The URL can be used to link to this page

Ord No 22-14-2200ORDINANCE NO.22-14-2200 An Ordinance relating to the fee schedule;amending ordinance 04-11-2077 to change thetitleto "Schedule of Fees and Fines"and to increase some fees, adding new fees,and deleting some feesfrom the schedule. WHEREAS,the Mayor and City Commission desires to adopt a new Fee Schedule allowing funding which will cover thecostof services provided;and, WHEREAS,the Mayor and City Commission desire to revise the adopted Fee Schedule allowing funding which will cover the cost of services provided;and, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THECITYOFSOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA: Section 1.That Ordinance 04-11-2077 is hereby amended so as to change the title ofthe City's Fee Schedule and to increase some fees,adding new fees,and deleting some fees from the schedule allas set forth on the attached. Section 2.Any such fees may be waived or reduced by the Mayor and City Commission by way of resolution. Section 3.Severability.If any section,clause,sentence,or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,this holding shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions ofthis ordinance. Section 4.Ordinances in Conflict.All ordinances orpartsof ordinances and all sections and parts of sections of ordinances in direct conflict herewith are hereby repealed.However,it is not the intent ofthis section to repeal entire ordinances,or parts of ordinances,that give the appearance of being in conflict when the two ordinances can be harmonized or when only a portion ofthe ordinance in conflict needs tobe repealed to harmonize the ordinances.If the ordinance in conflict can be harmonized by amending its terms,it is hereby amended to harmonize the two ordinances.Therefore,only that portion that needs to be repealed to harmonize thetwo ordinances shall be repealed. Section 5.Effective Date.This ordinance shall become effective upon enactment. PASSED AND ENACTED this 16th day of September ,2014. ATTEST:APPROVED: 0* CITY Ct£RK 1st Reading -9/2/14 2nd Reading-9/16/14 Page 1 of 2 Ord.No.22-14-2200 READ AND APPRQX/ED ASTOFORM: UNGUA5&+eGALITY AN! (THEREOF COMMISSION VOTE:4-1 Mayor Stoddard:Yea Vice Mayor Harris:Yea Commissioner Welsh:Yea Commissioner Liebman:Yea Commissioner Edmond:Nay Page 2 of 2 South1 Miami THE CITY OF PLEASANT LIVING CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To:The Honorable Mayor &Members of the City Commission From:Steven Alexander,City Manager Date:September 16,2014 REVISED SCHEDULE OF FEES &FINES 13 An Ordinance relating to the fee schedule;amending ordinance 04-11-2077 to change the title to "Schedule of Fees and Fines"and to increase some fees,adding new fees,and deleting some fees from the schedule. At the September 2,2014,CityCommission Meeting,Commissioners reviewed the proposed revisions to the City's "Schedule ofFeesandFines."TheCity administration has recommended revisions as below. The items being revised have been bolded and the font size increased for your benefit;inan effort for the revisions to be easily identifiable. Building Permit Fees Schedule Schedule D -Electrical Permit Fees TheCityis recommending a revision to Section D,"Electrical Permit Fees"to include a new fee forPhotovoltaicInstallations.TheChangeincorporates the permittingfeerequiredforthe individualsor businesses that are interested ininstallingsolarpanels.Other amounts wereleft the same and shown for the purpose ofuniformity. Planning and Zoning Fee Schedule Outdoor Seating Beginning in FY 2009,all businesseswithoutdoorseatingon public propertywerecharged$25 perseat.Thisfeeaswasscheduledtoincreaseby$10per seat peryear,at the start ofeach fiscal year,capping the charge amount at$65.As of FY 2013,allbusinesseswith outdoor seatingonpublic property werebeingassessedarateof$65perseat. Parks &Recreation Fees Schedule Multiple sections within the Parks and Recreation Fee Schedule havebeen revised inaneffort to provide fees which aremore in-line with local standards,and help offsetthe costs associated with the programs and facilities. In addition,many ofthe changes are being proposed with the intent to facilitate opportunities for City residentsatratesandschedulesmore advantageous thanfornon residents. Pavilion Rentals The City's Parks and Recreation Department conducted an evaluation for pavilion rental fees. The average price charged by the City of Miami Gardens,City of Miami Beach,City of Dora!, Town of Cutler Bay,City of Miami Springs,Village of Biscayne Park,Historic Virginia Key Beach Park and City of Homestead is $34.07 per hour.The median price charged by the aforementioned citiesis$37.50perhour. Cjty PerHour Rules City of Miami Gardens $18.00/hr.$108.00for6-hours CityofMiamiBeach $31.25/hr. CityofDoral $16.67/hr.$100.00for6-hours TownofCutler Bay $40.00/hr.$120.00for3-hours CityofMiamiSprings $50.00/hr. Village ofBiscaynePark $40.00/hr Historic Virginia Key Beach Park $41.67/hr.$250.00 (all day) Cityof Homestead $35.00/hr. Average $34.07 Median $37.50 TheCityofSouthMiamiis currently charging$120per DAY,or$20 over a 6-hour rental time period.The Cityis proposing an HOURLY rate for residents of $35.Basedon the evaluation of the abovefees,thecitybelieves that theproposedfee structure for pavilion rentalsisnotonly competitive compared to other cities,butalso reasonable forcity residents and will helpoffset operating costs associated with maintaining the pavilions Athletic Field Rentals (Palmer Park) The City'sParks and Recreation Department conducted an evaluation for athletic field rental fees.The average price charged by the CityofMiamiBeach,Cityof Doral,Town of Cutler Bay, CityofMiamiSprings,TownofMiamiLakesand Miami-Dade TropicalParkis $47.78 per hour without fieldlightsand $69.03 withfieldlights.The median price charged by the aforementioned citiesis $35.00 perhour without fieldlightsand$47.50withlights. City/County Without Lights With Lights Difference w/Lights City of Miami Beach $87.50/hr.$150/hr.$62.50 City of Doral $40/hr.$50/hr.$10.00 Town of Cutler Bay $30/hr.$40/hr.$10.00 City of Miami Springs $30/hr.$40/hr.$10.00 Town of Miami Lakes $20/hr.$45/hr.$25.00 Miami-Dade Tropical Park $79.18/hr.$89.18/hr.$10.00 Average $47.78/hr.$69.03/hr.$21.25 Median $35.00/hr.$47.50/hr.$12.50 Based ontheinformationabove,thecityis proposing toincreasethefeechargedfor lights at PalmerParkfrom$36.00 to$40.00perhour.This change represents a$10differencefrom$30 without lights to $40.00 with lights for residents and$14 difference from $36without lights to $50 with lights for non residents.The city believes thatthe proposed fee structure is not only competitivecomparedto other local cities,butalsoreasonableforcityresidentsand will help offsetoperatingcostsassociatedwith maintaining the ball fields and lights. Sports TheCity'sParksand Recreation Department conducted an evaluation foritstacklefootballand cheerleading program.Theaverage price charged bythe City of Doral,City of Miami Gardens and City of Homestead is $134.00 for tackle football and $118.00 for cheerleading. fity Football Cheerleading City ofDoral(Miami Xtreme League)$180.00 $180.00 CityofMiami Gardens $100.00$100.00 Cityof Homestead (FedEx Orange Bowl)$120.00$75.00 Average $134.00 $118.00 The City of South Miami is currently charging $72.30 for tackle football and cheerleading.Said fees are well below the local average.The city is proposing afee schedule starting at $80.00 for bothtacklefootballand cheerleading.Thecity believes theincreaseof$7.70isreasonablefor city residents and will help offset operating cost associated with maintaining the football and cheerleading equipment. Marshall Williamson Park Meeting Room The City recently completed the construction ofthe Marshall Williamson Restroom and Meeting Room.The facility isabeautifulstructure,surroundedwithabeautifulnew playground and tennis courts,which may be rented tothe Community for special events or meetings.The newly recommendedfeesare located onpage33onthescheduleoffeesand fines. Brewer Park Outdoor Basketball Half Court Rental Brewer Park is located in a quiet neighborhood and is considered semi active /passive in nature.After further consideration,it is recommended thatnofee shall be charged to reseve thecourtsat Brewer Park.The basketball half court is meanttoservethe local youth who live around it. Dante Fascell Park Outdoor Basketball Half Court Rental Dante Fascell Parkisanactivepark.The basketball halfcourtisrarelyusedandislocatednear the softball field;therefore,itisrecommendedthatnofeebechargedtoreservethecourt.This courtshouldbeusedby local youthwhensoftballplayisnotinprogress. After School Programs &Camps TheAfter School Program and Camps scheduleoffeeswereinadvertently included inthe proposedchangesfor fiscal year2015.Atthistime,thecitydoesnotwishtomakeanychanges to the current feesfor fiscal year2015.Thecityshallcharge the exactsamefeesitdidfrom fiscal year 2014 and before. Currently,the AfterSchoolProgramhasatotalof88participants.Theprogramismadeupof 83 participants whichare youth residents of the City ofSouthMiamiorwhichhaveanzipcode of33143;fiveof the current participantswhichhaveguardianswhichresideinthe City ofSouth Miami,fora total of88 participants which are paying the resident rate;and two childrenwhich are non-residents and are paying $40 a week. ATTACHMENTS:REVISED PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR 2015 SCHEDULE of FEES and FINES AS OF SEPTEMBER 16,2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Parking Division Collections Central Services Planning &Zoning Public Works &Utilities Code Enforcement Building Permits Building -Plumbing &Permits Building -Mechanical Permits Building -Electrical Permits Building -Cert,of Use,Completion &Occupancv Building -Other Building -Refunds City Clerk Police Department Parks &Recreation -Sports Parks &Recreation -Rentals Parks &Recreation -After School House &Camps Parks &Recreation -Fitness Center Parks &Recreation-Community Pool Special Events Page 1 of 1 PARKING DIVISION FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee Hourly Meter Parking Rate $|.50 Library,2-hour limit,hourly $|.00 Meter Rental Fee Daily $25.00 Valet Parking Daily $25.00 Parking Permits per Month (Plus Sales Tax)$65.00 Residential Parking Decal Annually (maximum of2)$20.00 Residential Paking Visitor Annually (Maximum of I)$40.00 Page 1 of 1 COLLECTIONS FEE SCHEDULE Description CODE Fee Local Business Tax RESIDENTIAL USE (Apartments only) up to 5Units 6 to 50 Units 51 to 100 Units 101 to 200 Units 201 to More Units PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL Up to 1,000 SQFT 1,001 to 3,000 SQ FT 3,001 to 10,000 SQ FT 10,001 SQFT&Over BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL 1 Employee 2 to 9Employees 10 to 24Employees 25 or more RETAIL AND WHOLESALE TRADE up to 1,000 SQFT 1.000 to 2,000 SQ FT 2.001 to 5,000 SQ FT 5,001 to 15,000 SQ FT 15,000 SQFT&Over TRANSPORTATION,WAREHOUSING & COMMUNICATIONS Minimum Rate 10 to25Employees 26 or MoreEmployees$ 7,500 to 20,000 SQ FTan Additional 20,001 SQ FT and Over an Additional Page 1 of 2 100 $91.16 101 $158.03 102 $243.11 103 $303.88 104 $364.65 201 $121.55 202 $181.81 203 $243.11 204 $291.72 301 $158.03 302 $243.11 303 $335.02 304 $425.43 401 $158.03 402 $243.11 403 $425.43 404 $607.00 405 $911.00 501 $243.11 502 $273.48 503 $303.88 504 $30.70 505 $60.78 COLLECTIONS FEE SCHEDULE Description CODE MANUFACTURING &INTENSIVE USES Minimum Rate 7,500 to 15,000 15,001 to 25,000 SQFT 25,001 to SQ FTand Over LIEN SEARCHES 24Hours (only single family residences) 48 Hours 72 Hours 5Days BURGLAR ALARM FEE Alarmregistrationfee,residential,onetime Alarm registration fee,commercial,annually Alarmnon-registrationfeeperoccurance First false alarm Second false alarm Third false alarm Fourth false alarm Fifth and each additional occurrence OTHER FEES Coin Operating Machine GarageSale,2-day permit Credit CardProcessingConvenienceFee(PerTransaction) Cost per Check Issued,Companiesonly Page 2 of 2 Fee $273.48 $303.88 $334.27 $364.65 $250.00 $135.00 $105.00 $105.00 $50 $100 $75 no charge $50 $100 $150 $200 $36.47 $20.00 $3.00 $2.00 CENTRAL SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee BACKGROUND CHECK per application $15 SPECIAL EVENTS Admin,processing fee $100 Non-Refundable ApplicationFee $60 Deposit (refundable)$500 Expeditefee(3businessdays)$60 Farmers Market Onprivate property,requiringno street closure $25 Onpublicproperty,requiring street closurewithnopoliceservices $75 PROFESSIONAL PHOTOS &FILMING Still PhotoFeeperday (8:30 amto5:30 pm)$1,500 Filming Feeperday(8:30amto5:30pm)$8,000 NOTARY First Page $10 Each additional page $2 CityDocument $5 LAMINATING persheet $2 PHOTOCOPIES Black &White,per page single-sided $0.15 Black &White,per page double-sided $0.30 Color,per page one-sided $0.50 Color,per page double-sided $I Page 1 of 1 PLANNING AND ZONING FEE SCHEDULE Description 2014 ERPB APPLICATIONS RS AND RT ZONING DISTRICTS New construction,per dwelling unit $750 ALL OTHER ZONING DISTRICT New construction $900 Renovation $450 SIGNS First sign $225 Each additional sign $50 Revisions,fences,walls,etc.