires a Warrant in all transect zones, a c
except CI — Civic Institution. Zones where an Exception Permit is required and in D2 — w o
Industrial District Zones where they are allowed by right (Art. 4, Tbl. 3). The definition is as .-F.a�i
follows: o
c
c c
— o
Infrastructure and Utilities: A facility or Structure related to the provision of d c
roads, water and sewer lines, electrical, telephone and cable transmission, and £ -a
all other utilities and communication systems. necessary to the functioning of a 0 u
community. (Art. 1, Sec. 1.1) in a
Warrant permits are administrative permits issued by the Planning Department based on criteria
established in Article 7 and Article 4, Table 12 — Design review criteria, including the purpose
and intent of the transect zone indicated in section 2 below; see also Planning Department
comments. Exception permits are public hearings that require review by the Planning
Page 6
4-4
4-1
0
42,
h
~ o
Department and approval by the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board. The criteria is
established in Article 7 and Article 4, Table 12 of the Miami 21 Code; see also Planning
Department comments.
2. The proposal for high intensity transmission lines shall be consistent with the purpose and
intent of the City of Miami Zoning Code, referenced herein as "The Miami 21 Code". Article 2
of the Miami 21 Code establishes the following purpose and intent:
a. It is further the purpose of the Miami 21 Code to promote the public health, safety, morals,
convenience, comfort, amenities, prosperity, and general welfare of the City and to provide
a wholesome, serviceable, and attractive community, including without limitation
protection of the environment; conservation of land, energy and natural resources;
improved mobility; more efficient use of public funds; greater health benefits of a
pedestrian environment; historic preservation; provision of recreational and open spaces;
reduction of sprawl; and improvement of the built environment and human habitat. (Art. 2,
Sec. 2.1.1.b)
b. Improving the relationship between low Density Residential neighborhoods and adjacent
Commercial Corridors with appropriate transitions of Density and Height following the
theory of the Transect. (Art. 2, Sec. 2.1.2.a.2)
c. In all cases the goal of transit -oriented, pedestrian -friendly, Mixed -Use urbanism shall
guide the arrangement of Transect Zones, Thoroughfares, Buildings and landscape. The
specific design of each componentshould be appropriate to its Transect Zone, as provided
in this Code. (Art. 2, Sec. 2.1.3)
d. The design of Thoroughfares and Buildings should reinforce safe environments, but not at
the expense of accessibility. Designs should incorporate principles of Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED).
e. Architecture and landscape design should grow from local climate, topography, history,
and building practice.
3. The proposed transmission lines shall be consistent with the Transect regulations for the
Transect Zone in which it is located. Where a Transect Zone designation is not indicated for an
area in the Miami 21 Atlas, the area shall be construed to be zoned as for the most restrictive
Abutting Zone, until corrective action shall be taken by the City Commission.
a. Height restrictions are applicable to all structures. There are no Variances permitted for
height under the Miami 21 Code.
b. Transect Zones along the proposed corridor include: T3, T4, T5, T6, CS, and Cl. See
Article 5 of the Miami 21 Code for height restrictions in each Transect Zone.
4. Building Disposition (Article 4. Table 12 Design Review Criteria)
-Articulate the building facade at street level to recognize pedestrian continuity and interest and
at upper levels to recognize long views of buildings.
- Respond to the physical context taking into consideration natural features, existing urban form
and Transect Zone intentions.
-Create Transitions in height and mass with abutting properties and transect zones.
Building Configuration
- Promote pedestrian interaction
5 Landscape Standards
-Preserve existing vegetation and/or geological features whenever possible.
-Use landscaping to enhance building design and continuity of streetscape.
( Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Page 7
® •
-Provide landscaping that screens undesirable elements and that enhances open space and
architecture.
5.5 Buffering and Landscaping
1. FPL shall ensure the compatibility of any new buildings, accessory structures
and appurtenances within neighborhoods. This can be achieved largely
through careful screening and buffering. Miami 21 Code provides that all newly -
developed and redeveloped above -ground utility appurtenances visible from the
public ROW shall be screened. Materials and earth -tone colors for screening shall
be compatible with the natural setting and surrounding structures. Chain link fencing
alone shall not be considered to be a screening mechanism.
2. Community aesthetics are valued highly by Miami residents, and Miami's tree canopy is of critical
importance. Inasmuch as transmission line siting may lead either to the loss of tree canopy or
disfiguring "vegetation management" practices, FPL shall offer a suitable plan for maximum tree
retention and tree replacement, if necessary, as part of its Application. To ensure that canopy
protection is given due weight in actual transmission line siting, FPL shall identify all trees within
the proposed corridor, determine their type and size, record their locationon a planning map, and
ensure that sufficient tree canopy remains as required by local ordinance. FPL shall commit, first,
to relocating trees, and, only when relocation is not feasible, to replacing trees on at least a one-to-
one basis.
3. Transmission poles shall be installed to avoid the removal of any large or existing specimen trees,
defined as trees having a minimum 18 inch diameter trunk at breast height measured 4.5 feet above
grade.
(Miami 21 Code, Article 4 Tbl. 12) (City of Miami Tree Protection Ordinance)
(MCNP Policy LU-1.1.3, Policy LU-1.1.8 and Objective LU-1.5)
4. For the entire transmission line route, provide large shade trees measuring a minimum height of 15
feet and planted at no greater than 30 feet on center to help screen views of the transmission lines
and poles.
(Miami 21 Code, Article 4 Tbl. 12) (City of Miami Tree Protection Ordinance)
(MCNP Policy LU-1.1.3, Policy LU-1.1.8 and Objective LU-1.5, TR-1.4.3)
v .0
a+
5. Provide a tree survey and tree disposition plan prior to any work. Furthermore, provide a = 3
landscape plan that shows additional appropriate landscaping to visually screen the view of aai c
transmission line poles, as well as, uphold tree replacement requirements.
(City of Miami Tree Protection Ordinance) (MCNP Policy LU-1.1.3, Policy LU- 1.1.8 and 0 d
Objective LU-1.5, TR-1.4.3) (Landscape Ordinance) .E o
V
5.6 Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) 4▪ '
.0 u
A. Compatibility with Adjacent Neighborhoods 0
The City is concerned with the compatibility of uses and the impacts on its adjacent
neighborhoods, specifically striving to facilitate the protection of the character of the
surrounding commercial areas and residential neighborhoods. The City is concerned about
potential conflicts with existing and proposed buildings and homes within the corridor. The City is
also concerned about where potential line location could limit future development. In order to
ensure both safety and peace of mind for adjacent residential uses the City requests that FPL show
the limits of any EMFs (electromagnetic fields) to be generated by the line, when adjacent to
residential uses.
The Project shall comply with the applicable electromagnetic field standards set forth in
Chapter 62.814, F.A.C. The electromagnetic fields associated with any
Page 8
ch
O
O
0
0.
0
t
F-
•
• •
configuration developed during the fmal design of this project must be provided to the City
and to DEP at least 90 days prior to the start of construction, or such a shorter time period to
which the DEP Siting Coordination Office agrees, as required by Rule 62-814.520(3),
F.A.C.
5.7 Public Safety
The proposed route for the transmission lines is in relatively close proximity to numerous City
police and fire department facilities, which provide vital public safety functions. It is
imperative that the City's emergency operations never be compromised or interrupted by the
EMFs. In the event of interference or blocking, the City will verify, to the best of its
ability that FPL equipment/facilities are at fault before requesting any FPL mitigation
efforts. In the event that FPL is determined to be responsible, FPL shall bear the costs
incurred by the City in rendering such determinations and shall cover any and all
costs associated with restoring the transmission path. This may include the construction
of additional radio infrastructure to augment coverage in the blocked area, according to the
City's specifications.
5.8 Access Roads and Drainage
FPL must submit a post -certification submittal to the City with detailed design plans
showing all access roads and drainage plans after ROW surveys and final design plans are
completed.
Supporting Regulation(s): Section §403.5317(2), F.S.; Rule 62.17.665, F.A.C.
5.9 Future Signalized Intersections
The City needs FPL to minimize the impacts of the transmission line on intersection
improvements by locating all proposed transmission line poles outside the ultimate
configuration for all current and potential future signalized intersections. FPL should agree to a
condition of certification requiring that the transmission poles be located longitudinally along
the ROW outside of the potential configuration for all currently designed and acquired future
traffic infrastructure projects to the extent practicable.
5.10 Architectural and Historical Resources
The City has concerns about historic resources located within or adjacent to the transmission
line corridor. FPL, as a condition during post -certification, shall coordinate with the City and
with Miami -Dade County's Historic Preservation Department to determine the level of
coordination required to satisfy the City's Land Development Code stipulations regarding
historic and archaeologically significant sites and to minimize any potential effects that the
final route may have on these resources. FPL should also agree to hire a consultant to perform
an archaeological survey prior to the construction of the transmission line to avoid damaging
any historic resources found to the extent practicable, and if avoidance is not practicable, to
mitigate impacts through salvage operations or other methods acceptable to the State of Florida
Division of Historic Resources and the City and County.
LI s c
. 1 N
3 3 � o. 01
• ch u
w
o o o >
a c • u
o c
c c c Q
0 0 ,a
Any excavation done within the archeological conservation area (starting with 8th street going E 'fl • 3I a•tl`
south on US 1 and ending just north of Coral Reef Drive) will require a certificate to dig, .Q $ E
monitoring by an archeologist, monthly reports to the Preservation Officer regarding the v+r ii L
ongoing excavation, and a final report to the Preservation Officer.
(MCNP Objective LU-1.5, LU-1.5.land Policy LU-2.2.3) (City Code Chapter 17, City
Code Chapter 23)
5.11 Scenic Transportation Corridor
Page 9
• •
Any work done along a "Scenic Transportation Corridor" (starting at SW 13th street and
continuing along Coral Way) requires a certificate of approval, surveys showing the location of
the proposed work, and photographs. It may also require a public hearing before the Historic
and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB).
(MCNP Objective LU-1.5, LU-1 .5.1, LU-1.3.14) (City Code Chapter 17)
5.12 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Placement of the transmission line poles shall be located off pedestrian facilities, and ADA access
must be accommodated at all times during construction. Where portions of the transmission poles
are along the M-path, those sections shall be refurbished after construction and include the addition
of pedestrian scale lighting. When the planned lines go through the M-Path, they shall upgrade the
M-Path to the standards of the M-Path Master Plan rather than refurbishing it to current standards.
Existing facilities in Brickell and Downtown, should be restored.
(MCNP Objective TR-1.3, Policy TR-1.2.2, Policy TR-1.3.3, TR-1.4.3) (City Code
Chapter 54) (County M-path Master Plan)
5.13 Mitigation of Construction Impacts
A. Final Design and Document Submittal
At least ninety (90) days prior to the commencement of construction of any portion of the
transmission line, FPL shall provide the City with the following:
1. a narrative description of the installation and construction of the line
improvements specific to potential impacts within the City, including but not
limited to the following Information:
a. identification of general location of construction staging, and
minimum land area required, and ' " r
3 3
b. ROW encroachments necessary as applicable (i.e. road a c
c,
closures, etc). 'o
t—,
d
1 C
C. C
2. a final design plan showing: Ci
a. all protected trees over 4" dbh to be removed for the transmission line, access road, E 4.0
and drainage installation. Protection measures for trees proposed for preservation N
shall be detailed;
b. the distances of the transmission line location to the nearest existing homes;
construction timetables, .phasing, and construction traffic to be generated by the
transmission line construction;
d. the screening measures, including landscaping, to be installed to screen
any auxiliary equipment to be located along the transmission line from adjacent
residential uses;
e. location, description, and terms of any proposed easements, reservations or
dedications, together with any necessary legal instruments;
f. all flood zone and floodway delineations along the route of the
transmission line;
Page 10
e1
a -I
0
'.o
O
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
g•
h.
i.
j•
k.
1.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q•
r.
s.
the location of any proposed school or park sites within one -quarter
mile of the transmission line location on the final design plan;
the location of the ROW with respect to adjoining development,
the existing zoning on adjoining properties, and existing land uses
adjacent to the ROW;
the name, location, and width of existing or platted street public ROW
within or contiguous to the right -of- way;
the location, size, and depth of sewers, water mains, and storm drains, and
approximate location of power, and phone lines, within contiguous
ROW;
the location and size of easements for all the above -ground
utilities, such as electric power lines, within or adjacent to the
ROW;
topographic contours on one -foot intervals based on means sea -level
datum;
flood plain management information on flood zones;
location of fire hydrants and exterior fire suppression systems supplied
by potable and non -potable water sources;
location, size and type of all proposed stormwater management facilities,
and
gross acreage of the site.
aerial photos of the transmission line location within the City
FPL confirms that it will not install any auxiliary equipment;
show as existing site conditions on the final design plan and the following (a)
the location of the right-of-way with respect to adjoining development, the
existing zoning on adjoining property and existing land use adjacent to the
right-of-way; (b) the name, location and width of existing or platted street
public right-of-way within or contiguous to the right-of-way; (c) approximate
location, size and depth of sewers, water mains and storm drains, and
approximate location of power and phone lines; within all contiguous of the
right-of-way; (d) location and size of easements for all the above ground
utilities, such as electric power lines, within or adjacent to the right-of-way;
(e) flood plain management information on flood zones delineated if
applicable; (g) location of fire hydrants and exterior fire suppression systems
supplied by portable and non -potable water sources; and (h) location, size
and type of all proposed stormwater management facilities.
All calculations and descriptions prepared by a Florida registered professional engineer need to show
evidence of compliance with stormwater management including the percentage of all impervious
surface located on lots. If the ROW is located in a flood way, all calculations and
descriptions prepared by a Florida registered professional engineer need to demonstrate
compliance with applicable flood plain management requirements.