$225 Each additional appearance before the Board $150 Appeal ERPB decision $100 REZONING Tenacresorlessperlot $6,000 Overtenacresperlot $20,250 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Each application $3,000 Each extensionrequest $500 SPECIAL USE APPLICATIONS Eachapplication $3,000 Eachextension request $500 VARIANCES Firstvariance request $3,000 Eachadditionalvariance request $1,125 Each extension request $500 Page 1of4 PLANNING AND ZONING FEE SCHEDULE Description 2014 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PUDMajorchange $5,250 PUDMinorchange $1,500 PLAT APPLICATION Tentative plat $5,000 Finalplat $4,000 Waiver ofplat $4,500 LDC AMENDMENT (Text Amendments) I.Generalstandards,miscellaneous provisions $3,000 II.Changepermitteduseschedule $6,000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Eachapplication $30,000 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) Applicationfee,plus $25,000 Residential,persquarefootofgrossfloorarea $0,075 Non-residential,persq.ft.ofgrossfloorarea $0.10 Mixed-Use,persquarefootofgrossfloorarea $0.10 DRI SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE Persquarefootofgrossfloorareaofchange $0,075 DRI EXEMPTION SENATE BILL 360 Perrequest,plus $25,000 Residential,per square footof gross floor area $0,075 Non-residential,per sq.ft.of gross floor area $0.10 Mixed-Use,per square footof gross floor area $0.10 TEMPORARY SIGNS &BANNERS Temporary signage,per sign (maximum 30-days)$75 Banner over public street (maximum 14-days)$300 Banner per pole (minimum $300)(per 30-days)$30 Page 2of4 PLANNING AND ZONING FEE SCHEDULE Description 2014 MD COUNTY SIGN APPLICATION persign $100 NEWSRACK APPLICATION FEE per newsrack $50 OUTDOOR SEATING Seating/Dining onPublic Right-of-Way Each outdoor seat annually $65 Each stand-alone table top without seating used for consumption of beverages or food,annually * Seating/Dining on Private Property Annual permit for all outdoor dining/seating $250 OUTDOOR DISPLAY OF RETAIL MERCHANDISE Annual permit foroutdoor display of retail merchandise $250 PERMANENT GENERATOR Eachapplication $100 TEMPORARY STORAGE UNIT (PODS) Residential (max.size 8'x 16',per 14 dayperiod)$50 Non-residential (max.8'x 32',per30dayperiod)$150 Ifassociatedwitha building permit Nofee TREE REMOVAL PERMIT Firsttreetobe removed $75 Each additional tree to be removed 35 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE 1 AdministrativePerSe $100 2AdministrativePerSe $200 3 Administrative Per Se $500 1 Consumption onPremises $250 2 Consumption onPremises $250 4 thru 8 Consumption onPremises $750 4 Consumption onPremises-SRX $1,000 Page 3of4 PLANNING AND ZONING FEE SCHEDULE Description 2014 MICROFILM RESEARCH Per request per any portion ofanhour,onlyif search exceeds 15 minutes of administrative time.$19 VACATE STREET,ALLEY,EASEMENT or OTHER PUBLIC PER REQUEST COVENANTS,EASEMENTS OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS PER REQUEST $3,000 $5,000 MODIFICATION /RELEASE OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS,$500 EASEMENTS OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS PER REQUEST REQUEST OR RELEASE OF UNITY OF TITLE EACH APPLICATION $1,500 PHOTOCOPIES AND PUBLICATIONS Official zoning mapincolor $15 Small official city map $5 Future land usemapincolor $15 Custom GIS map,eachcopy $15 Land Development Code $75 Comprehensive Plan $50 Hometown Regulations $5 Census data packet $3 Black &White copy,single-sided $0.15 Black &White copy,double-sided $0.30 DVD of recorded meetings $|q Printed and Bound copy ofthe City budget book $25 LETTERS Condominium conversion letter $|qqq Flood zoneletter $100 Zoningandlanduse verification letter $100 Page 4of4 PUBLIC WORKS &UTILITIES FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee PERMIT FEES Minimum permit fee $150 Permit extension fee,for 60 day period $150 DRAWINGS Revisions to approved drawings,per sheet $25 Shop drawing review $|qo INSPECTIONS Reinspection,per request $65 Afterhour Inspection $300 CHANGE OF CONTRACTOR Percentageof original permitfee 30% Minimum $55 Maximum $250 WORK WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS AND/OR INSPECTIONS After the fact permit fee:For any work performed without proper permits and/or inspections Permit fees quadrupled Minimum,perday $1,000 SANITARY SEWER,WATERLINE,GAS LINE,AND OTHER UNDERGROUND UTILITIES 0to 100 linearfeet $125 Each additional 100 linearfeet or fraction $50 WORK ON DRAINAGE SYSTEMS Oto 100 linearfeet $85 Each additional 100 linearfeet or fraction $50 POLES,DOWN GUY,ANCHOR,SPLICE PIT,MANHOLE OR FIRE HYDRANTS Installation or removal,eachunit $40 Page 1 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS &UTILITIES FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee SIDEWALK,CURB AND GUTTER Perevery 100 linearfeet or fraction $65 for additional -50 ft N/A DRIVEWAY Per approach N/A PAVING 0-30 square yards $200 Additional 100 squareyards or fraction $40 STRIPING OF ROADWAY per 100 linearfeet or fractionofroadway $100 STREET NAME OR DIRECTIONAL SIGNS Per sign installation $15 BRIDGES 0-1000 squarefeet $1,140 Each additional 100 squarefeetor fraction $230 PERMANENT TRAFFIC BARRICADE,GUARDRAIL AND GUIDEPOSTS Each 100 linear feetor fraction $85 CULVERTS Each linear footof pipe or fraction $10 TRAFFIC SIGNAL,per intersection or location New $1,710 Upgrade or modification $1,114 BUS SHELTERS Each Page 2 of 4 $115 PUBLIC WORKS &UTILITIES FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee EXCAVATIONS FOR UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION 0to250sq.ft $125 Each additional 250 sq.ft.or fraction $50 LANDSCAPING,TREES Each Exisiting single family residential $0 Multi-family owner occupied $0 Commercial $20 New Construction $20 LANDSCAPING,HEDGES For each I00LF. Exisiting single family residential foreach 100 L F.$0 Multi-family owner occupied foreach 100 L F.$0 Commercial foreach 100 L F.$25 NewConstructionforeach 100 L F.$25 LANDSCAPING,GROUND COVER 0 to 250sq.ft. Each additional250sq.ft.or fraction Exisiting single family residentialforeachL F.$0 Multi-family owner occupiedforeachL F.$0 Commercial0 to 250sq.ft.$200 Commercialeachadditional250sq.ft.or fraction $50 New Construction 0 to 250sq.ft.$200 New Construction eachadditional250sq.ft.or fraction $50 TEMPORARY STAGING AREA,CRANE,TRAILER,TRUCK ON THE RIGHT OF WAY Flatfee per dayforfirst5days $200 Every five days or fraction thereof after $300 Page 3 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS &UTILITIES FEE SCHEDULE Description TEMPORARY FULL ROAD AND SIDEWALK CLOSURE No single laneroadwayclosurepermitted.Excludes cityeventsandeventsfundedbythecity. Perlinear.Ft.ofroad,rounded to thenexthigherwholenumberinft.,perday TEMPORARY SIDEWALK CLOSURE PermitrequiresFrench Barricades alongcurbor EOP.For special event8hr.max.,incl.setup time.Excludescity events and events fundedby the city. Each25 square feet or fraction Maximum permit fee MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC (MOT) Intrusioninto and/or using one-way lane Roadwayswith two-way traffic Detour,per direction Sidewalk intrusion,each Landscaping contractor,specialpermitperyear PUBLIC WORKS HOURLY RATE (SPECIAL EVENTS) Non-supervisor Supervisor Public Works Fees &Materials Barricades(up to 100)perday Barricades (101 or more)eachperday Missing BarricadesFee(each) CUSTOM GIS MAP AND/OR DATA MDCHourlyRate-$5AdminFee TRASH COLLECTION Up to 1/2 truck load (12.5 cubic yards),onceperweek Over 1/2 truck load (12.5 cubic yards)or any partthereof Appliances,each Page 4 of 4 Fee $0.25 $75 $10,000 $100 $200 $100 $100 $100 $40 $45 $125 $85 $1 $50 $95 nocharge $156 $50 CODE ENFORCEMENT-FINES SCHEDULE Description Fee Class 1 OVERGROWN LOTS First Offense $200 Second Offense $300 Additional Offenses $500 ILLEGAL SIGNS First Offense $200 Second Offense $300 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER VIOLATIONS OF EQUIVALENT GRAVITY First Offense $200 Second Offense $300 Additional Offenses $500 Class II OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE FirstOffense $200 SecondOffense $400 AdditionalOffenses $500 ABANDONED /JUNK VEHICLES FirstOffense $200 SecondOffense $400 AdditionalOffenses $500 TRASH First Offense $200 SecondOffense $400 Additional Offenses $500 Page 1 of 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT -FINES SCHEDULE Description Fee COMMERCIAL VEHICLES -RS ZONING DISTRICT First Offense $200 Second Offense $400 Additional Offenses $500 GARBAGE First Offense $200 Second Offense $400 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER VIOLATIONS OF EQUIVALENT GRAVITY First Offense $200 Second Offense $400 Additional Offenses $500 Class III OVERGROWN VACANT LOTS First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 NOISE First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 ROW OBSTRUCTIONS First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER VIOLATIONS OF EQUIVALENT GRAVITY First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 Page 2 of 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT -FINES SCHEDULE Description Fee Class IV TRIANGLE OF VISIBILITY First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 VACANT,UNSECURED BUILDING First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER FLORIDA BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 ZONING VIOLATIONS/ILLEGAL UNITS First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 CONSTRUCTION WORK W/O PERMIT First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER VIOLATIONS OF EQUIVALENT GRAVITY First Offense $350 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 Page 3of5 CODE ENFORCEMENT -FINES SCHEDULE Description Fee Class V THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH First Offense $450 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 SAFTEY &WELFARE,Irreparable /Irreversible Violations First Offense $450 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 OTHER VIOLATIONS OF EQUIVALENT GRAVITY First Offense $450 Second Offense $450 Additional Offenses $500 Class VI ILLEGAL DUMPING FirstOffense $500 SecondOffense $|,000 AdditionalOffenses $|,000 OTHER VIOLATIONS NOT CATEGORIZED HATRACKED TREE Feepertree $250.00 GARAGE SALE Courtesy Failure to have permit first notice Second timewithout permit $150 LIEN REDUCTION REQUEST Feeforeachcase $250 NOTICE OF CIVIL INFRACTION LateFee after duedate $25 Page 4 of 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT-FINES SCHEDULE Description Fee NOTICE OF LIEN LETTER LateFeeafterduedate $50 SATISFACTION OF LIENS PreparationFee $25 OUTDOOR SEATING/DINING Without permit,perday $500 Violation of regulations/standards,per day $500 PLACING PORTABLE STORAGE UNITS W/O PERMIT First offense Second offense $250 $500 PORTABLE SIGNS Permitted Signs beexpandedex."OpenHouse"PermitFee $25 PORTABLE ILLEGAL SIGNS RemovalFee $25 RECORDS SEARCH Minimum -Maximum $I-$5 SPECIAL MASTER HEARINGS Court &Amninistrative Fee $100 SPECIAL MASTER ORDERS Re-Inspection Fee $50 SHOPPING CART RETRIVAL FEE Feepershoppingcart $40 Page 5 of 5 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION A-BUILDING PERMIT FEES Description Fee MINIMUM FEES FOR BUILDING PERMITS Residential Permit $100 Commercial Permit $150 NEW CONSTRUCTION -Whichever is the greater amount to the following: 0 to 25,000sq.ft.per sq.ft $0.80 Plusfor 25,001 and over per sq.ft $0.70 or Pereach$100 of construction cost $2.00 NEW CONSTRUCTION,RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS -Whichever is the greater amount to the following: Persq.ft.