Page 11
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
Prior to commencement of construction activities as part of the post -certification submittal,
FPL shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) to the City for review. The
ESCP shall identify construction sequencing, Best Management Practices to minimize
erosion and sedimentation and to manage the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff
during and after construction and other practices employed to minimize fugitive
particulate emissions during and after construction. The ESCP shall at a minimum include
the following information:
1. Details of construction sequencing, dewatering activities and sump
locations, stockpile areas, and/or deposition areas for excavated materials:
a. description of land clearing/disturbing activities, existing site conditions, and
adjacent land uses/areas that might be affected by land clearing/disturbances;
b. identification of stockpile areas and/or deposition areas for excavated
materials;
c. description of potential on -site problem areas
such as steep grade changes, highly erodible soils, areas adjacent to wetlands,
surface waters, or upland preservation areas;
a. construction scheduling, including the expected starting and
stabilization dates;
e. identification of disturbed areas where construction will not
be ongoing, and final grade will not be achieved within
fourteen (14) days, and an indication of temporary stabilization measures.
2. Details of Best Management Practices and Fugitive Particulate
Abatement Methods:
a. details, drawing and cross -sections of erosion and sediment control
devices;
b. maintenance program for erosion and sediment control devices including
inspection frequency and maintenance activities;
c. haul routes and details of apron stabilization at ingress -egress points to ROW
d. details/location of equipment washing area;
e. details of fugitive particulate abatement methods, and.
f. contractor information, including twenty -four -a -day contact information.
3. Details of dewatering activities and locations, drawing and cross -sections -sections of
dewatering pumps.
4. Water Quality Monitoring Plan and monitoring stations if applicable. FPL shall be
responsible for scheduling an on -site meeting with City staff. Prior to scheduling the
on -site meeting, FPL shall:
a. obtain all applicable approvals (Environmental Resource and Permit and
NPDES Permit);
Page 12
V L
.Ct
O. C
w o
u
o w
a+ C
C C
13
0
C
E
.n
N 1
o,
9
O
b. stake the boundaries of the wetland buffers, upland preservation areas or
other environmentally -sensitive areas, as indicated on the approved Final
Design Plan;
c. stake all silt screen locations as needed to prevent turbidity and erosion off
the site as indicated on the Final Design Plans.
C. Traffic coordination
During post -certification, FPL shall submit to the City the names of the public roadways that it
plans to use for the transportation of the transmission poles, the types of carriers, and wheel
pressures that will be utilized, and the times of day for the transport of said transmission poles.
For debris removal, FPL must consult the City of Miami's preferred Haulers.
The area of the City through which the proposed transmission line corridor will pass is densely
developed with residential type apartments, homes and townhomes. FPL shall provide detailed
information as to how it proposes to mitigate the construction activity associated with the new
transmission line through the City as it relates specifically to the immediately adjacent
residential areas.
D. Noise Level and Hours of Operation
The Corridor and any construction therein, as proposed, will be in close proximity to
existing developed residential uses. Care shall be taken to adequately address the public
health and welfare of nearby residents through the strict observation of permitted hours
of construction and permitted noise levels, as closely as possible.
The Application states that some construction activities may require night-time
operation. FPL should coordinate closely with the Office of the City Manager and the
Department of Code Enforcement for any construction activities that may take place at
night, and procure the properpermits for said activity..
E. Construction Trailer
A site plan and Temporary Use Permit application forms, along with the appropriate fee shall
be submitted to the City's Public Works Department a minimum of 30 days prior to installation
of any construction trailer. A descriptionof the type of building shall be provided.
5.14 Public Information and Notification
A. Detailed Construction Schedule
Transmission line construction may impact grant deadlines and scheduled roadway and other
improvements. As a result, once it is available, FPL shall provide the Office of the City
Manager with a detailed timetable for the construction sequencing within the City's
boundaries.
B. Ongoing Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Strategies
FPL has created a comprehensive greenhouse gas reduction strategy. Given the long -tern
nature of the proposed project in a densely -populated area. FPL shall provide information
about greenhouse gas mitigating strategies for contract fleets, heavy-duty vehicles, and off -
road equipment (cranes, bulldozers, and other equipment) FPL shall describe what
Page 13
7 ▪ 3
0. c
a, o
�+ o Cr
4.0
5 ▪ • v
ar =
•
E• �°
n i
•
o,
0
0
advanced technology or alternative fuel equipment will be used and any Transportation
Demand Management strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled during construction and
operation.
C. Monitoring Reports
Monitoring reports stating the status and condition of the project shall be provided to.
the City every month until all on -site construction is completed. A final report
indicating changes or deterioration of the roadway shall also be submitted. Any
damages identified as theresponsibility of FPL or any agents working for FPL shall
be repaired within 90 days of filing the report. A ROW permit shall be submitted to
and approved by the City's Public Works Department before proceeding with any
repairs.
D. Public Meetings. and Notices
In order to keep the residents of the City informed of the status of the project within
the City and to address the concerns of the various citizens, groups, and organizations
affected by the construction of the transmission line, FPL shall agree to hold regular
community neighborhood meetings and public meetings throughout the design,
permitting, and construction phases of the project. The City requests that FPL take
further initiative to schedule this meeting with adequate public notice to City
residents and interested parties. FPL shall coordinate with the Office of the
City Manager in obtaining updated homeowner associations' and civic groups'
contact information to provide these organizations with periodic updates on the
design and development process.
E. Environmental Programs
The City adopts by reference thereport of Miami -Dade County, particularly relating
to DERM review, as DERM administers environmental programs on the City's
behalf, as filed in this case.
F. South Florida Regional Issues
The City adopts by reference the report of South Florida Regional Planning Council
as it relates to the South -Florida Regional issues filed in this case..
5.15 CITY OF MIAMI PERMITS
Based on conceptual transmission line route submittals, the following City of Miami permits shall be
required. A final determination of permit requirements shall be prepared once the engineering plans are
reviewed by the City of Miami:
1. Public Works Department Excavation Permit
2. City of Miami NPDES permit
3. Public Works De -watering Permit
4. Police Department/ Public Works Maintenance
Events Permit
5. Night and weekend work requires separate app
6. Tree removal/ trimming permit
7. And any other permits as required by law
Page 14
of Traffic/Road Closure/Special
royal.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
•
5.16 FINAL DESIGN SUBMITTAL
A. A post -certification submittal to the City of Miami shall be a final design plan showing:
1. All protected trees over 3" diameter at breast height (DBH) to be removed for the
transmission line, access road and drainage installation. Protection measure for
trees proposed for preservation shall be detailed. A separate tree removal/trimming
permit is required. Tree replacement per Chapter 17 is required.
2. The distances of the Transmission Line location to the nearest existing homes.
3. Construction timetables, phasing and construction traffic to be generated by the
transmission line construction. A separate Maintenance of Traffic permit is
required.
4. What measures will be installed to screen any auxiliary equipment to be located
along the transmission line from adjacent residential uses with landscaping.
5. All existing and proposed easements.
6. All flood zone and floodway delineations along the route of the transmission line.
7. Show the location of any school or park sites within one -quarter mile of the
transmission line location on the final design plan. Concurrent review by other
agencies may required.
B. Show " as is" existing site conditions on the final design plan the following:
1. The location of the right-of-way/easement with respect to adjoining development,
the existing zoning on adjoining property and existing land use adjacent to the
right-of-way.
2. The name, location and width of existing or platted street public right-of-way
within or contiguous to the transmission line right-of-way/easement.
3. Approximate location, size and depth of sewers, water mains and storm drains, and
approximate location of power and phone lines; within all contiguous right-of-way.
4. Location and size of easements for all the above ground utilities, such as electric
power lines, adjacent to the right-of-way.
5. Typographic contours on one -foot intervals based on means sea -level datum.
6. Flood plain management information on flood zones delineated if applicable.
7. Location of fire hydrants and exterior for suppression systems supplied by potable
and non -potable water sources.
8. Location, size and type of all proposed stormwater management facilities.
C. Supplemental information to be submitted with final design plans to the City of Miami:
1. All calculations and descriptions prepared by a Florida registered professional
engineer need to show evidence of compliance with stormwater management.
2. If the right-of-way/easement is located in a flood way, all calculations and
descriptions prepared by a Florida registered professional engineer need to
demonstrate compliance with applicable flood plain management requirements.
3. Location, description and terms of any proposed easements, reservation or
dedications, together with any necessary legal instruments.
Page 15
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Cited Justifications
Miami 21 Code
http://www.miami21.org/final_code_AsAdopted.asp
City of Miami Tree Protection Ordinance
http://www.miamigov. com/Planning/pages/services/TreeProtectionOrd.pdf
Landscape Ordinance
http://www.miamigov.com/Planning/pages/services/LandscapeOrd finance-asADOPTED.pdf
Miami City Code
http://Iibrarv8:municode.com/default-test/home.htm?infobase=10933&doc action=whatsnew
Chapter 17 Environmental Preservation
Chapter 23 Historic Preservation
Chapter 54 Street and Sidewalks
Miami Dade County Metrorail M-Path Master Plan
http://www.miamidade.aovhnpo/docs/MPO mpath master final 200707.pdf
Page 16
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Corridor to Nowhere: Economic Impacts of FPL's
Proposed Transmission Line on the US 1 Corridor
By Richard Weisskoff, Ph.D.
Submitted to the City of South Miami
May 27, 2011
Draft.3.2
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
•
(this page left blank, inside cover page)
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Executive Summary
• FPL's proposed Eastern 230 kV Transmission Corridor, proposed to route power from two new
nuclear power plants proposed for construction at Turkey Point, would occupy an economically
critical segment of the US 1 corridor stretching from the Falls to Brickell that currently lacks
such transmission lines. Since the mid 1990's, the US 1 Corridor north from Broward to St.
Lucie County had become the cornerstone of the South Florida Region's strategy of compact
growth, "Eastward, Ho!" and has been incorporated into the South Miami -Dade Watershed
Study of 2007. These studies form the basis of the current anti -sprawl and compact growth
policies of the South Florida Region. (Section 1).
• The introduction of high voltage transmission lines on 105 ft high, 4-foot diameter, concrete
poles from the Falls to Brickell on US 1 inserts a major disamenity or blockage into this
gateway to Miami and into its rapidly growing southern neighborhoods. Addition of
aboveground transmission lines shatters the strategy of compact growth, changes the nature of
the urban corridor, and will produce severe and deleterious economic effects. Projected
economic consequences of FPL's proposed transmission lines on the existing and future
economy of the US 1 corridor have not been included in the combined operating license
application (COLA) for Turkey Point nuclear reactors 6 & 7. This report details the probable
consequences on the existing economy.
• FPL's proposed US 1 transmission line corridor directly affects a minimum of 173,000 people
or 7.2% of the county's residents (derived from the ZIP Code map, Figure 2.2 and Table 2.1).
But seen as the gateway to the South Miami -Dade Watershed region and areas to the North
including the City of Miami, Coral Gables, South Miami, Pinecrest, and Palmetto Bay, •the area
is.a portal and corridor for almost a million people or 38% of the county's residents (Table 2.2).
• The value of the 4,091 parcels (buildings and land) within two blocks on both sides of the
transmission line route was assessed at $4.03 billion in 2010, including FPL Corridor Option 1
at Brickell, 16th to 136 Street SW, and FPL's proposed corridor around Dadeland (Table 3.3).
• We examined the literature on effects of transmission line proximity on property values.
Overall we found a high degree of concordance between surveys of real estate professionals
and statistical analyses by academicians, with industry consultants consistently publishing
lesser effects. Real estate professionals reported a 10.3% decline, academicians a 12.6%
decline, and industry consultants a 2.7% decline. A detailed regression study of an area with an
urban density most comparable to that found along US 1 revealed a 10% decline in value (Des
Rossiers, 2002; Table 4.2).
• We have applied an array of loss rates: 5%, 10%, 20%, and 34% to reflect the range of findings
from studies done in other regions. Based on the literature, our best conservative estimate
is to expect a minimum of 10% property loss from construction of transmission lines on
US 1, but losses as high as 20% could occur as this value was found in the higher income
neighborhoods of Montreal in the study by Des Rossiers (2002). The 10% and 20% loss rates
applied to the FPL transmission line corridor would create declines in property values of $400
and $800 million respectively.
• At a 10% property loss rate, local municipalities would lose an aggregate of $9.3 million
in property taxes annually (Table 5.1). Total revenue losses would be approximately $24.5
million annually.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
3
• The 10% property value loss rate translates into a total job loss ranging from 4,382 to
8,040 jobs, depending on the labor -intensity of the job sectors that are most affected.
The economic cost of the average expected job loss is $300 million per year.
• We note two anecdotal cases of urban power lines in South Florida associated with economic
loss and urban blight:
1. A set of power lines occupy the portion of West 63`1 St., North Miami Beach that fronts
6205 Laguna Path, a 4 story, $1.5 million townhouse, part of the Aqua project on Allison
Island that was purchased in 2005 prior to construction, on the basis of the promoter's
models and drawings. Once built, however, the owner realized that the spectacular living
room view of the channel was marred by the powerlines and poles in the center stage. The
owner has therefore kept the property off the market due to the severe penalty caused by the
disamenity of visible aboveground power lines.
2. The State Road 7 / US 441 corridor in Broward County has, since 2004, been designated
as a growth corridor by the both County and the South Florida Regional Planning Council.
However, the transmission lines along the route may have effectively turned investors away
(Section 6).
• Our best prediction of economic loss to municipalities along the proposed US 1 corridor is
severe: approximately $400 million in property losses, $300 million a year in household
income from job losses, and $25 million a year in losses to municipal revenue.
• We caution that the path .proposed by FPL to transmit the energy needed for economic
growth in the region will Iikely become both the assassin and graveyard of economic
activity and growth, a "corridor to nowhere".
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Economic Impacts of the FPL Transmission Lines in the US 1 Corridor
Contents
Executive Summary 3
1: History of the Corridor, References 7
2: Population 10
3. Value of Corridor Property 12
4. Literature Review: Effect of Transmission Lines on Property Value, References 13
5. Value of Property and Job Loss in Miami -Dade County 18
6. Stories of the Special Case & Conclusion 20
List of Graphics
Tables
1.1 Measures of sprawl and South Florida appetite for land, 1995-2010
2.1 IMPLAN socio-economic data of .the FPL Corridor by ZIP Codes
2.2 Projecting Population Growth and Expansion in the Corridor
3.1 Sample appraisal valuation of properties near transmission lines, 26-36 St.
3.2 Sample of County land use codes found in Table 3.1 above
3.3 Summary Table of summed appraisal values by segments, Brickell to SW 136 St.
4.1 Review of survey results: transmission line effect on property prices
4.2 Review of statistical (regression analysis) studies of transmission line effect on property prices
4.3 Statistical analysis of possible bias in percent value losses across the different literature types
5.1 Summary: property adjacent to the transmission lines
5.2 Employment impacts at 5, 10, 20, and 34% loss levels: IMPLAN, various sectors
5.3 REMI Model: Job losses over time: different scenarios and time periods
5.3 Economic effect of job loss
Figures
2.1 Watershed interactive network (Williams, 1995)
2.2 ZIP Code map of the FPL proposed Eastern corridor and Southern Corridor
2.3 Minor statistical areas for the FPL proposed Eastern corridor and Southern extension (M-D P&Z)
2.4 South Miami -Dade Watershed Plan corridor map (2007)
5.1 Blocks of the REMI Model and some connections
Graphs
5.1 How long the job loss? Effects of 10% property loss on different time spans
5.2 How deep the trough? Effects on jobs of different sectors taking the hit of spending cuts
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
•
(page left blank)
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Section 1. History of the Corridor: Between Ocean and Swamp
The growth of Miami in the past decades has been an alternating clash between "sprawl -
and -spread" growth, on the one hand, and "compact -and -compressed" growth with higher
densities, on the other. One would think that Miami, a city constrained between the
ocean and the swamp, would have been forced to grow upward, not outward. Geography
alone would dictate that compactness and density would win over sprawl.
The record shows otherwise: indeed, of Florida's counties on the lower East coast,
Miami -Dade is already the most densely populated with 8.4 people per urban acre, more
than Broward with 7.2 inhabitants per acre. (See Table 1.1, col. 3, lines 1-2.) But the
average for the nine South Florida counties is half Miami-Dade's density or 4.8 people
per urban acre.
More important than density is a measure of the historical "responsiveness" of
urban land absorption as the population grows. Economists call this responsiveness "the
elasticity of demand for urban land with respect to urban population growth" and we
measure it in terms of the percentage change in land relative to the percent change in
urban population for a given time period and county. We computed the elasticities for a
number of counties using two comparable land use studies done in 1988 and 1995 (Table
1.1, col. 4). The value for Miami -Dade is 0.910, or almost unity, which means that
historically, a 10% increase in urban population has been associated with a 9.1% increase
in urban land occupancy. Note that the elasticity value for Miami -Dade is the highest of
all the counties in Table 1.1. Indeed, only the values for St. Martin (0.76) and for the
lower West coast counties (0.88) approach Miami-Dade's "sprawl tendency."
This sprawl tendency means simply that Miami -Dade incorporated 44.5 thousand
new urban acres from 1995 to 2010 to accommodate its growing population (Table 1.1,
col. 9). This kind of land -intensive growth expresses itself in the periodic wars to push
the Urban Development Boundary westward and to fill in ecologically precarious lands,
reduce parklands, and build on any kind of open space. Palm Beach County took 44.6
thousand acres, and that, with a lower elasticity (0.55) but a higher rate of population
growth (33% vs. 20% for Miami -Dade). But on Florida's lower West coast, the
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
7
population of the four sprawl -setting counties grew by 108% (Table 1.1, col. 7) and
transformed 284 thousand acres into urban land.
Clearly, with these historical parameters, the continued growth of the cities in
their traditional manner is unsustainable. If the historical tendencies are not checked, the
future of the Everglades is doomed as the cities seek more and more of the marshy land
to fill in and build upon.
In the southern suburbs of Miami, however, developers had learned early to make
peace with precarious coastal lowlands due to the high water table, frequent floods, the
exuberance of the hurricanes, and the multitude transversal creeks and canals, simply in
order to capitalize on the sheer beauty of the place. Dan Williams' South Dade
Watershed Project (1995) offered a planner's visualization of the region, which could
work neatly with another approach that could be realized in South Florida. The
Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Florida, which started to meet monthly
in the mid -nineties, began to promote a more compact development by pushing eastward,
not westward, in order to remove pressure on the agricultural lands and on the water
collection areas of the Everglades. As the. Everglades were to be "re -hydrated" and water
levels raised, the adjacent cities would require great flood protection and better drainage.
The built area would have to be kept back, intensified, filled in, and the economic
impetus to sprawl — the reward for converting freshwater marshland into houses — would
have to be kept in check (see SF Regional Planning Council 1996, and Burchell 1999).
At the same time, researchers were showing that the "sprawl -model" by which
most of Florida had been developed was merely shifting the costs of infrastructure from
the private developer (who took his profit up front) to the counties and municipalities
who then had to tax the new residents to cover their new costs. Burchell computed the
detailed costs of sprawl for New Jersey (2000), most major U.S. cities (2002), and the
saving that South Florida could realize by compact development (2003). A special six -
volume study was completed in 2002 on the retention of the agricultural land and those
strategies and policies that would keep the South Dade farmer in business (Degner &
Morgan, eds., 2002).
Miami -Dade County, together with the other agencies, sponsored a million dollar
South Miami -Dade Watershed Study (2007) which today offers a clear plan which
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
8
comprehends and builds on these earlier visions. The drive to sprawl could be checked,
the farm lands protected, and the Urban Development Boundary held, all by focusing
development on the US 1 corridor which had several distinct advantages: a rapid transit
system; an exclusive busway; the high coastal ridge to minimize flooding in view of
future sea level rise; home to a variety of income groups and land uses.
A series of charettes propelled the ideas: the cities and towns would become focal
points for development along the corridor: Coral Gables, South Miami, Kendall,
Pinecrest, Palmetto Bay, Cutler Bay — and the small towns too — Leisure City, Naranja,
Princeton, Goulds, Cutler Ridge, Perrine —and the endpoints, Florida City and
Homestead. With commercial, residential, and industrial growth concentrated along the
straight and naturally elevated US 1 corridor, the remaining agricultural lands and open
spaces would be retained and the urban infrastructure consolidated. The Plan (2007) was
widely publicized and the collaborating towns and cities along the route began laying the
groundwork for new city -centers, higher densities, and more compact zoning.
Into this setting enter the FPL transmission lines. They clash, head-on, with two
decades of work by the local communities and county planners. Along this very route are
to be strung the three 230 KV lines with 80' to105' high concrete poles every 300 ft.,
held in place by guyed wires where needed. Possibly three or more "underbuilt" lines are
to be strung lower down the poles. The poles themselves measure almost 4 feet in
diameter, such that the hands of two grown men hugging the poles on opposite sides
barely reach one another. The poles dwarf the neighboring buildings, hospital, shops and
schools; they block the sidewalks if they are placed near the curb to suspend the lines
over the roadway.
What are the economic impacts of running the lines from the Falls up US 1 to
Brickell? What would the true cost be to the society which has already launched itself
onto a risky but rational venture of compact growth along that very corridor?
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
General References for Chapter 1: Introduction to the Issues
Arranged Chronologically:
1. South Dade Watershed Project, 1995. Planning Document. Miami: Center for Urban
and Community Design, University of Miami, and South Florida Water
Management District.
2. South Florida Regional Planning Council, 1996. Eastward Ho! Revitalizing Southeast
Florida's Urban Core. (Initiative of the Governor's Commission for a Sustainable
South Florida). Hollywood. (pamphlet; also postedon sfrpc.com website).
3. Burchell, R.W., 1999. Eastward Ho! Development Futures: Paths to More Efficient
Growth in Southeast Florida. Tallahassee, FL: Dept. of Community Affairs.
4. Burchell, R.W., 2000. The Costs and Benefits of Alternative Growth Patterns: The
Impact Assessment of the New Jersey State Plan. New Brunswick, NJ: State
University of New Jersey (Rutgers), Center for Urban Policy Research, Bloustein
School of Planning and Public Policy,
5. Burchell, R.W. et al., 2002. Costs of Sprawl, 2000. Transit Cooperative Research
Program, TCRP Report 74. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
6. Degner, R.L. & Morgan, K.L., eds., 2002. Miami -Dade County Agricultural Land
Retention Study (6 Vols.), FAMRC Industry Report _02-02, Gainesville, FL:
University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.
7. Burchell, R.W., et al., 2003. Projected Development in the GEER (Greater Everglades
Ecosystem Restoration) Region and Potential Resource Savings by Employing a
Compact Development Growth Regime. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University,
Center for Urban Policy Research.
8. Weisskoff, R., 2005. Economics of Everglades Restoration: Missing Pieces in the
Future of South Florida. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
9. Miami -Dade County, 2007. South Miami -Dade Watershed Study and Plan: Planning
for a sustainable, healthy environment and economy. Posted at:
http://southmiamidadewatershed.net/
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Smart Growth Implementation Assistance
Program, 2010. Growing for a Sustainable Future: Miami -Dade County Urban
Development Boundary Assessment.
http://www.miamidade.gov/PlanZone/Library/Miami-DadeFinalReport(EPA)12-
17-10.pdf. Accessed May 1, 2011.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
10
Section 2. Population in the FPL Corridor
How many people will be affected directly by FPL's proposed transmission line corridor
on US 1?
We used three sources for deriving population figures:
1) ZIP Code zones along the route.
2) Miami -Dade Planning and Zoning Dept. Projections from the year 2000
onwards for minor statistical areas.
3) South Miami -Dade Watershed Study estimates and projections for the region.
The IMPLAN file for Miami -Dade County provides economic information on population
and business activity for all 79 ZIP Codes of Miami -Dade County. We have selected the
eight ZIP Codes through which FPL's proposed Eastern Corridor passes (see
accompanying Map 2.1). The population of the "ZIP Code corridor" is almost 207,000
persons living on 49 square miles, making for a density of 4,218 people per square mile;
Table 2.1, lines 2-4, col. 1). This population constitutes 8.6% of the County's .total
population, living on 2.5% of the land area, creating a density that is 3.4 times the
countywide average (Table 2.1, co1.3, lines 2-4).
Almost 160,000 people are employed in the corridor, or 11.1% of the County's total
workforce. Total personal income is $12.6 billion, which is 14% of the county total.
Household income averages $145,000, or 145% of the countywide average of.$100,322
(Table 2.1, lines 7-8, cols. 1-3).
By extending the US1 corridor all the way to Homestead (Table 2.1, col. 4), we add
more area and more families. The entire corridor encompasses 16% of the county's
population, households, and workforce (Table 2.1, lines 2, 5, 6) and.21% of its total
personal income. The overall population density of the entire corridor is lower than the
FPL Eastern corridor on US 1, but is still 2.2 times thecountywide average, and
household income averages $127,000, which is 127% of the countywide average.
In summary, then, the ZIP Code corridor is the narrowest economic area around the
FPL proposed Eastern corridor and encompasses 9% of the population, 11 % of the jobs,
and 14% of the county's personal income. Its density is 3.4 times higher than the county
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
11
0 Q
average, and household incomes average 45% higher than the county average. It is the
high -end corridor into Miami.
A statistical "cut" of the corridor, which is broader than the ZIP Code file, is
provided by the Miami -Dade County "minor statistical areas" (Table 2.2.). According to
this measure, the population of the FPL Corridor was 349,000 in 2000 or 15.5% of the
county, projected to reach 402,000 by 2015. The addition of five more statistical areas
for the "southern extended" corridor adds another 176,000 people, totaling 23% of the
County's population in 2000 and projected to reach 38% of the County by 2025. (Table
2.2, line 9).
The broadest boundary around -the FPL proposed Eastern corridor on US 1 is drawn
by the South Miami -Dade Watershed Study (Table 2.2, line C), which views the entire
region as a single unit of almost a million people or 38% of the County's population.
In summary, the ZIP Code file gives the narrowest number of people in the zone, or
207,000 or 8.6% of the county's population. The County's Planning and Zoning
"Statistical Areas" draws a larger corridor boundary with 349,000 people or 15.5% of the
county, and the Watershed Study comprehends an even larger area with about a million
people or 38% of the county.
But in addition to the sheer number of people living in the corridor area, our
concem now turns to the economic value likely to be affected by the addition of new
above -ground transmission lines on the corridor in question.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
12
0
Section 3. The Value of Corridor Property
We divided the FPL Corridor Route into 13 segments, from SW 16`h to SW 136 St., plus
Option 1 at Brickell and the "noose" around Dadeland. We examined a total of 4,091
properties on two blocks on both sides of the transmission line route. We noted their
CLUC (land use codes), address, square footage, value of land, value of building, and
total market value (see sample in Table 3.1).
The variety of land uses is broad. In the sample of properties shown in Table 3.1
which refer to SW 26-36 Streets, on both sides of US 1, we recorded 21 different land
uses, including commercial, industrial, institutional, residential, and many vacant
properties. These data could be valuable research tool for identifying potential areas for
land use improvements in the corridor (see Table 3.2 for a summary of the Land Use
Codes found in the sample properties).
We have found that the total market value for all land and buildings, two blocks on
both sides of US 1 is $4,031,771,963 just over $4.03 billion (Table 3.3.) '.
This estimate raises three further questions, only one of which will we attempt to
answer in this report. The first and most important question is, "What is the impact of the
transmission lines on the value of these properties and the economic activity they
generate?"
The second question is not explored here, but is extremely important nonetheless.
If the current value of local properties has already lost perhaps half of their value in the
recent economic meltdown, then to what extent will the future (and presumably
recovering) value be affected by FPL's proposed transmission lines on the US 1 corridor?
This question assumes that the recovery continues, as FPL assumes, and which is the
entire basis of the need for the new transmission lines in the first place (e.g., Statement of
Need, approved by the Public Service Commission on 11 April 2008).
Third, what is the loss of investment in expansion and new construction that would
bescheduled for the high -density corridor that now, with the transmission lines, might be
deterred and seek other places if not other counties? What is the cost of returning to the
The team of University of Miami graduate students participating in this project were: Vania Baker,
Meisha Brisbane, Ali Bustamante, Sephanie Cazobon, Patricia Guia-Martini, Andrej Lampe, Carl Mbao,
Meissa Meade, Martha Rodriguez, Mathieu Root, Sarah Slater and Lina Sokol. Edward Laird constructed.a
40 ft. array of panels using aerial photographs of the entire proposed US 1 Corridor. Mr. Laird also created
a full-size cardboard replica of the base segment of a typical 4 ft. diameter transmission line pole.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
13
sprawling, non -compact growth pattern if high-rise residential and business construction
shuns the transmission line corridor?