$0.50 or Pereach$100 of construction cost $3.00 PARKS &RECREATION DEVELOPMENT FEE PER HOUSING UNIT Multifamily PerUnit $113£6 Single,0-3bedrooms,perunit $2,590 Single,4+bedrooms,perunit $3,519 ALTERATIONS,IMPROVEMENTS AND REPAIRS TO BUILDINGS - Whichever is the greater amount to the following: Persq.ft.$0.75 or Pereach$100 of construction cost $3.00 Page 1 of 4 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION A-BUILDING PERMIT FEES GENERAL REPAIRS AND OTHER WORK NOT SPECIFIED ABOVE - Whichever is the greater amount to the following: Persq.ft.$0.20 or Pereach$100 of construction cost $2.00 INSTALLATION,ALTERATION OR REPAIR OF EXTERIOR WINDOW,DOORS AND SHUTTER Each $9 INSTALLATION,ALTERATION OR REPAIR OF CURTAIN WALLS OR STORE FRONTS Per sq.ft $0.25 WOOD DECK,WALKWAY,SCREEN ENCLOSURE,POOL DECK, AWNING,CONCRETE SLAB Per sq.ft $0.20 FENCES,WALLS,A/C SCREENS AND RAILINGS Perlinear foot $0.50 ROOFING Per sq.ft.$0.14 SWIMMING POOLS Each $300 PARKING LOTS AND DRIVEWAYS Per sq.ft.$0.15 PARKING LOT SEAL COATING AND STRIPING Oto 1,000 per sq.ft.$0.15 Each additional 1,000 sq.ft or fraction $10 Page 2of4 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION A-BUILDING PERMIT FEES DEMOLITION 0 to 1,000 sq.ft $0.50 Each additional 1,000 sq.ft.or fraction $15 PAINTING,SANDBLASTING OR STEAM CLEANING Commercial only,each $100 SIGNS Each $75 MOVE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE Per sq.ft $0.20 TEMPORARY BUILDING Per sq.ft.$0.30 TEMPORARY PLATFORMS Each $150 ORNAMENTAL IRON Per sq.ft.$0.10 PILE DRIVING First pile,each $65 Additional pile,each $20 ANY OTHER WORK NOT COVERED Pereach$100 ofconstructioncost $3.00 A/C SCREENS,MASONARY FENCES,RETAINING WALL & RAILING Perlinearfoot $0.30 LANDSCAPING,TREES Each Residential $0 Commercial $20 New Construction „_,A $90Page3of4*zu BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION A-BUILDINGPERMIT FEES LANDSCAPING,HEDGES For each 100 LF. Residential,each 100 LF. Commercial,each 100 LF. NewConstruction,each 100 L.F. LANDSCAPING,GROUND COVER 0to250sq.ft. Each additional 250sq.ft.or fraction Residential,0to250 sq.ft. Residential,each additional 250 sq.ft.or fraction Commercial,0to 250 sq.ft. Commercial,each additional 250 sq.ft.or fraction $50 New Construction,0to 250 sq.ft $200 New Construction,each additional 250 sq.ft.or fraction $50 FOOTING FOR POLES Each REINSPECTION FEE Each Page 4 of 4 $0 $25 $25 $0 $0 $200 $7.50 $50 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION B-PLUMBING PERMIT FEES Description Fee MINIMUM FEES FOR BUILDING PERMITS Residential Permit $100 Commercial Permit $150 SANITARY SEWERS Each connection $100 WATER SERVICE Main service Each $75 Eachfirst sub-meter $40 Each additional sub-meter $8.50 SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM INSIDE PRIVATE PROPERTY Each50ft.or fraction $50 Each manhole $50 Each sewer capping $50 Eachsumppump $100 Repairs $100 STORM SEWER Each roof draininlet $15 Each catch basin or areadrain $50 Each soakagepit,trench or Frenchdrain $25 First0to50L F.or fraction $20 Each additionallinear50ft or fraction $25 StormSewer capping '$30 A/C CONDENSATE DRAIN Perunit,each $30 WATER PIPING First0to50linearfeet $100 Each additional linear foot $lPage1of3* BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION B-PLUMBING PERMIT FEES PLUMBING FIXTURES &ANY OTHER DEVICES INCL SUPPLY Set $10 Rough $10 LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Sub-meters,each $65 Sprinkler heads,each $|.25 Water supply to sprinkler,each $65 Zone valve,each $75 FIRE PROTECTION Jockey pump,each $75 Water supply tofiresprinklersystem $50 Firepump or domestic pump,neworreplacement $100 Each standpipe,Siamese or roof manifold $50 Each hoserack or fire department outlet $25 Each sprinklerhead $|.25 Firehydrant $40 Backflow preventer fireline $60 Fire protection flow test $40 Sump pump,re-circulate,domesticand vacuum pumps $65 INTERCEPTORS AND SEPARATORS Septictanks,settlingtanks0to 150 gallons $75 Each additional 150 gallons orfractionover750 gallons $75 DRAINFIELD RELAY First0 to lOOsq.ft $75 Eachadditional 100 sq.ft.$20 SOAKAGE PIT Each $50 Page 2 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION B-PLUMBING PERMIT FEES SWIMMING POOL Piping $100 Commercial poolsandspas $135 Repairs $65 POOL/SPA HEATER Pool heater,each $65 Spa heater,each $60 WELLS Each $75 TEMPORARY TOILETS Each $40 LIFT STATIONS Each $300 NATURAL GAS OR LIQUIFIED PETROLEUM Each outlet,appliance or meter per$1,000 ofconstr.cost $15 Liquified Pertroleum gas tank,each $100 TEMPORARY WATER CLOSET Each N/A WATER TREATMENT Forfirst$1,000 of construction value $75 Each additional$1,000 ofconstructionvalue $25 MEDICAL GAS INCLUDING VACCUM OUTLET Piping feeforfirst$1,000 ofconstructionvalue $25 Each outlet $|o Page 3 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION C-MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES Description Fee MINIMUM FEE FOR MECHANICAL PERMIT Residential Permit $100 Commercial Permit $150 AIR CONDITIONING AND REFRIGERATION,(I ton =I HP=12,000 BTU) Each unit0to5ton $75 Each additionalton or fraction $18 A/C CONDENSATE DRAINS Each $25 A/Cwallunit $25 A/C ductwork forfirst$1,000 constructionvalue $35 A/C ductwork each additional $1,000 constructionvalue $15 STRIP HEATERS Eachoffirstfiveunits $25 Eachunit after firstfive $15 PAINT SPRAY BOOTHS Eachup to 100 sq.ft $200 Eachadditional 100 sq.ft $75 INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES Each $75 PRESSURE PIPING First $1,000 of construction value $100 Each additional $1,000 of construction value $25 COOLING TOWER Each $200 Page 1 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION C-MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES MECHANICAL VENTILATION SYSTEMS First $1,000 of construction value $40 Each additional $1,000 of construction value $20 FIRE PLACES AND BARBECUES Each $35 INSULATION,A/C DUCTS,PNEUMATIC TUBES,AND Each$1,000 or fraction of construction value $35 BOILERS AND PRESSURE VESSELS Eachup to 100,000 BTU $100 Eachadditional 100,000 BTU $15 Annual re-inspections $75 GENERATORS Upto50kva $100 Each additional5kva $20 EXHAUST FANS Each $50 DRYER VENT Each $20 KITCHEN HOODS Commercial,each $150 Residential,each"$25 TRASH CHUTE Each $50 Page 2 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION C-MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES WALK IN COOLER Each $35 PORTABLE CHILLER Each $35 SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS Each smoketest $250 STORAGE TANKS FOR FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS Each $150 Piping for flammable liquids $40 RE-INSPECTIONS Each $50 Page 3 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION D-ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Description Fee MINIMUM FEE FOR ELECTRICAL PERMIT Residential Permit $100 Commercial Permit $150 ROUGH WIRING OUTLETS One to 10 outlets $50 Each additional outlet $2 SERVICES AND FEEDERS Each 100 amps or fraction $20 Servicesandfeeders,101 to 200amps $25 Servicesandfeeders,201 to 400amps $30 Servicesandfeeders,401 to600amps $35 Servicesandfeeders,601 to800amps $40 Servicesandfeeders,foreach 100 over800amps $15 Temporary construction $60 Servicerepair or meter change $75 Temporary fortesting $75 Service temporary $65 Renewal $|o SWITCHBOARDS Each 100 amps or fraction $50 PHOTOVOLTAIC &SOLAR THERMAL SYSTEMS Residential systems Aggregate service capacity of599 amps or less (240v)$100 Aggregate service capacity of 600 amps ormore (240v)$200 Commercial Systems Aggregate service capacity of599 amps or less (240v)$200 Aggregate service capacity of600 amps ormore (240v)$350 DUCTBANK Each linear foot «Page 1of3 * BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION D-ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Description Fee EQUIPMENT MACHINE OR SPECIAL PURPOSE OUTLETS OR PERMANENT CONNECTIONS Residential,each $25 Commercial,each $30 CENTRAL AIR CONDITIONING Each ton $10 Chiller perton $10 CLEAR VIOLATIONS FOR NEW TENANTS Each $50 MOTORS 0to5 HP,each $30 6HPandover,perHP $3.50 FIRE PUMP Each $60 GENERATORS,TRANSFORMERS,HEATING EQUIP. STRIP HEATERS,RECTIFIERS &UPS SYSTEMS OtolOKW $10 11 KWandover,per KW $2 SIGNS Each,up to three atsamelocation $75 Page 2 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION D-ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES Description Fee LIGHT FIXTURES Parkinglot,per light $20 Lightpoles,each $20 Light fixtures I-10 sockets $15 Light fixtures I-10 fluorescent $10 Light fixtures,each over 10 $2.50 Light fixtures parkinglots,each $20 Light fixtures,all other,each $2.50 PLUGMOLD First 10 linear feet $30 Each additional 5 l.f.after first 10 l.f.$5 SATELLITE ANTENNAE Each $60 BURGLAR ALARM Installation,wiringanddevicespersystem $60 Repair per system $65 FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS Each $150 TELEVISION AND TELEPHONE SYSTEMS Mastercontrol $50 Each device $2 SWIMMING POOLS AND SPAS Residential,each $100 Commercial,each $85 REINSPECTION FEE Each $50 Page 3 of 3 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION E-CERTIFICATE OF USE,COMPLETION OR OCCUPANCY Description Fee Certificateof Occupancy,Residential $150 Certificate of Occupancy,Commercial perstory $250 CertificateofUse $200 Certificateof completion,perstory $200 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or .$250Completion,perstoryforfirst30 days TemporaryCertificateof Occupancy foreach thirty (30)dayextension Page 1 of 1 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION F-OTHER FEES Description Fee MINIMUM FEE FOR ITEMS IN SECTION F Residential Permit $100 Commercial Permit $150 PRELIMINARY PLANS REVIEW FEE An initial feeoftwenty five percent (25%)ot theanticipatedtotalpermitfeeisdueatthetimeany permitapplicationismadeand construction documentsaresubmittedforreviewandapproval.Non refundable,credited towards permit fee. OTHER FEES Permit card replacement $15 Forty(40)yearcertificationfee $250 Informationprovidedon other building matters $100 FeeforworkingonSundaysand Holidays $500 RESEARCH BUILDING DEPTARTMENT RECORDS perhour $17 RE-INSPECTION FEE Each $50 CHANGE OF CONTRACTOR Basefee (percentage oforiginalpermitfee)30% Minimum $65 Maximum $500 THRESHOLD BUILDING INSPECTION Perhour,minimum 3hoursper single request $125 SPECIAL REQUEST FOR AFTER HOURS JNSPECTIONS Perhour,minimum 3hoursper single request $125 Page 1 of 2 / ADDITIONAL COSTS BUILDINGPERMIT FEES SCHEDULE SECTION F-OTHER FEES Description Fee In addition to the basic application fees listed,applicants shall pay for all reasonable costs incurred by the City in processing said applications,These costs shall include but not limited to advertising, staff time and costs for qualified experts,such as architects,planners,attorneys and others deemed necessary for the review and evaluation of an application.These fees shall be in addition to any other fees required by the City. REVISIONS TO APPROVED DRAWINGS Per sheet PLAN REVIEW Review aftersecond rejection Each additional review $40 $50 $75 LOST PLANS FEE Base fee (percentage of original building permit fee)30% Maximum SHOP DRAWING REVIEW Each $500 $100 WORKING WITHOUT A PERMIT First time offense,$100 plus double of permit fees Minimum ^.^ $165 Second time offense,$200 plus double of permit fees Minimum ^^ $200 Third time offense,$500 plus twice the double permit fee Minimum $1,000 Page 2 of 2 BUILDING PERMIT FEES SCHEDULE -2010 SECTION G-REFUNDS,TIME LIMITATIONS AND CANCELLATIONS Feeschargedfora permit shallbe approved bythe Building Department subject to the following: Norefundswillbemadeon requests involving a)Permit feesof$200 or less b)Permits revoked by the Building Department c)Permitscancelledby court order d)Permitswhichhave expired e)Permits under which work has commenced f)The original permit holder when there isachangeof contractor A full refund will begrantedtoapermitholderwhotakesoutapermitcoveringworkoutsideCity limits when: a)Awrittenrequestissubmittedtothecitypriortothepermitexpirationdate,and b)Avalidatedcopyofthepermitissubmittedwithsuchrequest Page 1 of 1 CITY CLERK -FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee LOBBYIST Per registration $500 Page1 of 1 POLICE DEPARTMENT -FEE SCHEDULE Description Fee POLICE PERSONNEL (hourly rate) Officer,3 hour minimum $40 Officer -holiday $80 Supervisor,3 or more officersassigned $50 Supervisor -holiday $100 POLICE EQUIPMENT VehicleFee/hour (ifrequired),specialeventpurpose $15 RadioFee,per officer per day $3 TOWING SIGNS,per premises up to 5signs,per sign $75 eachadditionalsign $75 TOWING MEDALLION,per year up to 10 medallions,per medallion $50 more than 10 medallions,flatfee $500 Page 1 of 1 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE SPORTS Description Fee FOOTBALL Resident 1st Child $72.30 Resident 2ndChild $62.30 Resident 3rdChild $52.30 Resident 4th Child $42.30 Non-Resident 1st Child $90 Non-Resident 2ndChild $90 Non-Resident3rdChildandany thereafter $80 CHEERLEADING Resident 1st Child $72.30 Resident 2nd Child $62.30 Resident 3rd Child $52.30 Resident 4th Child $42.30 Non-Resident 1st Child $90 Non-Resident 2nd Child $90 Non-Resident 3rdChildandany thereafter $80 TRACK Resident $30 Non-Resident $60 Page 1 of 1 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE RENTALS Description Fee GYMNASIUM RENTAL (2hr min) Resident,per hour $100 Non Resident,per hour $200 Not-for-Profit,per hour $90 GYMNASIUM RENTAL 1/2 court Resident,per hour $50 NonResident,per hour $100 Not-for-Profit,per hour $45 MULTI PURPOSE ROOM (3 hr min) Resident,per hour $60 Non Resident,perhour $120 Not-for-Profit,perhour $55 SOUTH MIAMI PARK Field Rentals Resident,perhour $36 Non Resident,perhour $50 Not-for-Profit,perhour $30 MURRAY PARK Small Fields Resident,per hour $36 NonResident,per hour $50 Not-for-Profit,per hour $30 MURRAY PARK (Big Field) Resident,perhour $60 NonResident,perhour $75 Not-for-Profit,perhour $50 DANTE FACELL Pavilion Resident,perhour $35 Non Resident,perhour $70 Not-for-Profit,per hour page 1qU $30 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE RENTALS Description FUCHS PARK Pavilion Resident,per hour NonResident,per hour Not-for-Profit,per hour PAVILION Resident,per hour NonResident,per hour Not-for-Profit,per hour PALMER PARK without lights Resident,per hour Non Resident,per hour Not-for-Profit,per hour PALMER PARK with lights Resident,per hour NonResident,per hour Not-for-Profit,per hour SECURITY DEPOSIT for all rental Residential,per rental NonResidential,per rental Not-for-Profit,per rental BATTING CAGE Residential,per hour Non Residential,per hour Not-for-Profit,per hour Page 2 of 4 Fee $35 $70 $30 $35 $70 $30 $30 $36 $25 $40 $50 $35 $110 $200 $100 $25 $35 $20 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE RENTALS Description Fee MARSHALL WILLAMSON PARK MEETING ROOM Resident,per hour $25 NonResident,per hour $50 Not-for-profit South Miami Based,per hour $10 Not-for-profit per hour $20 MARSHALL WILLIAMS TENNIS COURT RENTAL Resident,per hour $4 Non Resident,per hour $8 Not-for-Profit,per hour $3 FUCHS PARK SAND VOLLEYBALL COURT RENTAL (2 hr min) Resident,per hour $25 NonResident,per hour $35 Not-for-Profit,per hour $20 COMMUNITY CENTER EDUCATION ROOM RENTAL (2hr min) Resident,per hour $30 NonResident,per hour $40 Not-for-Profit,per hour $20 COMMUNITY CENTER COMPUTER LAB(2hr min) Resident,perhour $45 NonResident,per hour $60 Not-for-Profit,perhour $35 MURRAY PARK OUTDOOR BASKETBALL FULL COURT RENTAL WITH LIGHTS (Organized Groups Only) Resident,perhour $30 Non Resident,perhour $40 Not-for-Profit,perhour $25 Page 3 of 4 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE RENTALS Description Fee MURRAY PARK OUTDOOR BASKETBALL FULL COURT RENTAL WITH OUT LIGHTS(OrganizedGroupsOnly) Resident,perhour $20 Non Resident,perhour $30 Not-for-Profit,perhour $15 MURRAY PARK AQUATIC CENTER FACILITY RENTAL 0-35 people (3 hrs)$265 36-64 people(3hrs)$315 Additional hours,perhour $50 BREWER PARK TENNIS COURT RENTAL Resident,per hour $4 NonResident,per hour $8 Not-for-Profit,per hour $3 DANTE FASCELL PARK SAND VOLLEYBALL COURT RENTAL Resident,per hour $25 NonResident,per hour $35 Not-for-Profit,per hour $20 Page 4 of 4 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM &CAMPS Description Fee AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Monthly (First child) Resident $25 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Monthly (Second child) Resident $25 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Monthly (Third child) Resident $15 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Weekly (First child) Non-Resident $40 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Weekly (Second child) Non-Resident $40 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM Weekly (More than two children,per Child) Non-Resident $30 SPRING CAMP Resident,perweekper child $30 Non-Resident,perweekper child $75 SUMMER CAMP Resident,perweekper child $30 Non-Resident,perweekper child $125 WINTER CAMP Resident,for2weekperiodper child $60 Non-Resident,perweekper child $125 DAY CAMP Resident,perdayper child $|o Non-Resident,perdayper child $30 Page 1 of 1 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE FITNESS CENTER Description Fee MEMBERSHIP -Monthly Resident $30 Non-Resident $45 MEMBERSHIP -Quarterly Resident $75 Non-Resident $105 MEMBERSHIP -Semi annual Resident $140 Non-Resident $200 MEMBERSHIP -Yearly Resident Non-Resident Teen(age 14-17)Resident $50 Teen(age 14-17)Non-Resident $175 Adult(age 18-59)Resident $200 Adult(age 18-59)Non-Resident $350 Senior (age60+)Resident $100 Senior(age60+)Non-Resident $125 Family (same household)Resident $350 Family (samehousehold)Non-Resident $550 Veterans&US Military Resident $50 Veterans&US Military Non-Resident $50 SM Business Owner $225 SM BusinessEmployee $250 Cityof SM Employee&Family Members $100 Page 1 of 1 PARKS &RECREATION FEES SCHEDULE COMMUNITY POOL Description Fee Daily Fees Youth/Teen (age 3-17)Resident $| Youth/Teen (age 3-17)Non-Resident $3 Adult(age 18-59)Resident $3 Adult(age 18-59)Non-Resident $5 Senior (age 60+)Resident $| Senior (age60+)Non-Resident $3 Personw/Disabilities,Veterans&US Military $0 Page 1 of 1 SPECIAL EVENT FEES SCHEDULE Description Fee SPECIAL EVENTS APPLICATION Admin,processingfee $100 Non-Refundable Application Fee $60 Deposit (refundable)$500 Expeditefee(3businessdays)$60 TEMPORARY SIGNS &BANNERS Temporary signage,persign(maximum30-days)$75 Banner over public street (maximum 14-days)$300 Banner per pole(minimum$300)(per 30-days)$30 TEMPORARY FULL ROAD AND SIDEWALK CLOSURE Nosinglelane roadway closure permitted.Excludescity events and events fundedby the city. Per linear.Ft.of road,rounded tothe next higher whole number in ft.,per day $q 25 TEMPORARY SIDEWALK CLOSURE Permit requires FrenchBarricadesalongcurb or EOP.Forspecial event 8hr. max.,incl.set uptime.Excludescity events and events fundedby the city. Each25 square feet or fraction $75 Meter RentalFeeDaily $25 Page 1 of 2 SPECIAL EVENT FEES SCHEDULE Description Fee POLICE PERSONNEL (hourly rate) Officer,3 hour minimum $40 Officer -holiday $80 Supervisor,3 or more officersassigned $50 Supervisor -holiday $100 POLICE EQUIPMENT VehicleFee/hour (ifrequired),specialeventpurpose $15 RadioFee,per officer per day $3 PUBLIC WORKS HOURLY RATE Non-supervisor $40 Supervisor $45 Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO.14-14-2192 An Ordinance amending Section7-3 of theCode of Ordinances,including the establishment of a parks and recreational impact fee category,and creating Section 7- 3.2 establishing regulations for the collection of such impact fees. WHEREAS,new development andredevelopmentintheCitycanaddtoandhelp maintainthe quality of life underabalancedgrowth management program;and WHEREAS,effective growthmanagementispromoted when adequatepublic facilities areavailabletoserve new development concurrentwiththeimpacts of thatdevelopment;and WHEREAS,the City Commission requestedthe preparation of animpactfeereport, based upon the most recent andlocalizeddatainsupport of the impact feeOrdinancetobe completed and submitted totheCity;and WHEREAS,thereport prepared byTischlerBise,Fiscal,Economicand Planning Consultants,datedApril1,2014 recommendedtheimplementation of aparks facilities impact feefor residential development;and WHEREAS,assetforthintheimpactfee report,thecollection ofthisimpactfeewill fundparksand recreation capitalimprovements required toservegrowth,andtherevenue generated fromimpactfeeswillbenefitnewdevelopmentby maintaining currentcitywidelevels of service;,thereby promotingthe general welfare of allCity residents and constitutes a public purpose;and WHEREAS,advaloremtaxrevenueandotherrevenueswillnotbesufficientto provide the additional capital improvements for parks and recreation facilities,which are necessary to accommodate new development. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1,Theimpactfee report prepared byTischlerBise provides an adequate and lawful basis for the adoption and imposition of parks facilities impact fees in accordance with this Ordinance andis incorporated herein by reference. Section2.Section7-3 of theCity Code of ordinances ishereby amended to read as follows: Sec*7-3.Comprehensive Ffee Schedule. There is hereby established a comprehensive fee schedule sottingforthfeesfortheThe feesforthefollowingitemssubjects shall beasset forth inthe City's ordinance regulating these subiectss orassetforthinthe City's comprehensive feesandfines ordinancefa copy of thelattershallbekeptinthe office of the City Clerkandwhich mav Ord.No.14-14-2192 beaccessedonthe City's web page which iscurrentlyat www.southmiamifl.gov\ whichever is the most current: (1)Building permit fees. (2)Plumbing permit fees. (3)Mechanical permit fees. (4)Electrical permit fees. (5)Landuse application fees. (6)Certificates of use,completionoroccupancy fees, (7)Public works/utility fees. (8)Other fees. (9)Occupational license fees. (10)Tree removal permit fees. 01)Development impact fees. as set forthin the inthe schedule entitled "Comprehensive Fee Schedule,"attached to Ordinance No.1154and adopted by roforence hereof,[and any amendments thereto]. (Ord.No.1454,§4,96-90;Ord.No.1501,§1,3-3-92;Ord.No.1512,§1,9 15-93;Ord,No.1575,§§ 1-3,221-95;Ord.No.1578,§1,4 195;Ord.No.1594,§§1 3,11 795;Ord.No.1692,§1,112 99; Ord.No.1730,§1,11700) Editor's note • Section 1of Ordinance No.2800 1730t adopted November 7,2000,amended Ordinance No.14 90 1451 byaddinganewpermitfeerefund schedule.Attho city's roquost, such schedule has not boon set out heroin,but isonfilein tho office of tho city dork. Section 3.Chapter7 of theCityCode of OrdinancesisamendedtoaddSection7-3.2 which shall read as follows: Sec,7-3.2.Parks Impact Fees. A.Established.As a condition of the issuance of a building permit for new development,the person,firmor corporation who or which has applied for the building permit for residential construction shall pay to the City,the parks impact fees as set forth inthe provisions of this Ordinance. B.Definitions.Forthepurpose of this Ordinance,certain terms and words are defined.Additionally and where applicable,words used in the present tense shall include