In the absence of published studies of the impact of transmission lines on property
values in Florida, we shall turn now to a detailed review of the published literature and
their findings.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
14
Section 4. Literature review of the decline in property value adjacent to
transmission lines.
Two types of studies have been applied to measure the economic impacts of transmission
lines on property value: the questionnaire -survey and statistical regression analysis. The
former asks questions of industry experts and buyers of property. The latter uses data of
sales and detailed records of the characteristics of those. properties.
One type of direct survey inquires as to the magnitude of the loss or gain due to
transmission lines, and a second asks simply if is the properties experience a loss or gain
of value. Among the responses to the questionnaires sent to appraisers, real estate
professionals, and purchasers overwhelmingly cite transmission lines as a disamenity,
that is, a downward influence on price. (Table 4.1, cols. 6-7). Only one survey found no
effect (Table 4.1, line 6). The average loss for the 12 reporting cases was 10.3%.
Among the 11 surveys inquiring simply if there was a gain or loss due to
transmission lines, (without estimating the magnitude of that loss or gain), an average of
57% of respondents reported a loss; in 3 studies, 46% of the respondents said "no loss, no
gain," and 2 surveys, 10.5%, reported gains, usually due to larger parcel sizes or to the
recreational amenities and low traffic associated with transmission line easements (Table
4.1, cols. 11-13, bottom line).
In the statistical regression analysis, the researchers use multivariate statistical
techniques to measure the "contribution" of the transmission line to the value of the
house. This variable itself may get redefined into other dimensions: distance from the
transmission line, front or rear sighting, noise, plus the wide array normal variables, such
as year of construction, rooms, lot size, and other amenities.
But these observations appear, and measurements can be "made", only when the
houses are sold. What if the house cannot be sold, as may occur if the owner is unwilling
or unable to take the market loss and chooses to hold on to his otherwise "devalued"
property? In such cases, the "loss of value" is never realized, the measurement is never
made, and the "observation" never appears in the data set. Moreover, the "loss" of
housing or commercial construction foregone due to the transmission line is not recorded
in these data. For this reason, empirical data sets may provide an overly optimistic
estimate of actual property values adjacent to transmission lines.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
15
0
Including all eighteen regression studies, the mean recorded loss attributable to
transmission line proximity was 6.4% (Table 4.2, line 22, col. 7; Table 4.3). However,
we consider the possibility of bias within these studies. For instance, studies published in
peer -reviewed journals are universally considered more reliable than those published
without peer review. Likewise, studies performed by industry consultants are likely to
find outcomes favorable to industry because a consulting firm stands to be hired again if
its results favor the industry's interest. We analyzed the literature for evidence of these
two potential biases, journal type and author employment (Table 4.3).
We found that studies by industry consultants reported significantly lower mean
(average) property devaluations from transmission line proximity than studies by
academics, 2.7% vs. 12.6% (p=0.004, Table 4.3). For non -statisticians, the Fisherian
significance value, "p=0.004" can be interpreted to mean that elves rolling dice would
only obtain a difference in mean roll scores as extreme or more extreme than the
difference in reported devaluation means no more than four times in a thousand. In other
words, such an extreme difference between the author groups (industry consultant vs.
academic) is extremely unlikely to have been obtained by chance alone, and thus likely
has an underlying cause. We posit this cause to be financial conflict of interest
experienced by industry consultants.
Examining the effect of journal type, we found that the non -peer -reviewed
literature reported a lesser decline on average than the peer reviewed literature, 4.25% vs.
8.6%. While the difference is not statistically significant (t-test, 1-tailed, unequal
variance, t=1.38, p=0.09), one data point falls more than three standard deviations beyond
the mean, the accepted statistical standard for outlier exclusion; a study prepared by the
University of Quebec for Hydro -Quebec found transmission line proximity associated
with a 17% decline in property value. Omitting this statistical outlier from this analysis,
the mean value decline in non -peer -reviewed literature is a 2.67% and the difference
between peer-reviewed.and non -peer -reviewed literature is statistically significant
(t=2.18, p=0.03). Even within the peer -reviewed literature, industry consultants reported
significantly lower devaluations than academics, 2.3% vs.13.3% (t=2.99, p=0.01).
Which group of studies is most accurate? The question is resolved by the
corroboration of the academic regression studies by the real estate professional
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DL2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
16
questionnaire surveys. Surveys of real estate professionals reported an average 10.3%
loss of property values due to transmission line proximity, a figure in concordance with
the 12.6% average reported in the academic studies, and much higher than the 2.7%
reported by industry consultants. We place confidence in the concordance between the
realtor surveys and the academic regression studies.
Seeking studies most geographically and economically similar to US 1, we
imagined the ideal study in which urban property values along a major thoroughfare were
measured before and after the construction of a high -voltage transmission line. It hasn't
been published yet. Most published studies analyzed corridors that pass through small
towns between major cities, but the study by Des Rossiers (2002) examined the city of
Brossard in the Greater Montreal Area, (Table 4.2, line 7), a region directly comparable to
the urban character of FPL's proposed US 1 corridor. That city of 69,000 is smaller than
our corridor of 207,000 people (as measured by the ZIP Code areas, Table 2.1 above), but
Brossard's density of 4,059 people per sq. mile is very similar to our corridor's density of
4,218 people per sq mile. Des Rossiers (2002) used a sample of 507 single-family houses
sold between 1991 and 1996, but the high -voltage transmission line corridor was itself
two miles long and 200 ft. wide, and not built alongside a major thoroughfare: their 315
kV lines were run on high pylons down the middle of its exclusive corridor, whereas US
1 would feature 230 kV lines situated along the roadway. Des Rossiers' study is
outstanding in the number of variables tested (62), the numerous geographical and class
divisions of the city, the number of models tested, and the forms of the equations fitted.
In Brossard, Des Rossiers found transmission line proximity produced on average a 10%
loss of residential property value and a maximum loss of 20% in certain locations. An
earlier of another Quebec site (Table 4.2, line 7, Universite du Quebec, 1982) found a
maximum of 34% value loss.
The concordance between Des Rossier's study (10% loss), the realtor surveys
(10.3% loss), and the academic regression studies (12.6% loss) give us confidence that
10% is a reliable and conservative figure for the property value loss within two
blocks of FPL's US 1. Below we apply a range of property loss rate projections to the
property corridor: 5%, 10%, 20%, and 34%, then select 10% for our remaining
calculations.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
17
In our review of 42 studies, important questions arise, for example:
1) For how long does the disamenity last? One year? Ten years? Some studies found
that prices "normalized" after 20 years.
2) Over what distance is the disamenity "effective"? One block? Two blocks? 200
meters? The literature shows that distance depends on the field of vision, the height of
the towers, and intervening structures and foliage.
3) Some studies report no loss of sale price, but rather a longer time period to .sell the
property at the asking price. Such an economic effect fails to show up in the regression
analysis but requires the conversion of the lost time into the price variable.
4) Literature shows that the perception of the disamenity is itself the "real" cause of lost
value, so that, for example, developers of upscale restaurants, car dealerships, hospitals,
and daycare centers are likely to avoid the transmission line corridor altogether.
Section 4: References
A. General — Transmission Lines .and Property Values:
1. Fik, T.J., D.C. Ling, & G.F. Mulligan, 2003. "Modeling Spatial Variation in Housing Prices: A Variable
Interaction Approach." Real Estate Economics 31, 4, pp. 623-646. professors at University of
Florida and University of Arizona. Theoretical models: dummy, distance, access don't explain
location; need a unique "location value signature" and other site, structural and independent
attributes plus interactions.
2. Wilson, A. R. 2006. "Real Property Damages and Rubber Rulers." Real Estate Issues, Summer, pp. 25-
31. Private consultant in Woodland Park, CO. Damage diminution, location discussion.
3. Pitts, J. M. and T.O. Jackson, 2007. "Power Lines and Property Values Revisited." Appraisal Journal,
Fall 2007 pp. 323-325. (general descriptive; not original).
Stigma:
4. Elliot, P. & D. Wadley, 2002. "The Impact of Transmission Lines on Property Values: come to terms
with stigma." Property Management 20,2 pp. 137-152. U. of Queensland, Australia
Legal issues, "just compensation"
5. Furby, L, R. Gregory, P. Slovic, & B. Fischhoff, 1988. `Electric Power Transmission Lines, Property
Values, and Compensation." Journal of Environmental Management 27, pp. 69-83. All are private
consultants in Eugene, OR.
6. Orel, L.J., 1994(?), "Perceived Risks of EMFs and Landowner Compensation." University of New
Hampshire Law Review, vol 6, Winter. http://Iaw.unh.edu/risk/vol6/winter/orel.htm
7. Gell, C. 1999. "Shocking Overheads — Power Lines." National Association of Real Estate Appraisers
(UK).
Review of General Statistical Studies and Issues:
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
18
8. Bolton, D.R. & K.A. Sick, 1999. "Power Lines and Property Values: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly."
Urban Lawyer, Spring, 31, 2. Authors are consultants in Austin, TX. Early lit review.
Detailed Review of All Types of Statistical Studies:
9. Kroll, C.A. & Priestley, T., 1992. "The Effects of Overhead Transmission Lines on Property Values: A
Review and Analysis of the Literature." Report prepared for the Edison Electric Institute Siting
and Environmental Planning Task Force, Internet Edition (Washington, D.C.)
Survey Questionnaires:
Nation-wide survey:
10. Delaney, C.J. & Timmons, D., 1992. "High Voltage Power Lines: Do They Affect Residential Property
Value?" Journal of Real Estate Research 7, 3, Summer, pp. 315-329. Prof., Baylor University,
Waco, TX, and UT, San Antonio, TX.
Memphis, TN:
11. Kung, H. & Seagle, C.F., 1992. "Impact of Power Transmission Lines on. Property
Values: A Case Study." The Appraisal Journal, 60, 3, Jul, pp. 413-418. Sponsored by Memphis
State U and Memphis Area Assoc of Realtors Educ. Foundation. Authors: geography professor at
Memphis. State University and real estate appraiser. (Concludes: value sensitivity depends on
awareness and perception of power line dangers.)
Minnesota:
12. Mitterness, C. and S. Mooney. 1998. "Power Line Perceptions: Their Impact on Value and Market
Time" Paper presented at ARES Annual Meeting 1998. 14 pp (Review of 6 surveys; asks buyers.
SS (Professor at St. Cloud State University, MN).
Regression -type studies:
Reviews of Regression studies.
13. Gallimore, P. & M.R. Jaye, 1999. `Public and Professional Perceptions of HVOTL risks: the Problem
of Circularity." Journal of Property Research 16, 3, pp. 243-255. Reviews early regression model
results. Professor at Nottingham Trent University & Staffordshire University Business School,
UK.
14. Jackson, T.O. & J. Pitts. 2010. "The Effects of Electric TransmissionLines on Property Values: A
Literature Review." Journal of Real Estate Literature, 18, 2. pp. 239-259. Authors are Texas
A&M professors and real estate consultant no funding source given. They conclude there are.no
effects.)
Original regression studies
Academic:
Decatur, ILL:
15. Colwell, P.F. & Foley, K.W., 1979. "Electric Transmission Lines and the Selling Price of Residential
Property." The Appraisal Journal Oct., pp. 490-99. Prof. at U Ill, Urbana -Champaign and real
estate agent with Illinois Power Company. The first study to find falling price with proximity to
Power Lines.
16. Colwell, P.F., 1990. "Power Lines and Land Value." Journal of Real Estate Research, 5, 117-27. Finds
the "power line price -effect" diminishes over time.
Montreal:
17. Des Rossiers, Francois, 2002. "Power Lines, Visual Encumbrance and House Values: A Microspatial
Approach to Impact Measurement." Journal of Real Estate Research 23, 3, pp. 275-302. Professor
at Laval University, Canada.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
19
Washington & Oregon:
18. Woverton, M.L. & S.C. Bottemiller, 2003. "Further Analysis of Transmission Line Impact on
Residential Property Values." The Appraisal Journal 71,3 July, pp. 244-252.
Professor at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, chief appraiser at Bonneville Power
Administration, USDOE.
UK and Scotland:
19. Sims, S. and P. Dent, 2005. "High -voltage Overhead Power Lines and Property Values: A Residential
Study in the UK." Urban Studies 42, 4 (April), pp. 665-694. Authors are at Oxford Brookes
University. Excellent statistical work; also references.
Cleveland:
20. Simons, R.A. and J.D. Saginor 2006. "A Meta -Analysis of the Effect of Environmental Contamination
and Positive Amenities on Residential Real Estate Values." Journal of Real Estate Research, 28, 1
pp. 71-104. Authors are at Cleveland State University. No funding source given.
Industry sponsored:
NY, ME, CA (Land & 1-family)
21. Kinnard, W.N. Jr. & S.A. Dickey, 1995. "A Primer on Proximity Impact Research: Residential Property
Values Near High -Voltage Transmission Lines." Real Estate Issues, 20, 1, Apr. pp. 23-29.
Emeritus Professor from Canada and consultant in California.
Conn. &.MA: (1 family)
22. Chalmers,.J.A. & F. A. Voorvaart. 2009. "High -voltage Transmission Lines: Proximity, Visibility, and
Encumbrance Effects." The Appraisal Journal. Summer. Pp. 227-245. Funded by Northeast
Utilities; authors are private appraisers and litigation consultants.
Rural and suburban Ct , MA. See comments in Fall 2009 and Summer 2010 Appraisal Journal.
See comments by E. Razzi, "Pay Attention to Power Lines," Washington Post, Aug. 8, 2009.
B. Other Studies on the Economic Impact of Amenities:
General disamenities:
23. Boyle, M.A., and K.A. Kiel. 2001. "A Survey of House Price Hedonic Studies of the Impact of
Environmental Externalities." Journal of Real Estate Literature 9, 2, p 117-144. All kinds:
pipelines,.nuclear plants, smelters, landfills, but no specific power line studies included. Funded
by US EPA. Professor at MIT and College of Holy Cross, Worcester, MA
24. Jackson, T.O. 2001. "The Effects of Environmental Contamination on Real Estate: a Literature
Review." Journal of Real Estate Literature 9, 2, pp. 93-116. funded by NSF, Lincoln Institute.