thefuture:thesingular number shallincludetheplural,andthepluralthesingular: Building permit shallhavethesame meaning as provided intheFloridaBuilding Codeandshall include a permit issued by the building official forthe construction. U:\My Documents\reso!utions\Ordinance Impact Fee Ordinance CArev3 Comm Amendment.doc Ord.No.14-14-2192 enlargement,alteration,modification,repair,movement,demolition,or change inthe occupancy ofa building or structure. Capital improvements shallmeanphysicalassets constructed orpurchasedtoprovide, improve orreplaceapublicfacilityand which arelarge scale,high in cost andhave an estimated useful lifein excess of one year.Thecost of acapital improvement is generally nonrecurring and may require multivear financing. Feepaver shall mean any person,firm,orcorporation intending to commence new development and,duringthelife of the development,appliesfortheissuance of a building permit. Impactfee study shall mean theParksand Recreation Facilities Impact Fee Study on the methodology usedtoestablishParksand Recreation Facilities Impact feesforthe City of South Miami prepared bv Tischler Bise.dated April 1.2014.which establishes the basis for the fair share of capital facilities costs attributable to new development basedupon standard and appropriate methodologies,andacopy of which is attached to and incorporated bv reference into this Ordinance but which is excluded from the codified version of thisordinance.A copy shallbeonfile with the City Clerk. New residential development shallmeanthecarrying out of any residential building activity,orthemaking of anymaterialchangeintheuseor appearance of any building,^-structure or land,whichresultsinthedividing of existing spaceorthe addition of anyspacethat could beusedasan additional bedroom or otherwise causes anadditional impact or demand onparksfacilities. C.Imposition of fees.Thereisassessed,charged,imposed,andenactedparksimpact feesonall new residential development occurring within the municipal boundaries of the City of SouthMiami.These feeswillbe assessed,charged,or imposed inaccordancewith thefee schedule provided below andas may be amended from time to time bv the City's Fee Schedule ordinancebaseduponthe most recentandlocalizeddata.The effective date of any increaseinfeesshalltake effect atleast90daysfollowingpublicationandenactment of the amended Fee Schedule. Parks and Recreation Development FeeSchedule per Housing Unit Unit Type Muitifamily Unit Single Unit Single Unit Number of Bedrooms All Sizes 0-3 Persons per Housing Unit 111 1.34 2.54 Proposed Fee $1,366 $2,590 $3,519 U:\My Documents\resolutions\Ordinance ImpactFeeOrdinance CArev3 Comm Amendment.doc Ord.No.14-14-2192 Til PPHU Recommended multipliers are scaled tomakethe average valuebvtypeofhousingforFL PUMA 4014 match the average value fortheCityderivedfrom 2011 American Community Survey data. withpersons adjusted tothe Citvwide average of2.80personsper single family unit. D.Payment Theimpactfeesshallbe paid tothe City bvthe Feepaver atthetime of and asthe condition precedent tothe issuance of the building permit. E.Disposition of fees.All fees collected bv virtue of this Ordinance and any interest earned on them,other than the allowable administrative cost for collection,shallbe deposited into a special andseparatetrust account to be designated,"parks and recreation facilities impact fees account."Funds from this account maybe expended for land acquisition forparks:for maintaining (not including routine maintenance),furnishing, equipping,repairing,remodeling,or enlarging of both existing and future facilities:for construction of new parksfacilities:for anv architectural,engineering,legalandother professional feesand expenses related toanysuch improvements:and for any administrative costs not incurred bv thefee collection process.Funds from this account may also be expended for retirement of loans and/or bonds that may be.or have been, issued to finance the capital improvements herein contemplated. IL Reporting,Collections,and Audits.TheCity of SouthMiami'sFinanceDirector shall keep an accurate accounting and reporting of impact fee collections and expenditures withintheCitv.The City shall retain upto5%of the impact fees collected tooffsetthe administrativecosts of collectingtheimpactfeesfwhichshallbelimitedtothe actual collection costs incurred)andthecost of administering the provisions of this Ordinance. Audits of theCity's financial statements which are performed bva certified public accountant pursuant to Section 218.39.F.S.as amended,thatare submitted to the Auditor General must include an affidavit signed bythe Finance Director stating that the City has complied with Section 163.31801.F.S.f "Florida Impact Fee Act")as amended. G.Refunds.Credits,and Reimbursements. ill Uponapplication of the property owner,theCitvshallrefundthatportion of any impact feewhichhasbeenon deposit for oversix f6)years and whichis unexpended and uncommitted,except asdescribedinsubsection (3)of thissection.The refundshallbemade tothe then-current owneror owners of lots or units ofthe development project or projects. {2}If.attherequest of the City,aFeepaverconstructsa parks and recreation facilities component or dedicates land for future facilities and ifthe constructed facility or thededicatedlandwouldotherwisehavebeenpaidforbvimpact fees,the City shall reimburse the Feepaver for Parks and Recreation Facilities impact fees previously paid in accordance with thefollowingconditions,unlesstheFeepaverandtheCityagreetoother conditions: fa)The reimbursement shallbelimitedtoapaybackperiod of five(5)years: (b)The City shall not reimburse interest on the outstanding balance:and. (c)The Feepaver shall be required to provide sufficient documentation acceptable to the Citv.of the actual costs incurred for the facility improvement. U:\My Documents\resoIutions\Ordinance Impact Fee Ordinance CArev3 Comm Amendment.doc 4 Ord.No.14-14-2192 £3}If anyimpactfees charged toa Feepaver areunexpendedoruncommitted duringthesixthyearfollowingitscollection,thefeesareexemptfromsubsection (1)of this section if the Citv Commission makes the following findings: £a)Aneedforthecapital improvement stillexists: fb)Thefeeswillbeusedforanidentifiedpurposewithintwo(2)years of the finding of need:and fc)Thepurposeforwhichthefeeswillbeusedissubstantiallysimilartothe purpose for which thefeeswere collected. Section 4.Codification.The provisions ofthisordinanceshall become andbe made part of theCode of Ordinances of theCity of SouthMiamiasamended;thatthesections ofthis ordinance may berenumberedor re-lettered toaccomplishsuchintention;andthattheword "ordinance"maybechangedto "section"orother appropriate word. Section5.Severability.If anysection,clause,sentence,orphrase of this ordinance is forany reason heldinvalidor unconstitutional byacourt of competent jurisdiction,thisholding shallnotaffectthe validity oftheremainingportions ofthisordinance. Section 6.Ordinances in Conflict All ordinancesorparts of ordinancesandall sections and parts of sections of ordinances in direct conflictherewitharehereby repealed. However,itisnottheintent ofthissectionto repeal entire ordinances,or parts of ordinances, thatgivetheappearance ofbeingin conflict when thetwoordinancescanbe harmonized or whenonlyaportion of theordinanceinconflictneedstobe repealed toharmonizethe ordinances.If the ordinance inconflict can be harmonized by amending itsterms,itis hereby amended toharmonizethetwo ordinances.Therefore,onlythatportionthatneedstobe repealed toharmonizethe two ordinancesshallberepealed. Section7.Effective Date.This ordinance shall becomeeffective90daysfollowingits publication. PASSED AND ENACTED this]1_7thday of June _,2014. cle£kt^ 1st Reading 6/03/14 2nd Reading 6/17/14 READ AND LANGUA ex: OVED AS TO FORM: GALI1 THEREC W&L& COMMISSION VOTE:4-1 Mayor Stoddard:Yea Vice Mayor Harris:Yea Commissioner Edmond:Nay Commissioner Liebman:Yea Commissioner Welsh:Yea U:\My Documents\resolutions\Ordinance Impact Fee Ordinance CArev3 Comm Amendment.doc CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI SOUth"Miami OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER theQTYOf plLL^Jc INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To:The Honorable Mayor &Members of the City Commission From:Steven Alexander,City Manager Thru:Christopher Brimo AICP,Planning Director Date:May 28,2014 Agenda Item No. Subject: An Ordinance of the City of South Miami,Florida,amending Section 7-3 of the Code of Ordinances and establishing a parks and recreational impact fee,and creating Section 7-3.2 establishing regulations for the collection of such impact fees. Background: InApril 2013,the City Commission approved a contract with Tischler Bise Incorporated, pursuant to a request for proposal [RFP #PZ2013-03-01],to conduct an Impact FeeStudyand Transportation Concurrency Review;Resolution No.77-13-13895.The study would look at three areas for possible fee assessment;transportation,parks &recreation,andpublic safety. TheCity Administration requested the study of impact fee feasibility as a possible method of shifting the costof infrastructure fromnewdevelopmentfrom the existingresidents,whopay for it now,to the developer.Inessenceitmakesnew development payitsownway. Therefore,adoption of impact fees reduces the financial pressure onlocal residents to raise taxesandfees.With new development payingforitsfair share of capacity-enhancing infrastructure needs,any current funds that havebeen designated topayfor those projectscan potentially beshiftedto the more immediateneedsofexisting residents,suchasfor facility maintenance and rehabilitation. TheCity currently does not collect impact fees,and the purpose of the study wasreviewthe City's current services and facilitiesand determine whether impact feescouldbe assessed for new development.The process includedan appropriate impact fee determination methodologyandfee assessment schedules necessaryfor the City to establishanddefendany proposed fees.Any methodology for establishing impact fees would need to meet the "rational nexus"test,aswellasbein compliance withFlorida Statute 163.31801 the FloridaImpactFee Act,to guarantee fairness in assessing these fees. Adoption of impact fees reduces pressure onlocal residents to raise taxes andfees.Andwith new development payingforitsown capacity-enhancing infrastructure needs,any current funds that have been designated topayfor those projects canbe shifted to the more Parks&RecreationImpactFeeOrdinance May 28,2014 Page2of2 immediateneeds of existingresidents,suchasfor facility maintenanceandrehabilitation.Asa result of thestudytheconsultantsconcludedthatitwouldonlybefeasibleatthis time forthe Citytoassessan impact feeforparksandrecreationalfacilities.It was determined that the imposition ofa transportation impactfeewouldnotbea feasible optionfor the City,partly becausetherearelimitedopportunitiesfor wholesale roadway corridor projectsthatwould improvetrafficflows,but also the capitalcostsofimprovingroadwaylevels of servicefor existingvehiculartraffic.Itwas suggested that other options be pursued that placeless emphasison ji/ehicle utilization,suchas the creation of amultimodal transportation district (MMTD).Byestablishinga MMTD andhavingalong-termplanfor the development of multimodalinfrastructure,the Citymaybeabletocollectmobilityfeestopayfor that infrastructure. TheCityiscurrentlyundertaking the South Miami Intermodal TransportationStudy (SMITP). Theresults of this study will be used inpart,toaddress the feasibility of assessingamobility fee. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commissionapprove the adoption of the parksandrecreation impact fee schedule pursuant to the recommendations of the Tlschler Bise impact fee study. The impact fee study is incorporated in the proposed Ordinance by reference. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Parks&Recreation FacilitiesImpactFee Study;DatedApril 1,2014 Advisory LegalOpinion-Municipalities,use of impactfees Page1 of7 Florida Attorney General Advisory Legal Opinion Number:AGO 2010-46 Date:November 5,2010 Subject:Municipalities,useofimpactfees Ms.Jerri Blair City Attorney • Cityf of Wildwood Post Office Box 130 Tavares,Florida 32778-0130 RE:MUNICIPALITIES -FEES -IMPACT FEES -SOLID WASTE COLLECTION — UTILITIES -use of impact fees for other purposes,s.163.31801, Fla.Stat. Dear Ms.Blair: On behalf of the City Commission of the City of Wildwood,you have been asked to request my opinion on substantially the following questions: 1.Whether impact fees collected by the City of Wildwood for purposes of expanding a particular utility service such as • refuse/garbage collection may beused for another utilityservice which generally benefits the subject property which paid the impact fees? 2.Whether the City of Wildwood must return impact fees which have been collected for a service which will be privatized to the owner of the property for which the fees were collected or to the person from whom the impact fees were paid? In sum: 1.Impact fees collected by the City of Wildwood for the purpose of refuse collection must be used for that purpose and for other solid waste-related purposes.Other utility services unrelated to solid waste collection may not be funded with surplus impact fees collected for refuse/garbage collection. 2.In the absence of any direction from the Legislature as to the return of validly collected impact fees for refuse collection,this office would suggest that the city utilize these fees for solid http://www.myfloridaIegaJ.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Advisory Legal Opinion -Municipalities,use of impact fees -Page 2of7 waste-related purposesas considered in St.Lucie County v.Cxty o£ Fort Pierce. ( According to information you have supplied tothis office,theCity ofWildwoodhas,forseveral years,leviedandcollectedanimpact fee for refuse collection as well as other utilities and services. Theimpactfeescollectedbythecityforrefusecollectionwere imposedandcollectedpursuanttosection 163.31801,Florida Statutes.The city has now determined that lower rates can be maintainedthroughcontractingandprivatizingtherefusecollection portion of its utility service and has entered into a contract for thisservicewithaprivate company.However,the city currently holds$165,981.00thatwascollectedasrefuseimpactfees.Since thecityisprivatizingrefuse services,youstatethatthesefees willnotbe used fortheexpansionof refuse collection services. Therefore,youhaveaskedwhetherthesesurplusfees may be used for any other utility service or must be returned. Question One Section 163.31801,Florida Statutes,is the "Florida Impact Fee Act."[l]The intent of the Legislature in adopting this statute is provided in subsection (2)thereof: "The Legislature finds that impact feesarean important source of revenue fora local government to use in funding the infrastructure necessitated by new growth.The Legislature further finds that impact feesare an outgrowth ofthe home rule power ofa local government to provide certain services within its jurisdiction.Due to the growth of impact fee collections and local governments' reliance on impact fees,it is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that,when a county or municipality adopts an impact fee by ordinance ora special district adopts an impact fee by resolution, the governing authority complies with this section." Subsection (3)of the act requires that any impact fee adopted by municipal ordinance must,at a minimum: "(a)Require that the calculation of the impact fee be based on the most recent and localized data. (b)Provide for accounting and reporting of impact fee collections and expenditures.If a local governmental entity imposes an impact feeto address its infrastructure needs,the entity shall account for the revenues and expenditures of such impact fee in a separate accounting fund. (c)Limit administrative charges forthe collection of impact fees to actual costs. (d)Require that notice be provided nolessthan90days before the effective date ofan ordinance or resolution imposing a new or increased impact fee.A county or municipality is not required to http://www.myfloridaiegaI.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Advisory LegalOpinion-Municipalities,use of impact fees Page3 of7 wait 90 days to decrease,suspend,or eliminate an impact fee." Nothing in section 163.31801,Florida Statutes,addresses the redirection of impact fees collected under that statute to other purposes. With regard to the imposition ofa viable impact fee,assessment and collection of such a fee must be based upon the pro rata share of the reasonably anticipated costs of capital expansion required to provide a service to a'user.[2]The nature of such fees was expressed by the Supreme Court of Florida in Contractors and. Builders Association o£Pinellas County v.City o£Dunedln,[31as follows: "The avowed purpose of the ordinance in the present case is to raise money in order to expand the water and sewerage systems,soasto meet the increased demand which additional connections to the system create.The municipality seeks to shift to the user expenses incurred on his account...."[4] This office has also concluded that impact fees are in the nature of user charges.[5]In Attorney General Opinion 76-137,this office commented upon the imposition of an impact fee for the construction of municipal water and sewer facilities,stating,"there is little doubt that the fee imposed (bycity ordinance)is not a tax ora specialassessment but isavalidimpositionofan 'impact fee'or user charge for the privilege of connecting to the city's water and sewer system •..." In City o£Dunedln,theCourt delineated the test tobe applied in determining the validity ofalocally imposed "impact fee."Suchan impact fee must satisfy thefollowingtest:(1)newdevelopmentmust requirethatthe present systemofpublicfacilitiesbeexpanded; (2)the fees imposed on users must be no more than what the local governmental unit would incur in accommodating the new users ofthe system;and (3)the fees must be expressly earmarked and spent for the purposes for which they werecharged.Thus,a viable impact fee, levied and collected for an express purpose,must be spent for that purpose. Inacaseinvolvingimpactfeesforrefusedisposalservices,St. Lucie County v.City o£Fort Pierce,[6]the county brought anaction against the city on the parties1 waste disposal contract.For a numberofyears,pursuant toan interlocal agreement,thecountyhad granted the city the right to dispose of its garbage and trash at one of the county's landfills.The city paid tipping fees to the county for the use of the landfill.The fees increased over the course of the agreement and,after a final rate increase,the parties became involved ina dispute concerning the city's use of thelandfill.After thefeeincrease,the city began withholding a http://www.myfloridalegai.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Advisory Legal Opinion -Municipalities,use of impact fees -Page-4 of 7 portion of its payment tothe county complaining thatthe county was usingpartofthefeesitwas collecting tocloseoneofthe county'sotherlandfills.Thecityarguedthatit never used the landfill being -closed and was not responsible for this portion of theassessed fee.Thecitythenbegandeliveringitswasteto another landfill outside thecounty. St.LucieCountysuedfordeclaratoryandinjunctiverelief concerningthecity'srighttodisposeofitswasteoutsideofthe county.The City of Fort Pierce counterclaimed for damages for unjust enrichment.The city based its claim onthe theory that it should not be required to pay for the closure ofa refuse disposal site never used by the city.The trial court ruled in favor of the cityonits unjust enrichment claimand awarded damagestothecity. Thedamage award under the unjust enrichment theory wasthe subject of the appeal to the Fourth District Court of Appeal.The county raised two points in support of its appeal:1)that the waste disposal feewasa valid fee and thatits partial use for other county solid waste purposes had no effect on the validity of the fee,and 2}that the use of these fees for closure of the landfill was not unjust enrichment.As the court noted,"[s]imply stated it's the county's position that if these fees are valid user fees and they are being used for related waste disposal purposes then there can be no unjus.t enrichment."The Fourth District Court of Appeal agreed with the county and reversed the lower court decision.As the court stated "[w]e find that the fees are valid user fees and that the fees are being expended for a solid waste-related purpose."[7] The court's analysis relied on City o£New Smyrna Beach v.Board o£ Trustees o£Internal Improvement Trust Fund.[8]In that case,the court dealt with a challenge to the expenditures made by the City of New Smyrna after the collection of a beach use fee.The board's position was that collection of the beach fee only authorized expenditures for "beach maintenance."The court rejected this argument and stated that:"If the term Ybeach maintenance1 were to be construed as limited solely to physical upkeep of the beach,then the municipalities would have to shoulder the economic burden of the increased costs for law enforcement,life guards,emergency service and liability insurance."[9]The court upheld the city's expenditures,and held that the fees could be used for traffic management,parking,law enforcement,liability insurance, sanitation,lifeguards and other staff purposes,"so long as such expenses were beach related."[10]Relying on the holding in City o£ New Smyrna.Beach,the court in St.Lucie County agreed with the county that "the use of the fees to close down the Airport Landfill was a solid waste related purpose and therefore a valid expenditure from the fees collected."[11] Similarly,the City of Wildwood has imposed an impact fee for refuse collection.The City imposed this impact fee pursuant to section httpy/www.myfloridaiegal.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 AdvisoryLegal Opinion -Municipalities,use ofimpactfees "Page 5 of7 163.31801,Florida Statutes.Asa valid impact fee,the fees imposed must be no more than what the city would incur in accommodating the new users of the system and these fees must be expressly earmarked and spent for the purposes for which they were charged and collected.As Florida courts and this office have recognized,an impact fee,levied and collected for an express purpose,must be spent for that purpose.Thus,the City of Wildwood refuse collection impact fee may be spent only for that purpose and related purposes and may not be directed to another unrelated utility service. You have cited section 180.07,Florida Statutes,which relates to public utilities and provides for the combination of plants or systems and the pledge of revenues raised pursuant to this chapter for the construction and operation of these plants and systems.You note that*subsection (2)of this statute provides: "Whenever any municipality shall decide to avail itself of the provisions o£this chapter forthe extension orimprovementofany existing utility plant or system,any then-existing plant orsystem may be included asa part ofa whole plant or system and any twoor more utilities may'be included in one project hereunder*The revenues of all or any part of any existing plants or systems or any plantsorsystems constructed hereunder may be pledged tosecure moneys advanced for the construction or improvement of any utility plant or system or any part thereoforany combination thereof."