Consultant in Bryan, TX
Evaluation of Visual Disamenities:
25. Harrison, S., 2002. "Visual Disamenity in the Queensland Wet Tropics: Estimating the Economic
Impacts of Overhead Transmission Lines." Economic Analysis and Policy 32, 2, June, pp. 173-
188. U. Queensland, Australia. (Impact on Tropic tourism; farmland values).
Transmission Line Siting:
26. Vajjhala, S.P. and P.S. Fischbeck. 2007. "Quantifying Siting Difficulty: A Case Study of US
Transmission Line Siting." Energy Policy 35, pp. 650-671. (Resources for the Future; Carnegie
Mellon U). Good bibliography.
Wind Mills as Disamenities:
27. Hoen, B., R. Wiser, P. Cappers, M. Thayer, & G. Sethi. 2009. "The Impact of Wind Power Projects on
Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi -Site Hedonic Analysis." Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory. 146 pp. (revision #1). Funded by US DOE. Excellent bibliography
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
20
Tunnels and roads as disamenities:
28. Kilpatric, J.A., R.L. Throupe, J.I. Carruthers, & A. Krause. 2007. "The Impact of Transit Corridors on
Residential Property Values." Journal of Real Estate Research, Jul -Sept, 29, 3, pp. 303-320.
Funded by HUD. Authors are from U. Denver, private consultants, and HUD. (superhighways, I-
95's, tunnels)
C. Safety Discussion:
29. Jaconetty, T.A. 2001. "Do You Want your Children Playing Under Those Things? The Continuing
Controversy about High Voltage Electro-magnetic Fields, Human Health, and Real Property
Values." Assessment Journal May/June, p. 23-30. Author is Chief Deputy Commissioner, Cook
County Board of Review. (Review of many factors; no conclusions).
30. Silicon Valley Real Estate Info: "High Voltage Transmission Lines, Electric and Magnetic Fields
(EMFs) and How They Affect Real Estate Prices." Jan. 3, 2008.
31. Kennebec Journal, "As transmission lines plans proceed, homeowners ponder offers, safety concerns.
May 18, 2008.
Energy Efficiency in Florida:
32. Florida PIRG Education Fund, 2005. "Redirecting Florida's Energy: the Economic and consumer
Benefits of Clean Energy Policies." Tallahassee. 24 pp. (written by Navin Nayak). Funded by
Energy Foundation, a renewable energy industry consortium.
33. Elliot, R.N, & M. Eldridge, A.M. Shipley, J. Laitner, S. Nadel , 2007. "Potential for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy to Meet Florida's Growing Energy Demands." Report No. E072.
American Council for an Energy -Efficient Economy, Washington, DC
34. Petition to determine need for Turkey Point Nuclear Units 6 and 7 electrical power plant, by Florida
Power & Light Company. DOCKET NO. 070650-El, ORDER NO. PSC-08-0237-FOF-E1
http://www.floridapsc.com/library/filings/08%5 CO2812-08%°5 CO2812-08.pdf
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
21
Section 5. Value of Property and Job Loss in Miami -Dade County
5.1 Loss in property values
In Section 3 above, we identified property valued $4.03 billion in the two -block corridor
along the FPL's preferred route. At loss rates of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 34%, respectively,
the corresponding losses in property values are $203 million, $403 million, $803 million,
and $1.37 billion for the respective loss rates (Table 5.1, lines A.1-A.4.). The
corresponding losses of property tax revenues (valued on the Miami -Dade County
millage rate of 22.992) range from $4.6 to $31.5 million annually (Table 5.1, lines B.1-
B.4.). At the "best -estimate" loss rate of 10%, the projected property value loss
from transmission lines on US 1 is $403 million, roughly twice FPL's upper estimate
of $200 million required to underground these lines.
5.1 Loss in municipal revenues
A property value loss of 10% translates to annual property tax losses of.$9.3 million
(Table 5.1, B). The losses in other municipal revenues are more difficult to model, but
we can make an approximation. Ad -valorem taxes in South Miami constitute 38% of
annual municipal revenues, so assuming the hit to property value affects other activities
such as construction and retail by a proportional amount, we can assume that total
annual revenues lost would be $24.5 million ($9.3 million / 0.34). Loss rates of 20%
would produce annual ad -valorem tax loss of $18.6 million and total revenue losses of
$49 million. At a 10% value loss, the lost municipal revenues alone would exceed the
cost of undergrounding in eight years, and at 20% value loss, municipal revenue
losses would exceed the undergrounding costs in four years.
5.2 Job Losses
How do property value losses affect the number of jobs in the economy? How does
"dollar property loss" translate into "job loss"? Fortunately economists have developed
two standard models for measuring economic impacts of different "events" or policy
changes, IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planners) and REMI (Regional Economic
Modeling, Inc.; see IMPLAN.com and REMI.com). Both are excellent analytic tools;
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
22
each gives a different dimension of the economy, and both must be used to obtain a
complete projection of economic impacts. IMPLAN measures the impacts for a single
time period. It assumes the full "loss" ripples through the economy all at once. It
collapses or consolidates all the economic effects into a single "solution," even if the
effects take years to work themselves out and occur at different points in time. IMPLAN.
deals primarily with the backward or production linkages, with the inter -industry
connections, and also with the consumption effect of workers' spending as a result of an
impact or policy change. These effects are specified as "direct, indirect, and induced"
effects on jobs; their sum is the total job impact. IMPLAN gives us an "X-ray" of the
economy. Alter one economic entity, such as land value, and IMPLAN will trace which
other components are connected to it and quantitatively how much value flows from one
economic entity to another. REMI (Regional Economic Modeling, Inc.) is analogous to a
video MRI of the patient yesterday, today, tomorrow, and for the next 40 years. The
REMI model measures the interactions between the interconnected economic
components. This modeling system includes "blocks" that trace flows and relationships
between output, capital and labor demand, population and labor supply, wages, prices,
and profits, and market shares (see the sketch of the economic pieces in Figure 5.1). Both
tools give the analyst significant insights into the impacts of a disamenity.
Once the real estate market "recognizes" the disamenity and prices react, say, by a
decline of 10%, what is the next step? Do the homeowners and business owners see
themselves as "poorer," and if so, how is that expressed? If prices and appraisals fall,
then taxes will fall and government spending will fall. But the private citizen's reaction
to losing 10% of the value of his house may vary widely. The aggregate loss in the
Miami -Dade economy of $403 million, almost a half billion dollars when the lines are
completed, spread across 4,000 property owners, may lead to different scenarios. How
will individuals, families, and businesses express this loss? Will they cut spending across
the board, invest less, or save more? Will they cut discretionary spending on restaurants,
jewelry, and travel, or insist on cuts in social services, such as nursing care and
education? The precise responses of different property owners to declining property
values determines how the value losses resonate through the economy.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DL2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
23
5.2a IMPLAN Job Loss
We use IMPLAN as a fast "X-ray" guide to these alternatives, designing alternative
programs to evaluate the impact of different levels of value reductions (5%, 10%, 20%,
and 34%) on different arrays of sectors (Table 5.2, lines A 1-6). At 10% property
devaluation, the affected neighborhoods along the corridor would experience from
4,382 to 8,040 jobs lost, with the precise number depending on the economic sectors
present and affected by spending reductions (Table 5.2). For instance, if just the real
estate sector and government -spending take the full hit, then a total of 4,382 jobs will be
lost at the 10% property loss level (Table 5.2, col. 2, line A). But if the cut in sector
spending hits air travel, private colleges, and retailing (Table 5.2, line 2), then 5,170 jobs
will be lost. The most service -intensive "basket" of cuts is our last scenario (Table 5.2,
col. 2, line 6) which reduces $403 million in spending on private education, real estate,
nursing care facilities, food and drinking places, and jewelry manufacturing. In this case,
8,040 jobs would be lost.
All the numbers above assume that the effects are compressed into a single year.
We must now turn to REMI and play out similar scenarios with a more complex regional
economic model and for a longer time span.
5.2b REMI Job Loss
The basic REMI model for Miami -Dade County gives results that are similar to the
IMPLAN findings. At a 10% property loss, REMI finds the first year reduction in jobs of
3,790, compared to the IMPLAN loss of 4,382 jobs. (Table 5.3, line A). But REMI
allows us to keep the disamenity in place for a number of years and watch as its
"unattractiveness" disappears. The underlying assumption entered into REMI is that the
disamenity causes an initial drop in value, then people gradually get used to the
disamenity and business as usual retums. In a low quality economic area (e.g., industrial,
used motor homes, fast food), the assumption of a disappearing disamenity may be
founded. In upscale retail and residential areas, however, the desired development may
simply move to a location lacking the disamenity, to be replaced by activities of lower
economic value. In the former scenario (gradually returning value), the number of lost
jobs declines gradually to 3,056 in five years (2015) and to 2,132 in ten years (2020). If
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
24
•
the disamenity lasts 30 years, then the impact is still a loss of 838 jobs by 2040. The
length and depth of the trough (job loss) due to the disamenity is shown in Graph 5.1 for
the 10% rate. Under the second scenario, if the jobs return at all they would be at lower
pay grades.
The depth of the trough might also vary, as we discovered already from our
IMPLAN experiments. For a five-year disamenity, if only the real estate sector is
affected, then the REMI model finds that 2,586 jobs per year will be affected for each
year, falling to 2,142 jobs per year in five years. (Table 5.3, line B 1) If the business
service sector takes the hit (line B2), then 7,536 jobs will be affected, falling to about
6,000 jobs in 5 years. If, however, nursing takes the hit, then 10,680 jobs per year will be
lost, falling to 8,238jobs by 2015 (line B3). If the disamenity lasts long and affects the
service or health industries, then the impact on jobs could be quite severe.
5.3 Economic Effect of Job Loss
Let us calculate the economic cost of jobs lost from a 10% property value decline. We
assume average income is $50,166, half the countywide family total income of $100,322.
We assume the expected job loss number is the average value in Table 5.2, 5955 jobs.
The annual cost of the job Loss is $298,738,530, approximately $300 million.
Recognize that these loss figures do not include the effects of transmission lines on
the recovery of property values and jobs lost in the recent economic hyper -recession.
Nor do these loss figures include the cost in future development desired for the US 1
corridor. Nor do these loss figures include the extreme cost of infrastructure needed to
service the urban sprawl that would result from failure to create density along this
corridor. Actual costs to the region could be an order of magnitude higher than those
projected in this study.
The potential gains of value to society from enhanced electrical transmission must
be fairly offset by the economic losses from citing aboveground transmission lines on the
US 1 corridor.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
25
Section 6. Epilogue - Stories of the Special Case: a Corridor to Nowhere
The entire US 1 development strategy, a decade of collaborative planning and action on
the part of local and county government, is jeopardized by FPL's transmission line
project, and the anti -sprawl program of compact growth along the corridor is likewise
threatened. As a prologue, we provide two cautionary case studies that will never be
featured in the regression analysis literature.
In 2005 Howard Taft and Charles Gelman bought a 4-floor town house at 6205
Laguna Path,.a part of the famous Aqua Project on Allison Island in North Miami Beach.
They paid $1.4 million .prior to construction on the basis of models and architectural
renderings. Their comer lot was to have a corner window and a spectacular view of the
bay channel. However, after it was built, the frontage was marred by a spectacular view
of poles and power lines running up West 63`I Street. The owners replaced the corner
picture window with opaque glass that lets in light but no images. To this day, the prices
Taft and Gelman have been offered for the property, even by the current tenants, is far
below the market value of comparable properties that lack power lines in front. The
owners have been unwilling to sell at the "disamenity" price, thus the property will not
appear among data on disamenity losses.
The second case is another transmission corridor that, perhaps, gives us a glimpse
of what US 1 with transmission lines might come to look like. In Broward County, State
Road 7 / US 441 had been targeted as a "future growth corridor" by the South Florida
Regional Planning Council. About 17.5% of Broward's residents reside within a mile of
the transmission lines. In 2004, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) identified five major
development centers along the corridor and forecast growth of office space, retailing,
hotels, and new residences in a study commissioned by the SR 7 / US 441 Collaborative.
Yet the corridor never developed and remains a semi -moribund zone. Is it because of the
landfill along part of the route? The casino? The remains of an old incinerator site? Or
maybe it is the miles of high -voltage transmission wires that parallel and cross the route?
We find it ironic indeed that the very conveyance of the energy needed for
economic growth can itself prevent the same growth. Siting a new transmission corridor
though a developing urban region may create a graveyard monument to the economic
potential it destroyed, a corridor to nowhere.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
26
0 0
Table 1.1
Measures of Sprawl and South Florida Appetite for Land, 1995-2010
1995 1988-1995 2010 1995-2010
Urban Urban Density Land- Urban Pop. abs. 0/. % new urban
Pop. Land (People/ Pop. Pop chnge. chge chge land
(thou.) !thou acres) acre ElasticIty (thou.) (thou) pop. land (thou. ac.)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A. Lower East Coast (LEC)
1 M-Dade 2,085 248 8.4 0.910 2,496 411 19.7 17.9 44.5
2 Broward 1,438 199 7.2 0.532 1,748 310 21.6 11.5 22.8
3 Palm Beach 995 250 4.0 0.546 1,320 325 32.7 17.8 44.6
Sum (3 counties) 4,518 697 6.5 0.693 5,564 1,046 23.2 16.1 111.9
B. Upper East Coast (UEC)
4 Martin 114 50 2.3 0.763 146 32 28.1 21.4 10.7
5 St. Lucie 173 73 2.4 0.137 278 105 60.7 8.3 6.1
Sum (2 counties) 287 123 2.3 0.286 424 137 47.7 13.7 16.8
C Lwr. E. Coast (5 counties) 4,805 820 5.9 0.637 5,988 1,183 24.6 15.7 128.7
D. Lower West Coast (LWC)
(Collier, Glades, Lee, Hendry)
Sum (4 counties) 620 300 2.1 0.879 1,289 669 107.9 94.8 284.4
E Sum: 9 counties 5,425 1,120 4.8 1.080 7,277 1,852 34.1 36.9 413.1
Sources end Methods:
col. 1: Population 1995 from BEBR, Fla. Statistical Abstract 2002, Table 120.
col.2: Urban land 1995 from SFWMD GIS Data, CD-ROM #1, "Land Use, National Wetlands Inventory`, West Palm. Beach, 1997.
col. 3: Computed co1.1/col 2.
col. 4: Elasticity from Weisskoff 2005, Econ of Everglades Restoration. Table 42, p. 87. See computations there.
Elasticity is defined as the % change in land divided by the % change in population.
col. 5: Population from BEBR, Table 1, http://www.bebcufl.edu/contenUcensus-population-counts-county-and-city-florida-2000-2010-new
col.6 = col. 5 - col. 1.
col. 7 = (col. 5 - col. 1)/(col. 1)
col. 8 = col 4 ' col. 7.
col. 9 = col. 8 ' col. 2
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
• •
Table 2.1 IMPLAN Socio-Economic Data of the FPL Corridor by Zip Codes
Narrow and Extended, 2008 Data.
% FPL/ Entire % Entire
FPL M-D County Corridor to Corr/County
Corridor County col 1/col 2 Homestead col 4/col 2
1 2 3 4 5
1 Number of Zip Codes* 8 79 10.1 14 17.7
2 Population 206,682 2,398,245 8.6 387,150 16.1
3 Area (sq.miles) 49 1,945 2.5 137 7.0
4 Density (pop/sq mi) 4,218 1,233 342.1 2,816 228.4
5 Employment • 159,527 1,441,182 11.1 223,096 15.5
6 No. households 87,078 901,127 9.7 147,673 16.4
7 Total personal income $12.649 $90.402 14.0 $18.754 20.7
(bill. $)
8 Income per household $ $145,257 $100,322 144.8 $126,999 126.6
9 No. IMPLAN sectors** 222 384 57.8 245 63.8
Notes:
* Zip codes for FPL Corridor are: 33129, 30, 33, 43, 46, 56, 58, & 76.
Zip codes for the rest of the US1 Corridor. include: 33157, 189, 170, 032, 033, & 030.
* *The IMPLAN model has potentially 440 producing sectors, but
not all are found in any single area. The number of sectors in any given region
indicates the number of inter -industry linkages operating in the region.
Source: IMPLAN zip -code data files for Miami -Dade County, 2008.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
• •
Table 2.2 Projecting Population Growth and Expansion in the Corridor:
M-D P&Z Dept. and South Miami -Dade Watershed Study.
A. Miami Dade Planning & Zoning
Minor Statistical Areas
2000 2015 2025 Abs.Chge % Change
1 2 3 4 5
1 FPL Corridor 2000-2025 2000-2025
5.2 55,893 79,106 92,559 36,666 65.6
5.3 120,126 128,766 131,814 11,688 9.7
5.5 80,111 88,586 96,165 16,054 20.0
5:6 32,431 35,188 36,720 4,289 13.2
5.7 25,346 28,104 30,131 4,785 18.9
5.8 35,040 42,501 48,629 13,589 38.8
2 Total: FPL Corridor 348,947 402,251 436,018 87,071 25.0
3 South Extension:
7.1 41,575 76,248 99,332 57,757 138.9
7.2 39,327 58,490 73,199 33,872 86.1
7.3 32,367 43,205 50,854 18,487 57.1
7.4 48,364 104,187 146,118 97,754 202.1
7.5 14,636 36,024 49,979 35,343 241.5
4 Total: South Extension 176,269 318,154 419,482 243,213 138.0
5 Sum Entire Corridor 525,216 720,405 855,500 330,284 62.9
6 Total: Miami -Dade County 2,253,362 2,724,623 3,046,081 792,719 35.2
7 % FPL Corridor/ County 15.5 14.8 14.3 11.0
8 % So. Extension only/County 7.8 11.7 13.8 30.7
9 % Entire Corridor/County 23.3 26.4 28.1 41.7
B Watershed Project Region
952,779 1,033,751 1,161,016 208,237 21.9
% of County: 38.2% 37.9 38.1
Sources:
A. Miami -Dade County, Dept of Planning and Zoning, Research Section,
Population Estimates and Projections, Feb. 2008.
B. South Miami -Dade Watershed Study, 2007, Table 2.1, p. 2.6.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
0 0
Table 3.1
Sample Appraisal Valuation of "Power Line Properties", 26-36 St., Two blocks In, both sides of US1
Property AdJ Sq Market
Folio No. Clut Address Footage lot size Land Building Value
1 01-4116-117-0010 47 0 5.17 Acres 1,466,380 0 1,466,380
2 01-4116-038-0010 34 2900 SW 28 LN 11,214 25,432 50 FT $1,525,920 5256,518 $1,782,438
3.01-4116.038-0020 81 2940 SW 28 LN 0 12,129 SQ FT $727,740 0 $727,740
4 01-4116-038-0070 12 2950 SW 28 LN 2,175 6,250 5Q FT $375,000 599,823 $474,823
5 01-4116-076-0020 37 2990 SW 28 LN 81,533 29,185 SQ FT $1,751,100 $3,041,190 54,792,290
6 01 4116-037-0350 2 2902 SW 27 LN 1,916 10,167 SQ FT $66,086 $119,062 $385,148
7 01.4116-037-0351 1 2966 SW 27 LN 1,015 6,696 SQ FT 543,572 558,575 $102,147
8 01-4116.037-0360 1 2978 SW 27 LN 1,797 8,122 54 FT $52,820 5112,473 $165,293
9 01-4116-037-0370 1 2990 SW 27 LN 1,074 8,432 SQ FT $55,310 563,204 $118,510
10 01-4116-035-0320 3 2796 SW 30 AVE 1,741 4,500 SQ FT $40,162 561,032 5101,194
11 01-4116-035-0330 3 3010 SW 27 LN 1,961 4,500 SQ FT 40,162 564,864 $105,026
12 01-4116-035-0331 3 3020 SW 27 LN 1,918 4,500 SQ FT 540,162 563,253 $103,415
13 01-4116-035-0340 3 3036 SW 27 LN 3,394 9,000 SQ FT $BD,325 $139,482 $219,807
14 01-4116-035-0350 3 3040 SW 27 LN 1,834 4,500 SQ F7 $40,162 $64,293 5104,4557
15 01.4116-035-0360 3 3050 SW 27 LN 1,834 4,500 SQ FT $40,162 $64,293 $104,455
16 01-4116.035-0370 3 3060 SW 27 LN 1,834 4,500 SQ FT $40,162 $64,293 $104,455
17 014116-035-0380 3 3070 SW 27 LN 1,834 4,500 SQ F7 $40,162 564,293 5104,455
18 01.4116-035-0390 3 3074 SW 27 LN 1,834 4,500 5Q F7 $40,162 $64,293 $104,455
19 01 4116 035-0400 3 1,834 4,500 54 FT $40,162 564,293 $104,455
20 01-4116-035-0401 3 3090 SW 27 LN 1,304 3,375 SQ FT 530,122 $46,732 $76,854
21 01-4116-035-0410 3 3094 SW 27 LN 1,293 3,137 SQ FT $27 998 $46,347 574,345
22 01-4116-035-0590 13 3001 SW 28 LN 6,934 10,620 SQ FT 27,99 0 $21,360 5605,460
23 014116-035-0580 81 3015 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT 5123,750 $0 $123,750
24 01-0116-035-0570 81 3025 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT 5123,750 50 $123,750
25 01-4116-035-0560 81 3035 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT $123,750 50 5123,750
26 01-4116-035-0530 32 3029 SW 28 ST 3,660 6,750 SQ FT $371,250 51,000 5372,250
27 01-4116-035-0510 36 3051 SW 28 ST 3,380 4,500 SQ FT $247,500 $56,519 5304,019
28 01 4116-035-0500 81 3055 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT 5123,750 50 5123,750
29 01-4116-035-0490 81 3057 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT $123,750 $0 $123,750
30 01-4116-035-0480 81 3061 SW 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT $123,750 $0 $123,750
31 01-4116-035-0470 81 30715W 28 ST 0 2,250 SQ FT $123,50 5123,750
750
32 01-4116-035-0440 37 3075 SW 28 ST 3,850 6,750 SQ FT 5371,50 590,960 5462,270
33 01-4116-035-0420 81 3085 SW 28 5T 0 5,963 SQ FT $327,965 50 5327,965
34 014116-035-0430 37 3099 SW 28 51' 5,339 3,038 SQ FT 5167,090 5165,911 5333,001
35 01-4116-038-0350 13 3010 SW 28 LN 6,550 12,300 SQ FT $738,000 $401,627 51,139,627
36 014116-038-0420 34 2801 SW 31 AVE 16,824 11,650 SQ FT $699,000 $405,774 $1,104,774
37 014116-038-0260 11 3000 SW 28 LN 51,312 27,973 SQ FT $1,678,380 $2,848,215 $4,526,595
38 01 4116 038-0270 41 3044 SW 28 LN 4,568 6,250 SQ FT 5375,000 5203,017 $578,017
39 01-4116.038-0330 37 3054 SW 28 LN 98,373 25,000 SQ FT $1,500,000 57,000,000 $8,500,000
40 01.4116-038-0340 37 2851SW 31 AVE 82,863 26,809 SQ FT 51,608,540 55,491,460 57,100,000
41 01-4116-036-0010 42 2805 SW 32 AVE 36,424 9.91 ACRES $2,916,776 5504,399 53,421,175
42 01-4116-017-0100 2 3201 SW 29 51' 2,360 7,494 SQ FT $48,711 $153,510 5202,221
43 014116-017-0090 2 2890 SW 32 AVE 2,620 6465 SQ FT $42,582 $170,892 5213,474
44 01-4116-017-0080 2 2880 SW 32 AVE 2,200 6,465 SQ FT $42,582 $141,488 5284,070
45 01-4116-017-0130 2 2883 SW 32 CT 2,260 13,899 SQ FT 590,107 $129,475 5219,582
46 01 4116-017-0120 2 2893 SW 32 CT 1,886 7,584 SQ FT $49,597 5217,211 5166,808
47 01-4116-017-0300 .1 2892 SW 32 CT 883 4,276 SQ FT $27,879 $50,717 $78,596
48 01 4116.017-0330 1 3261 SW 29 ST 612 2,695 SQ FT $17518 $36,064 $53,582
49 01-4116-017-0290 2 2886 SW 32 CT 1,194 6,949 SQ FT :45,053 571,964 5117,017
50 01-4116.017-0281 1 2876 SW 32 CT 1,157 6,949 54 FT $45,053 571,907 $116,9606
51 01-4116-017-0280 1 2870 SW 32 CT 1,752 6,949 SQ FT 545,053 597,303 $142,356
52 01-4116-017-0350 1 2877 SW 33 AVE 1,378 6,949 SQ FT 545,053 582,531 5127,584
53 01-4116-017-0340 1 2887 SW 33 AVE 1,128 6,949 SQ FT 545,053 565,333 $110,386
54 01-4116.017-0330 2 3281 SW 29 ST 2,200 6,583 SQ FT $42,957 5138,118 $181,075
55 01-4116-017-0320 2 3285 SW 29 ST 2,195 7,374 SQ FT $47,931 $137,067 $184,998
56 01-0116-022-0150 2 3260 SW 29 ST 1,371 17,038 SQ FT $71,148 5106,021 $177,169
57 01 4116 022-0140 41 3270 SW 29 51' 4,576 16,819 SQ FT $109,324 $204,662 5313,986
58 01-4116-018-0440 1 2911 SW 33 CT 1,522 7,869 SQ FT $51,148 545,809 596,957
59 01-4116-018-0430 2 2901 SW 33 CT 2,419 6,100 SQ FT $39,820 $152,944 5192,764
60 01.4116-018-0420 2 2891 SW 33 CT 1,502 6,100 SQ FT $39,820 $87,327 $127,147
61 01 4116 018-0410 1 2881 SW 33 CT 1,435 6,100 SQ FT $39,620 $75,889 $115,709 u t C
62 01-4116-018-0400 81 0 9,150 SQ FT 559,729 50 559,729 11 = 0 i
63 01-4116-018-0570 2 2920 SW 33 CT 2,906 10,557 SQ FT 568,620 $177,678 5246,298 3 3 � a dJ
64 01-0116-018-0560 1 3351 SW 29 TER 1,382 7,540 SQ FT 5403,3538 $68,230 5117,568 fl' o Ct o V
65 01-4116-018-0553 2 3363 SW 29 TER 1,746 6,250 54 FT $40,500 5114,982 5155,482 , L .1 O -
66 01 4116-018.0552 2 3369 SW 29 TER 1,892 7,622 54 FT $49,872 $119,275 $169,147 +' U U
67 01 4116 018-0550 2 3375 SW 29 TER 1,431 3,582 54 FT 523,283 $87,873 5111,156 C C Q
68 01-4116-018-0551 1 3373 SW 29 TER 1,150 5,434 SQ FT $35 321 $69,840 5305,161 O O rti
69 01-4116-018-0541 1 3377 SW 29 TER 2,390 7,075 54 FT $46,172 5154,826 $200,998 -0 u N
70 01-4116.018-0540 2 2935 SW 34 AVE 4,589 7,500 54 FT $49,150 5338,480 5387,630 C QI .N
.0 o
u
IAE IC'
VI
•
71 01.4116-018-0530 1 2929 SW 34 AVE
72 01-4116-018-0520 2 2927 SW 34 AVE
73 01-4116-019-1390 1 2960 SW 34 AVE
74 01-4116-019-1380 1 2950 SW 34 AVE
75 01-4116-019-1372 2 2946 SW 34 AVE
76 01-4116-019-1371 3 2940 SW 34 AVE
77 01-4116-019-1430 2 2939 SW 35 AVE
78 01-4116-019-1440 2 2941 SW 35 AVE
79 01-4116-019-1450 2 2951 SW 35 AVE
80 01.4116-019-1460 2 2961 SW 35 AVE
81 01-4116-019-1470 2 3441 SW 29 TER
82 01.4116.019-1220 1 2980 SW 35 AVE
83 01.4116-019.1230 13 2990 SW 35 AVE
84 01-4116-019-1310 1 2965 SW 36 AVE
85 01-4116-019-1320 2 2973 SW 36 AVE
86 01-4116-019.1330 65 3555 SW 29 TER
87 01-4121-002-1550 12 36215 DIXIE HWY
88 01-4121-002-1470 19 3501 5 DIXIE HWY
sum north side
South of US 1
Folio No.