(e.s.) According to your letter,the City of Wildwood relied on section 163.31801,Florida Statutes,toimposeandcollectan impact feefor refuse collection.Further,the city is not considering the extensionor improvement ofanexisting utility plant,butis contracting with a private solid waste provider for services.The clearlanguageof section 180.07(2),Florida Statutes,statesthat it appliestoprojectsundertakenpursuanttotheprovisionsof Chapter 180.Thus,itdoes not appearthatsection 180.07(2), FloridaStatutes,provides authorityfortheCityofWildwoodtouse impactfeeswhichwereleviedandcollectedforthatpurposeto support other utility services. Question Two Your second question relates tothe disposition of impact fees which havebeenleviedand collected,butarenolongerneededfor capital expansion to provide refuse collection services. NostatutoryorotherauthorityofwhichIamawareortowhichyou havebroughtmy attention wouldauthorizetheCityofWildwoodto return or refund validly imposed and collect impact fees.[12]Inthe absence ofany direction inthe law for such an action,this office cannot suggest what may appear tobean equitable resolution to your http://www.myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Advisory Legal Opinion-Municipalities,use of impact fees '-'Page 6of7 question.[13]Inthe absence ofanysuch legislative authority fora refund,thisofficewouldsuggestthatthecityutilizethesefees forsolidwaste-relatedpurposesasconsideredin St.Lucie County v.City o£Fort Pierce,[14]cited and discussed above,which would represent a valid expenditure of the fees collected. Sincerely, Bill McCollum Attorney General BM/tgh [1]See s.163.31801(1),Fla.Stat. [2]See Contractors and Builders Association o£Pinellas County v. City o£Dunedln,329 So.2d 314 (Fla.1976),appeal a£ter remand, 358 So.2d 846 (Fla.2d DCA 1978),cert,denied,444 U.S.S67 (1979).See also Home Builders and Contractors Association o£Palm Beach County,Inc.v.Board o£County Commissioners o£Palm Beach County,446 So.2d 140 (Fla.4th DCA 1983),petition £or review denied,451 So.2d 848 (Fla.1984),appeal dismissed,105 S.Ct.376 (1984). [3]329 So.2d 314 (Fla.1976). [4]329 So.2d at 318.C£.Loxahatchee Blver Environmental Control District v.School Board o£Palm Beach County,496 So.2d 930 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986),approved,515 So.2d 217 (Fla.1987),in which the court determined that certain service availability standby charges were within the definition of impact or service availability fees established by the State Department of Education. [5]See Ops.Att'y Gen.Fla.76-137 (1976),82-09 (1982),and 85-101 (1985);Inf.Op.to Nieman,dated Oct.4,2010. [6]676 So.2d 35 (Fla.4th DCA 1996). [7]Id.at 37. [8]543 So.2d 824 (Fla.5th DCA 1989). [91 Xd.at 829. [10]Id.See also Jacksonville Port Authority v.Alamo Rent-A-Car, 600 So.2d 1159 (Fla.1st DCA 1992),review denied,613 So.2d 1 (Fla.1992). http://vwwjfnyfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf7printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Advisory LegalOpinion -Municipalities,use of impactfees Page?of7- [11]Supra n.6 at.37. [12]Cx\State ex rel.Victor Chemical Works v.Gay,74So.2d 560 (Fla.1954),holding that unless there was some statutory authority providing for refunds,money could not be recovered once it had been paid into the state treasury and that refunds are a matter of legislative grace;St.Joe Paper Co.v.Department o£Revenue,460 So.2d 399 at 404 (Fla.1st DCA 1984),"[a]t common law,there was no right to a refund from the sovereign;asa result,in the absence of a statute authorizing a refund,a refund of taxes could not be allowed unlessthe taxpayer could demonstrate thatthetaxwaspaid involuntarily or compulsively[;]»Op.Att'y Gen.Fla.75-293 (1975).. [13]C£.Cha££ee v.Miami Transfer Company,Inc.,288 So.2d 209 (Fla.1974),and Ops.Att'y Gen.Fla.06-26 (2006)and 81-10 (1981), for thepropositionthattheAttorneyGeneraliswithoutauthority to qualify or read into a statute an interpretation or to define words in a statute in a manner which would result in a construction thatseemsmore equitable undercircumstances presented bya particularfactualsituation;suchconstructionwhenthelanguageof a statute is clear would,ineffect,bean act of legislation which is exclusively the prerogative ofthe Legislature. [14]676 So.2d 35(Fla.4th DCA 1996). http://www.myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf/printview/A8E0F8C5AAA4D7AD852577D20072...5/28/2014 Parks and Recreation Facilities Cit^Of S^itlft Miami,tflbiriifii TischlerBise TIschlerBise 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda,Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com Impact Fee Study CityofSouthMiami,Florida Table of Contents Impact Fee Study City of South Miami,Florida Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Executive Summary...................^..^................................................................................................l •mroQucoon xo ifnpaci rces .«.**.......*..»»•.....«....»»«.......•»...•.»•««.»•••»»•»..«...»•••.»......».«••.a.«.*».»»^.....».••...•••...2 General Legal Framework ..2 Unique Requirements ofthe FloridaImpactFeeAct ........3 Methodologies and Credits ................................................^......4 »»w9i iwi iiiJfJciwL rets wLUViy.........................................................................................................................D MaximumAllowableImpactFeesByTypeofLandUse „„,«„„,„,„„„„6 Park?and Recreation Facilities impact Fees........................................................................M..7 Methodology ................7 Parks and Recreation Facilities Improvements andCosts.8 Parks and Recreation Capital Improvements Needed toServe Growth 11 Cost for Impact Fee Study 13 Credit For Future Principal Payments...................—...........14 Parks and Recreation Input Variables andImpactFees..15 CashFlow Projections 16 Implementation and Administration .—................................,,-17 Credits and Reimbursements 17 Collection and Expenditure Zones -17 Appendix A -Land Use Assumptions 18 Introduction 18 Residential Development 19 Appendix B -Florida Statute:163.31801 24 Title XI 163.31801 -Impact fees;short title;intent;definitions;ordinances levying impact fees 24 TischieiBise mm Fiscal,Economic &Planning Consultants Executive Summary 4701 SANGAMORE ROAD I SUITE S240 I BETHESDAI MD 20816 Ti 800.424.4318 I Ft 301.320.4860 300 UNO LAGO DRIVE I SUITE 405 I NORTH PALMBEACH I FL 33408 Ti 800.424.4318 I Ft 301.320.4860 WWW.TISCHURBISE.COM TheCityofSouth Miami retained TischlerBise,inc.toanalyzecurrentlevelsofservice,andto calculate maximumallowableimpactfeesfor Parks andRecreation facilities in the City.Thisreportpresents the methodologiesandcalculationsusedtogeneratecurrentlevels of serviceand the maximum allowable impact fees.It Is intendedtoserveas supporting documentation forfutureupdatestoimpactfeesinthe City. Thepurposeofthis study is to demonstrate the City's compliancewith Florida Statute 163.31801 Florida ImpactFeeAct.Consistentwith the stateStatute,and the City's master planning documents itisthe intent ofthe Cityto: 1.Collect impact feesto fund parks and recreation capital improvements required to serve growth, and 2.Touse revenue generated from impact feestobenefitnew development by maintaining current citywide levels of service. Impact feesareone-timepaymentsusedto construct systemimprovementsneededto accommodate new development.An impact fee represents new growth's fair share of capital facility needs.By law, impact fees can onlybeused for capital improvements,not operating or maintenance costs.Impact fees aresubjectto legal standards,which require fulfillment ofthreekeyelements:need,benefitand proportionality. •First,to justify afee for public facilities,itmustbe demonstrated thatnew development will create a need forcapital improvements, •Second,newdevelopmentmust derive abenefitfromthepaymentofthefees (I.e.#inthe form of public facilities constructedwithina reasonable timeframe). •Third,thefee paid bya particular typeof development should notexceedits proportional share of the capital cost for system improvements. TischlerBise evaluated possible methodologies,and documented appropriate demand indicators by type of development to document levels of service and calculate fees.Local demographic data and improvement costs were used to identity specific capital costs attributable to growth.This report includes summary tables indicating the specific factors,referred toas level of service standards,used to derive the impact fees. The geographic area for the Parks and Recreation Facilities impact feesisthe City of South Miami;and the demandindicatorisresidential development. •Fiscal Impact Analysis •Impact Fees •Economic Impacts -Infrastructure Financing .Market and Financial Feasibility •Fiscal Software * iNTRODUCTiONToJiviPAGT Fees:- Impact Fee Study City ofSouth Miami,Florida Impact feesare one-time payments usedto construct system improvements neededto accommodate new development.An impact fee represents new growth's proportionate shareof capital facilities. Impact fees have defined parameters for use.They arenota complete solution for infrastructure financing needs.Rather,theyareone component ofa comprehensive portfolio toensure provision of adequate public facilities.Impactfeesmayonlybeusedforcapital improvements or debtservicefor growth-related infrastructure.Incontrasttogeneraltaxes,impact feesmaynotbeusedforoperations, maintenance,replacementorcorrecting existing deficiencies. GENERAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK Both stateandfederalcourtshave recognized the imposition ofimpactfeesondevelopmentasa legitimate form ofland use regulation,provided thefeesmeetstandardsintendedtoprotectagainst regulatory takings.Land use regulations,development exactions,andimpactfeesaresubjecttothe Fifth Amendment prohibition ontakingofprivatepropertyforpublicusewithoutJustcompensation.To comply withthe Fifth Amendment,development regulations mustbeshownto substantially advancea legitimategovernmentalinterest.Inthecaseofimpactfees,that InterestIsIntheprotectionofpublic health,safety,andwelfarebyensuring that developmentisnot detrimental to the qualityofessential public services.Themeanstothisendarealsoimportant,requiring bothproceduralandsubstantivedue process.Theprocess followed toreceivecommunityinput,withstakeholdermeetings,worksessions, andpublichearings provideopportunityforcommentsand refinements totheimpactfees. Thereislittlefederalcaselaw specifically dealingwithimpactfees,although other rulings on other types ofexactions(e.g.,land dedicationrequirements)arerelevant.In oneof the mostimportantexaction cases,theU.S.SupremeCourtfound that agovernmentagencyimposingexactionson development must demonstrate an "essential nexus"between the exaction and the interest being protected (see Nollan y.California Coastal Commission,1987).In amorerecentcase (Dolan v.City of Tigard,OR,1994), theCourtruled that anexaction also mustbe"roughly proportionar to the burden created by development.However,the Dolandecision appeared to setahigher standard ofreviewfor mandatory dedications ofland than fpr monetary exactions suchasimpactfees, Thereare three reasonablerelationshiprequirementsforimpactfees that related closelyto"rational nexus"or "reasonable relationship"requirements enunciated bya number of state courts.Although the term "dualrationalnexus"\s often usedtocharacterize the standard bywhich courts evaluate the validity of impact fees under the U.S.Constitution,we prefer a more rigorous formulation that recognizes three elements:"need,""benefit,"and "proportionality."Thedual rational nexus test explicitly addresses only the firsttwo,althoughproportionalityis reasonably implied,and was specifically mentioned by the U.S.Supreme Court in the Dolan case.Individual elements of the nexus standard are discussed further in the following paragraphs. All new development ina community creates additional demands on some,or all,publicfacilities providedbylocal government.If the capacity offacilitiesis not increased to satisfy that additional demand,the qualityoravailabilityofpublicservicesforthe entire community will deteriorate.Impact feesmaybeused to recover the costof development-related facilities,butonlyto the extent that the need forfacilitiesisa consequence of development that