1 01.4115.041-0580
2 01.4115-041-0570
3 01.4115-041.0560
4 01-4115-041-0720
5 01.4116-078-0010
6 01-4116-078-0020
7 01-4116-078-0030
8 01-4116-028-0130
9 01.4116-028-0170
10 01-4116-007-0250
11 01-4116-007-0220
12 01-4116-001-0070
13 01-4116-001-0080
14 01-4116-007-0110
15 01-4116-007-0090
16 01-4116-027-0150
17 01-4116-027-0140
18 01-4116-027-0130
19 01-4116-027-0320
20 01-4116-027-0310
21 01-4116-027-0160
22 01-4116-027-0220
23 014116-048-0010
24.01.4116-045.0010
25 01-4116-042-0010
26 01-4116-022-0130
27 01-4116-022-0120
28 01-4116-022-0110
29 01-4116-022-0071
30 01.4116-022.0040
31 01-4116-022-0080
32 01-4116-022-0090
33 01-4116-049-0010
34 01-4116-022-0030
35 01.4116-061-0010
36 01-4116-003-0070
37 01-4116-047-0030
38 01-4116-047-0020
39 01-4116-047-0010
40 01-4116-046-0010
41 01-4121-001-0150
42 01-4121-001-0160
43 01-4121-001.0180
44 01-4121-002-0250
45 01-4121-002-0560
Sum south side=
ITable 3.1 cont.
Cluc Property Address
11 2600 S DIXIE HW
11 2610 S DIXIE HWY
11 2698 5 DIXIE HWY
11 2795 SW 27 AVE
26 2775 SW 28 TER
11 27105 DIXIE HWY
11 2720 5 DIXIE HWY
13 2900 5W 28 TER
3 2950 5 DIXIE HWY
3 2890 VIRGINIA ST
1 2923SW30CT
65 2906 VIRGINIA ST
2 2914 VIRGINIA ST
3 3050 5 DIXIE HWY
1 2920SW30CT
40 2901 BRIDGEPORT AVE
13 2911 BRIDGEPORT AVE
1 2919 BRIDGEPORT AVE
10 2925 BRIDGEPORT AVE
1 2923 BRIDGEPORT AVE
13 3100.5 DIXIE HWY
3 2942 BRIDGEPORT AVE
11 2999 5W 32 AVE
11 2935 MCDONALD ST
62 3198 5 DIXIE HWY
11 3200 S DIXIE HWY
3 3220 W DIXIE HWY
13 3250 S DIXIE HWY
3 3244 W TRADE AVE
3 3250 W TRADE AVE
3 3270 W TRADE AVE
3 3280 W TRADE AVE
3 33005DIXIE HWY
1 3265 BIRD AVE
81 3335 BIRD AVE
81 3355•BIRD AVE
'81 3375 BIRD AVE
13 33505 DIXIE HWY
19 34005 DIXIE HWY
26 3490 S DIXIE HWY
1 3000 ELIZABETH ST
1 3420 BIRD AVE
1 3011 NEW YORK ST
11 3490 BIRD AVE
98 3500 5 DIXIE HWY
1,426 7,500 50 FT $49,150 580,212 $129,362
2,400 7,500 SQ FT $49,150 $152,752 $201,902
1,182 6,795 SQ FT $44,421 $68,052 $112,473
1,804 7,250 SQ FT $47,593 $79,852 $127,445
3,339 7,250 SQ FT $47,593 $204,667 $252,260
2,576 7,250 SQ FT $47,593 $161,964 $209,557
2,774 7,250 SQ FT 47,593 $143,358 $190,951
1,378 7,250 SQ FT $47,593$86,963 $134,556
1,935 7,250 SQ FT 547,593 $122,339 $169,932
2,013 7,250 SQ Fr 547,593 5124,520 $172,113
2,241 10,572 SQ FT $68,718 $141,039 $209,757
2,127 7,000 SQ FT $45,540 $137,569 $183,109
6,201 7,000 SQ FT $45,500 $488,000 $533,500
954 7,000 SQ FT $45,540 $56,647 $102,187
2,201 7,000 SQ FT $45,540 $137,246 $182,786
O 14,75650FT 5885,360 $18,525 $903,885
4,119 13,489SQFT $1,031,908 $10,000 $1,041,908
1,997 12,091 SQ FT $924,962 $1,000 $925,962
538,019 23,992,066 27,230,676 51,222,742
Adj Sq Footage lot size Land Building Market Value
14,098 24,18054FT $2,418,000 $764,855 $3,182,855
1,956 5,580 54 FT $558,000 $71,754 $629,754
1,196 8,370 SQ FT $837,000 $74,436 $911,436
7,691 8,356 SQ FT 5752,040 5378,300 $1,130,340
8,647 54,979 SQ FT 5,745,306 $576,239 $6,321,545
4,928 29,228 SQ FT $2,922,800 $518,948 $3,441,748
18,962 63,1905QFT $5,371,150 51,251523 $6,622,673
46,958 25,593 SQ FT $1,279,650 $4,362,953 $5,642,603
64,769 52,32054FT $2,333,472 $2,805,772 $5,139,243
60,229 46,073 SQ FT $2,073,285 $1,926,715 54,000,000
993 7,532 SQ FT $248,556 $24,537 $273,093
O 6,407 SQ FT $42,286 $12,513 $54,799
2,997 8,680 SQ FT $286,440 122,616 $409,056
14,354 17,705 SQ FT $672,790 $774,615 $1,447,405
1,249 6,322 50 FT $208,626 $70,480 $279,106
8,517 13,797 SQ FT $1,034,775 $749,130 51,783,905
1,828 7,500 SQ FT $375,000 $142,162 $517,162
853 6,750 SQ FT 5337500 5100 $337,600
1,156 3,213 SQ FT $0 $0 $177,720
1,156 2,676 SQ FT $0 $0 $177,720
16,831 23,680 SQ Fr $1,894,400 $1,175,290 $3,069,690
3,887 20,250SQ FT $534,600 558,627 $593,227
106,807 8.23 ACRES $17,931,450 $10,000 $17,941,450
2,053 11,458 54 FT $973,930 $203,132 $1,177,062
1,846 11,761SOFT $1,058,490 $121,397 $1,179,887
4,183 29,250 SQ FT $2,632,500 $445,053 $3,077,553
3,155 6,390 SQ FT 319,500 $163,494 $482,994
2,573 13,292 SQ FT $797,520 5168,508 $966,026
3,619 7,500 SQ FT 300,000 $173,962 $473,962
14,633 28,000 SQ FT $1,260,000 $665,904 $1,925,904
10,812 15,000 5Q FT 5600,000 5646,040 $1,246,040
4,136 7,50054 FT 5300,000 $128,627 $478,627
45,059 32,126 SQ FT 52,730,710 $758,660 $3,489,370
2,004 13,000 SQ FT $650,000 $13,353 $663,353
O 7,841 SQ FT 5392,050 $0 $392,050
O 4,050 SQ FT $202,500 $0 $202,500
O 6,710 54 FT $335,500 $0 $335,500
9,088 17,897 SQ FT 51,521,245 $584,834 $2,106,079
5,040 32,735 SQ FT $2,946,150 $377,777 $3,323,927
2,912 14,33154 FT $1,218,130 $170,943 51,389,078
1,052 5,896 SQ FT $188,672 528,404 $217,076
1,543 6,600 SQ FT $211,200 $44,954 $256,154
1,078 6,000 SQ FT $192,000 $30,354 $222,354
8,738 41,10150 FT 52,109,284 $605,838 $2,715,122
925 45,300 54 FT $4,303,500 $17,399 $4,320,899
514,511 0 73,100,007 21,270,197 94,725,649
Source: Miami -Dade County, County Appraiser's Files on line, Accessed Oct -Dec., 2010
hnp://www.miamidade.Rov/pa/property search.asp
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 3.2
Sample of County Land Use Codes (CLUC) found in Power Line Property
from Table 3.1.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Institutional
Multi -Family
Not used
Single Family
0011 Retail Outlet
0012 Repairs, Non -Automotive
0013 Office Building
0019 Automotive or Marine
0026 Service Station - Automotive
0032 Light mfg and food processing
0034 Canneries , bottler
0036 Heavy industry or lumber yard
0037 Warehouse or Storage
0040 Municipal
0041 Educational, private
0042 Club or hall, private
0047 Dade County
0098 Federal
0003 Multi -family 3 or more units
0062 Railroad Assessment
0065 Parkin/)vacant lot enclosed
0001 Residential, single family
0002 Duplex
0010 Townhouse
Vacant 0081 Vacant land
Source: Selected from Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser's Office, Web site,
from CLUC that appear in our Table 3.1, Col. 2.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 3.3
Summary Table of Summed Appraisal Values by Segments, Brickell to 136 St, Both Sides of US 1.
West # prties streets
of US 1
18 opt 1 3rd Ave,
4th St to 15th Rd
109 a 16-26
88 b 26-36
29 c 36-46
40 d' 46-56
142 d" 46-56
21 e 57-66
75 f 66-76
134 g 78-88
27 h 86-96
301 1 96-106
48 j 106-116
49 k 116-126
25 1 126-136
1,088 total above
1,106 :h optl
East # prties streets
of U5 1
49 opt 1 3rd Ave,
4th St to 15th Rd
118 a 16-26
45 b 26-36
89 c 36-46
175 d 46-56
14 d' 46-56
259 e 57-66
98 f 66-76
122 g 78-88
23 h 86-96
196 i 96-106
21 j 106-116
33 k 116-126
13 I 126-136
1,206 .l above
1,255 total- with optl
Total fl prties
Dadeland 1,730
West 1,106
East -1,255
total -with optl
total -with optl
AdJ Sq Ft
122,023
505,656
538,019
163,032
135,598
411,448
1,162,416
4,555,411
1,066,884
2,533,060
1,455,400
328,413
104,445
322,777
13,282,559
13,404,582
AdJ Sq Ft
395,204
468,389
514,511
352;192
472,020
47,921
1,425,739
1,757,825
1,878,164
516,340
660,124
401,699
551,775
517,320
9,564,019
9,959,223
Adj Sq Ft
13,404,582
9,959,223
Land Value
12,978,780
26,812,968
23,992,066
72,688,020
35,702,734
38,493,510
50,195,938
118,371,353
78,259,882
57,525,060
66,649,510
22,569,132
10,975,862
22,729,183
624,965,218
637,943,998
Land Value
21,393,737
48,206,038
73,100,007
57,219,860
36,126,784
7,822,717
100,688,124
229,502,100
299,507,454
79,399,934
81,568,397
58,510,480
89,149,900
81,138,049
1,241,939,844
1,263,333,581
Land Value
637,943,998
1,263,333,581
Bldg Value
sum Market v
13,441,935 26,420,715
27,426,144
27,230,676
6,556,191
7,616,392
30,070,002
70,231,925
123,369,756
49,461,447
30,571,005
50,881,298
8,563,183
5,621,235
16,437,273
454,036,527
56,188,017
51,222,742
79,244,211
45,744,776
68,563,512
194,332,949
553,541,109
127,721,329
385,096,065
145,889,438
40,706,555
16,597,097
38,663,800
1,803,511,600
467,478,462 1,829,932,315
Bldg Value
sum Market v
19,893,141 41,749,688
31,960,019
21,270,197
18,174,221
21,751,656
5,690,738
76,432,895
57,371,638
91,947,705
23,202,218
34,767,012
20,926,779
28,881,863
18,102,119
450,479,060
80,166,057
94,725,649
75,394,081
86,839,120
13,513,455
229,896,429
370,773,738
391,455,159
102,602,152
137,459,739
79,437,259
121,535,388
99,240,168
1,883,038,394
470,372,201 1,924,788,082
Bldg Value
467,478,462
470,372,201
sum Market v
276,551,566
1,829,932,315
1,924,788,082
SUM:
4,091
4,031,271,963
Source & Method: The power line route was traced on Miami -Dade County Appraiser's File, and all Properties were listed,
as in Appendix Table 3.1. These were then summed and presented in this Table.
! Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 4.1
Review of Survey Results: Power Line Effect on Property Prices
Study authors
Survey Flndtnos
Yr Citati Profession . Client • % loss neutral aver. . Comments
2 3 4 5 8 7 8
9
% reoortina single line
toss eutral gain aver Geography feature
10 11 12 13 14 8 15
1 Ball 1989 1989 9 Appraisers
less than 5 devel residential
more than 12 20.3 com., ind.from easemt
44 value In easemt area
2 Jensen & Weber
3 NJersev
4 Van Court
5 Jensen
6 Early & Early
7 Mitchell
8 Boyer
1982 9 Appraisers Utility 0-20 10
1989 9 Appraisers Utility 0-10 5
1988 9 Appraisers Pub Sery Co 3 3
1980 9 Appraisers Utility
1988 9 Appraisers Utility no effect 0
1976 9 Perception Academic
1978 9 Perception Academic
9 Real Est Counselg Or 1984 9 Perception n.g.
10 Market Trends 1988 9 Utility
11 Rhodeside 1988 9 Perception Utility
12 Ec Consulting NW 1990 9 Utility
13 PdesUy - 1990 9 Utility
14 Kung & Seagle 1992 11 Academic
10-20
Ariz 69-230
W.Central Minn 230-400
NJ 230
Colo 230
15 W.Central Minn 230,315500
NC 230
33 on line;94 nearby .S. Ontari
74-79 7863.55 S. Ontaroo
lower price;
Restate professionals: 86-90 BB hard to NY metr
finance; sold
slowly.
Purchasers 2646 36 affected value
2818T
53 53 Phoenix, AZ var
230
230,500
27 57. . 16 27 Va.. WashgtnDC var
50 50 W. Montana . •
65 . 30 . 5 65 No. Calif . 115-230
'"if they had
72 Memphis, Tenn
known
345
15 Delaney & Timmons 1992 10
16 Bond 1998 4
17 Jones. JC, Texas ABM 1999 4
Academic US ever. 7.8-15.5 11.7
SE US: 10.7
Academic
10 said 50% respondents
5-10 10 said 46% respond.
10-15 said 31 % respond.
7.8 7.6 wll 200 yds.
4.1 . by appraisers, sellers
USA
Australia
St. Cloud. MN
St. Louis
18 Devel Strategies
19 Gimmy
20 Lower Colorado
21 Pitts 8 Jackson
1995 8
1994 8
1997 8
2007 3
RE consult
18-53.8
5-10
0-5
2-7
35.9
7.5 on all lands
3.5. U view
If adjacent
50
no effect
Calif.
110
Georgetown, TX
Central Calif.
138
22 Sims & Dent
23 Rikon, Mich.
2005 19
1996 8
Law journal: Crisula Case:
5-10 9 appraisers, agents
5-15 appraisers
'fear Is as Important es actual data.'
•
neu: gain
loss
24 Averages of ell entries:
sum: 123.5
-_-�
Sum: 137
21
622.5
25
0 cases: 12.0
0 cases: 3
2
11
26
Aver. 10.3
Aver. 45.7
10.5
56.6
Notes:
' See citations at end o1 chapter.
n.g.s 'not given-
7
8
12
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
0
0
•
Table 4.2
Review of Statistical (Regression Analysis) Studies of Power Line Effect on Property Prleea
Study unholy
Yr CRatron• Client
1 1
Ail Studies
% lose
Pear Review Ord.
close distant
6 e
% Aver.
loss yes or no?
7 a
%loss
All
Non- peer
R.N.., Sponsor
% Iona
Acid named a0
0 11 tl
Arad
Non-acedl
Hybrid 7 where pubfsMd7
is
1.
profeselon
is
lieognphy
1e
One (satiny
re
1 Colwell 6 Foley 79 13 Aced a nay
2 Cobalt 90 18 Arad.
3 Kennard 6 Mitchell 98 9 NY PowerAuth
4 Kinnard 88 9 UMW co,
5 Kinnard. Mitd,e8 Webb 89 9 NY PawwAulh
6 Palk Consulting 91 4 My co.
7 Un. Quebec 82 9 Acad.
8 Kinard & Okkev 95 21 Aced 6 consdtent
9 Hannon a Carruthers 93 13 And •
10 lgnem & Pdes5 91 13
11 klnnrd various 67 13
84
96
97
12 Memnon 6 Saloon 95 13 Aced.
13 Cowan & Behe1Re9 98 8 Acad.
14 Oa R.ssiers 02 17 Pad.
15 Wolverton 6 6ottemele7 03
16 Olean" 8 Voorvaan 09
17 Jackson A Pitts 10
18 Carman & Hrgre9vea 95
19 Sinn & pent
20
21
22
18 no,
22 Wally co.
14
13 meters 10
30
50
8.8 3.6 5.7 v
25.0 y
0,0 n
0.0 n
0.0 n
5.0 n
17.0 n
5.2 v
5.0 n
1-9 4.5 n
3
2 1.8 n
0.3
9.10
5.22
2.9
27.3
9.1
5.4
05 19 send -death 13.8
detach: 9.7
rear view: 7.1
front view 14A
6.3
5.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
13.9
All':
v
v
Y
5.7
25.0 25.0
5.2
4,3 • 9.3
10.0 10.0
0.0
0.0
13.9 13.9
5,7
5.2
0.0
0,0
H
A
OA H
0A H
0.0 H
5.0 N
17.0 A
H_
5.0 A
4,5 N
AppelaL59nnol (prigssso.l
JOur of Real Est Research (AMON= RE Soc ARESI
Cued nowt Red Est Corona Oran of Ct
Coed report. Rae Est Coadm, raw of Ct
Client report Red Est Cam4e9, hoop of p.,
a5ent repat9R Calt_Edlsln
dka draO0Mec
Rea1_Estate ham lour of Coraserot litElt.
U-Sr-Columbia_ReponfAcethethic.Maim, lavla9Ndl
corutreard.Padfk CormA&m Senna
1.8 N Client apart
A
5.0 N
A
N
14
A
Jowl Ecaromip
Rind of Way Ma9adne. Trade banal for Int. Right of Way
Assoc,
J. R. E.L Res.IARES)
Appahpl J.
Appeal J.
J. R. Fst1R.
J. Prof. Res.(d1M NZmtend Vyluara JaonuL We manger)
11.3 Y 11.3 11.3 A Urban Studies
sure: 115.7
d asap: 18
Average: 6.4
Peer Non- A0 non.
A0 Par. Peer Azad: aced: peer
77.4
9
0.8
68.5
13.3
10.9
4
17
35.3
9
4.3
Surer: N.naad par • non -peer
492
(tarn sadin
13
•
3.6
P rofessor • broker fer Malty
P roleup
Protean, • Cmmdte t
Prorssor I Consultant
Professor • Considtse
COnsu5ant
Pr0195or •
_e ereaa • Cemufent
Profor as
Corte
Client reports
Deetur.10
N, Resident.
NYState
tea
NYStets
CA
Quebec
CA
V .09800r
Alarm CA
Hartford, CT
Oreyte ON. NY
138
135
345
345
345
115230
735
no.
aA
red horded Vancano sub 230 500
e ordultsnt dtont Bonneville Power
Adndnhha*on Reiland. Oros
aced funded Montreal
a-aulh kr Wel appal= for 9onareMe Poland. Van..
Pwofldlir¢ty Manned Seattle
spetsered N.En1Ia4SL5t 0estlYrorol, rut. orb Cl MA
rp)naw data - Lit review
Professors
Professors
(Scouand noes)
All non -peer wfo Quebec
21.3
(m 111
8
L7
is
Me es,
10
11
le
Wadnplon, NZ
Non -par (We
Quebec) • non-
acedamtc
3L2
(ae1(seers)
12
L7
110
275
is
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
- Statistical analysis of literature
�� percent value loss
Study type Author Journal type n Mean SD
Survey
Realtor
all
12
10.29%
9.57%
Regression
All
all
18
6.43%
6.81%
Regression
All
peer -review
9
8.60%
7.74%
Regression
All
non -peer -review
9
4.26%
5.30%
Regression
Academic
all
7
12.64%
6.90%
Regression
Industry
all
6
2.72%
2.42%
Regression
Hybrid
all
5
2.18%
2.99%
Regression
.Academic
peer -review
5
13.30%
7.09%
Regression
Industry
peer -review
4
2.73%
3.15%
Statistic Author Journal Type t p
T test
Academic vs.
Industry
Peer -reviewed
2.99
0.013
T-test
Academic vs.
Industry
All
3.59
0.004
T-test
All
Peer -reviewed vs.
. non -peer -reviewed
1.39
0.093
T-test
All
Peer -reviewed vs.
non -peer -reviewed
(removed outlier)
2.18
0.027
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DL2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 5.1
Summary: Property Adjacent to the Power Lines
Total # properties Adj Sq Ft Land Value $ Bldg Value $ Sum Market Value $
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Dadeland 1,730
2 West (w/ opt 1) 1,106
3 East (w/opt 1) 1,255
4 Total: 4,091
13,404,582 637,943,998 467,478,462
9,959,223 1,263,333,581 470,372,201
276,551,566
1,829,932,315
1,924,788,082
4,031,271,963
A. Loss in Property Value % loss rate: $ value lost:
1. Lower boundary, all studies 0.05 201,563,598
2. Aver. Montreal urban, 2002 0.10 403,127,196
3. Upper boundary,.2002 0.20 806,254,393
4. Un. Quebec (1982) 0.34 $1,370,632,467
B. Loss in Property Taxes per year*
1. Lower boundary, all studies 0.05 4,634,370
2. Aver. Montreal urban, 2002 0.10 9,268,741
3. Upper boundary, 2002 0.20 18,537,482
4. Un. Quebec (1982) 0.34 $31,513,719
(*Miami -Dade millage rate: 22.9921)
Source: Sum of individual property records, Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser Office, on line.
Submitted into the public
' record in connection with
items D1.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 5.2
Employment Impacts of 5, 10, 20, and 34% Loss of Property Value: IMPLAN Model
Various Sectors, Single Year Only
Model
Total Jobs Lost: Direct., Indirect and Induced
at 5% loss at 10% : at 20% al 34%
1
2 3 4
IMPLAN Sector Nos.
6
A Basic loss of real estate value & 2,191 4,382 8,764 14,899 360, 437
government spending
1 Money, real estate, hospital, drink & dining, 2,349 4,698 9,396 15,973 397, 413,354,360,133
retail, pharmaceutical mfg.
2 real estate, air travel, private colleges, 2,585 5,170 10,340 17,576 392, 329, 360, 332, 359
retailing
3 Boat building, performg arts, scientific 2,979 5,958 11,916 20,257 402, 376, 135, 291, 383
research, blot prep, travel agencies
4 Museums, family care services, private 3 392 6,784 13,568 23,066 406, 400, 397, 330, 32/25, 395,394
hospitals, retail, home care, office physicians
5 Fitness centers, food, drinking, surgical 3 327 6,654 13,308 22,624 407, 413, 305, 319, 113
Instruments, wholesale, printing
Private education, real estate, nursingg
6 facilities, food services, Jewelry 4,020 8,040 16,080 27,336 391, 413, 398, 310, 360
manufacturing
total 20,843 41,686 63,372 141,732
Source: Computations using IMPLAN Model with Mlaml-Dade County Data
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 5.3 REMI Model: Job Loss over Time: Different Scenarios and Time Periods
Model or Sector of Impact:
Jobs Lost per Year
No. yrs: 1 ... 5 ... 10
20 30
% value
loss Year: 2011 2015 2020 ... 2030 ... 2040
A General Reduction
5% 1,895 1,528 ... 1,066 ... 639 ... 419
10% 3,790 3,056 2,132 1,278 838
20% 7,580 6,112 4,264 2,556 1,676
34% 12,886 10,390 7,249 4,345 2,849
B Sector Impacts on Economy:
1 Real Estate, only
2 Business Services, only
3 Nursing, only
5% 1,293 1,071
10% 2,586 2,142
20% 5,172 4,284
34% 8,792 7,283
5% 3,768 2,954
10% 7,536 5,908
20% 15,072 11,816
34% 25,622 20,087
5% 5,340 4,119
10% 10,680 8,238
20% 21,360 16,476
34% 36,312 28,009
Source: REMI Model for Miami -Dade County, with 2008 Data Base, run In Dec. 2010.
See accompanying graphs
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
pgas : • q Q 42° '9
e�¢o °
*4 0eg 9�- . +'r. .
Of ,..
a° e a a o , Pose^
ole°� t° P y,q •
B °4. ° ` ° m ,,,A. 4° 7 d oe
Pros, 0 ," a ° 0' 4°6 q'8gy efi 8- 14•op 66
8 m -0,ro Al, v 647.X. �lo OE Pa`a ..
° Pper
°P'SbP ms °
v.p.9 e n
V °NPR
•
°2p ° ° n;o p
* ¢ Ra°'Oo ag mtmw
'C L
�•_ Elilli!ri� 1_
r1,1=i;
11tiamg i
®fie°� 'b
8
d'at.;
x
° m� yam
'P418
7'
a °. • m �m ad7o = ° Tk
� t
°
Planning Document 0
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
THE S O U T H_ DADE WATERSHED PROJECT
Center for Urban and Community Design, University of Miami, School of Architecture / South Florida Water Management District
•
37877870
.;„ •3309
31162:
1„..4 :A rx,
43136
u
•
.0
c
0. c
a, o
.*0
0 c
C C
u
cu c
E
u
LEGEND
Inland and Coastal Water
Major Streets and Highways
F?L. C.rlS
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
ZIP CODE BOUNDARY
sim
1'33172
• :33174.as-
117 ISEN S
33033
sw sum
E
sw 370117
MW 202/40 DT
33015
33014 5
=
• 33165
67 33144 •
• S. 051
ww sm. ST
1
74* MIN ST NE MITT SI NE 211TN 81
31169
33 167. ry
1411111r,ty,
N ST 33125
Cor
0. a)
E
9 0
_c
I—
C eri
0 co
E
61
w
MIAMI-DAD
COM
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
RESEARCH SECTION
06/18/02 TUE 13:25 FAX 3053752�80
1
Population Projeuioas by Minor SLaustical Arca
DADE PLAN DEV REG 12 FL 110
a
war
3
Niii+i111I� Iil
JINall
WORM, OSA
MINOR STATISTICAL
AREAS
t FfL— Co4-r1L!!of,
J001
N
7005 URBAN DEVELCPMINT BOUNDARY
.....ma.. 2015 URBAN EXPANSION AREA BOUNDARY.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
•
•
Tamlami Trail
Notes:
1) Zonas A and B aro lot the putposo
of mooting o general guldo for o higbel
density. baneti oriented. dovotopmeM
pattern. II la not the Intent to aeolo
rigid logulatory boundorles of that the
avelego densities plosodbod w it be
achieved Ihtougltcltl the (intlfo zone.
2) Zeno C Is o general oroo that should
be utilized to improve valet WAY
tolotnewter Irootment). loslo/o
wetlands. and facilitate other programs
such oa CERP.
4nm nfnn,
Legend
0 Existing Urban Canton
Maio. Development Hodes
--- IAnlol Roadway
.••• &dating Mon Development Boundary
•••• Existing Winn Evpansoll Alto
.o Holmium] Esporeron
O Creneltea
Hummel***
QEmployment Centers
CLiZone A-1/4mite I.1s4Ye[ z. evm w;
n Zone B. 1R mde r GaAs oam Ain
iklijg Znoe C. 61Aa. RestaNgn Open Space
WMerldedStudy Area
[3] Population and Labor
Supply
Population M
Minration MIG
Figure 5.1 The Blocks of the REMI Model and Some Connections
='.+,:.''*F1�a`o-•,'ateu.�3-- •k'dS:cL�%::e§Y.°¢mYcuS.3'
[I] OUTPUT BLOCK
Optimal Capital Stock
Employment Opportunity Wage Rate
Housing Price
Consumer Price Deflator
Source: Excerpted from Treys, Regional Economic Modeling, Kluwer, 1993, p. 291.
[2] Capital
& Labor
Demand
Stats—niGnUMMik..,•7 Weans.,
Labor/Ou.. ut Ratio
[4] Wage, Price, Profit
Production
Costs
Real Wage
Rate
Profitability
Industry Sales Price
Share of Local
Market
Share of
External
Market
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
items DI.2 on 06-09-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
0
0