is subject to the fees.TheNollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactionsmaybeusedonlytomitigateconditions created by Impact Fee Study City ofSouth Miami,Florida the developments upon which they are imposed.Thatprincipleclearly applies to impact fees,inthis study,the impact of development oninfrastructureneedsisanalyzedin terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development and the demand forspecificfacilities,basedon applicable level of service standards. The requirement that exactionsbeproportional to the impacts of development wasclearly stated by the U.S.Supreme Courtin the Dolan case (although the relevance of that decision to impact fees has been debated)andis logically necessary toestablishapropernexus.Proportionalityis established through the procedures used to identify development-related capital costs,andin the methods used to calculate impact feesforvarious types of facilitiesandcategories of development.The demand forfacilitiesis measured in terms of relevant and measurable attributes of development (e.g.a typical housing unit's household size). Financial Accounting A sufficient benefit relationshiprequires that impactfee revenues be segregated from other funds,and that they be expended onlyon the facilities forwhich the fees were charged.Impactfeesmustbe expendedinatimelymannerandthe facilities fundedbythefeesmustservethedevelopment paying thefees.However,nothinginthe U.S.Constitution orthestate enabling legislation requires that facilitiesfundedwithfee revenues beavailableexclusivelyto development paying the fees.Inother words,benefit may extend to ageneralareaincludingmultiplereal estate developments.Procedures for the earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are discussed further below.All of these procedural,aswellas substantive,issuesareintendedtoensure that new development benefits from theimpactfeestheyarerequiredtopay.Theauthorityandproceduresto implement impactfeesis separatefrom,and complementary to,theauthoritytorequire improvements aspart of subdivision or zoning review. UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA IMPACT FEE ACT in Florida,impact feesarean outgrowth ofhome rule power and compared tootherstates,the enabling legislation is relatively brief.[See Appendix B-Florida Statute:163.31801]TheAct requires the calculation of impact feestobebasedonmost recent and localized data.Administrative charges forthe collection ofimpactfeesarelimitedto actual costs.Thechief financial officerofthe local government hasspecificresponsibilities for accounting and reporting collections andexpendituresofimpactfees.In contrast to the legal precedent in other states,Florida lawstates,"In anyactionchallenginganimpact fee,thegovernmenthastheburdenof proving bya preponderance oftheevidencethatthe imposition or amount of the fee meets the requirements ofstatelegal precedent or this section." As documented inthisreport,theCityofSouth Miami hascompliedwith the Florida Impact FeeActand applicable legal precedents.Impactfeesare proportionate and reasonably relatedtothe capital improvement demandsofnew development.Specificcostshavebeenidentifiedusing local dataand current dollars.Withinputfrom City staff,TischlerBise determined demand indicators foreachtypeof infrastructure and calculated proportionate share factors to allocate costsbytypeofdevelopment.This reportdocumentstheformulasandinput variables usedtocalculatetheimpactfeesforthreetypesof parksandrecreationcapital components.Impactfee methodologies also identify the extent towhich new development isentitledtovarioustypesofcreditstoavoidpotentialdoublepaymentofgrowth- related capital costs. TischlerBise METHODOLOGIES AND CREDITS Impact Fee Study O'fy ofSouthMiami,Florida Conceptual Impact Fee Calculation In contrasttoproject-level improvements,impactfeesfundgrowth-relatedinfrastructure that will benefit multiple development projects,or the entire jurisdiction {usually referred toassystem improvements).The first stepisto determine an appropriate demand indicator forthe particular typeof infrastructure.The demand indicator measures thenumberofdemandunits (e.g.,population)foreach unit of development.For example,anappropriateindicator of the demandforparksispopulation growthandtheincreaseinpopulationcanbeestimatedfrom the averagenumber of personsper housingunit.Thesecondstep in the impactfee formula Is todetermineinfrastructureunitsper demand unit,typicallycalledlevel of service (LOS)standards.Inkeepingwiththepark example,a common LOS standard Is parkacreageper thousand people.Thethird step in the impactfeeformulais the cost of various infrastructure units.To complete the park example,thispart of the formula would establish the cost peracreforlandacquisition and/or park improvements. Calculation Methodologies Impactfeescanbecalculatedbyany one of severallegitimate methods.Thechoice of aparticular method depends primarilyon the service characteristics andplanning requirements for each facility type.Each method has advantages and disadvantages inaparticular situation,and to some extent can be interchangeable,because eachallocatesfacilitycostsinproportion to the needs created by development. Reduced to its simplest terms,the process of calculating impact fees involves two main steps:(1) determining the cost of development-related capital improvements,and(2)allocating those costs equitably tovarious types of development.In practice,though,the calculation of impact feescan become quite complicated because of the manyvariablesinvolvedindefining the relationship between development and the need forfacilities.Thefollowingparagraphsdiscuss three basic methods for calculating impact fees,andpossibleapplication of each method. Cost Recovery or Buy-In FeeCalculation.The rationale for the cost recovery approach is that new development ispayingforits share of the useful lifeandremaining capacity of facilities already built or landalreadypurchasedfromwhich new growth will benefit.This methodology Is often used for systems that were oversized such as sewer and water facilities. Incremental ExpansionFeeCalculation.The incremental expansion method documents the current level of service (LOS)foreach type of publicfacilityin both quantitative and qualitative measures,based on an existing service standard (such as square feet per student).This approach ensures that there are no existing infrastructure deficiencies or surplus capacityinexisting infrastructure.New development is onlypayingits proportionate share for growth-related infrastructure.The level of service standards are determined ina manner similar to the current replacement cost approach used by property insurance companies.However,in contrast to insurance practices,the fee revenues would not be for renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities.Rather,revenue will be used to expand or provide additional facilities,as needed,to accommodate new development.An incremental expansion cost method is best suited forpublicfacilities that willbe expanded inregular increments,with LOS standards based on current conditions in the community. TsschlerBse Impact Fee Study City ofSouth Miami,Florida Plan-Based Fee Calculation.Theplan-based method allocatescostsfora specified set of improvements toa specified amount of development Facility plansidentify needed improvements,and land use plans identify development.Inthis method,the totalcost of relevantfacilitiesisdividedbytotaldemandto calculate a cost per unit of demand.Then,the costper unit of demand is multiplied by the amount of demand per unit of development (e.g.,housing unitsor square feet of buildingarea)ineachcategory to arriveata cost per specific unit of development (e.g.,singlefamily detached unit). Credits Regardless of the methodology,aconsiderationof"credits"Isintegralto the development of a legally valid impact fee methodology.There are two types of "credits,"each with specific anddistinct characteristics,but both of which should be addressed in the calculation of impact fees.Thefirst Is a creditduetopossibledoublepaymentsituations.This couldoccurwhencontributionsaremadebythe property owner toward the capitalcostsofthe public facility coveredby the Impactfee.This type of creditisintegratedinto the impactfee calculation.Thesecondisacredittoward the payment of afee for dedication of public sitesor improvements provided bythedeveloperandforwhichthe facility fee Is imposed.Thistypeofcredit Is addressedinthe administration and Implementation ofa facility fee program. Fee Methodologies Each ofthefee methodologies discussed abovewere considered to calculate impact feesforthe City of South Miami.Where capacity is sufficient to serve current demand the Incremental expansion method documents the current level of service (LOS)for each typeof public facility.The costrecovery method, usedonthe rationale thatnew development is paying for its share ofthe useful life and remaining capacityofanexisting facility,isusedto calculate anewgrowthshareof recreational facilities.The following table summarizes the method(s)usedto derive the Impact feeforeach component ofthe Parks andRecreation Facilities impactfees. Figure1:Summary of Impact Fee Methodologies Reporting Results Calculations throughout this technical memoare based onan analysis conducted using Excel software. Results are discussed inthememo using one-and two-digit places (in most cases),which represent rounded figures.However,the analysis itself uses figures carried totheir ultimate decimal places; therefore the sums and products generated in the analysis may not equal the sum or product ifthe reader replicates the calculation with the factors shown In the report (due tothe rounding of figures shown,notin the analysis). TischlerBise Impact Fee Study CityofSouthMiami,Florida COST FOR IMPACT FEE STUDY Included inthe Parks and Recreation facilities impact feeisthecostfor preparation ofthe Impact Fee Study.The City of South Miami Incurred acostof $36,000 forthe 2013 Impact Fee Study to establish maximum supportableimpactfeesfor Parks and Recreation Facilities and Multi-Modal Transportation Facilities (tobe discussed inafuture document).To distribute thecost among eachstudy component, half ($18,000)ofthetotalprojectcostwas assigned tothe Parks and Recreation Facilities fee evaluation. Thecomponentsharesandcostsareshown in Figure 2. Figure2:Impact Fee Study Preparation Cost Fee Components 2013 Component Costs Parks and Recreation $18,000 Multi-Modal Transportation $18,000 Total Study Cost &W$S38B8m^3&& MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE IMPACT FEES BY TYPE OF LAND USE Figure 3 provides ascheduleofthe maximum allowable impactfeesbytypeoflandusefor the City of SouthMiami.Thefees represent the highest amount allowableforeach type ofapplicablelanduse,and represents newgrowth'sfair share of the costforparksandrecreationcapitalfacilities.TheCitymay adopt fees that are less thantheamountsshown.However,areductioninimpactfeerevenue will necessitate an increase in other revenues,a decrease inplanned capital expenditures,and/or a decrease in levels ofservice. Thefeesforresidential development aretobeassessedperhousingunitandshouldbecollectedwhen building permitsareissued.Asanoption,thefeesfor single residential unitsarepresentedbysizeofthe unit,basedonnumberofbedroomsandpersonsperhousingunitfactors.SeeAppendixAfor further explanation of these factors and fee options. Figure3:Summary of Maximum Allowable Impact FeesbyLandUse Unit type Number of Bedrooms Persons per HousingUnit [1] MulttfamllyUnit Single Unit Single Unit All Sizes 1.34 0-3 2.54 4+3.45 wmsmmmmmmmm mmmm mjm^mm ^S^ [1]PPHU Recommended multipliers are scaled to make the average value by type of housing for FLPUMA4014 match the average value for the Oty derived from 2011 American Community Survey data,with persons adjusted to the Gtywlde average of 2.80 persons per single family unit. TischlerBise Parks and Recreation Facilities Impact Fees METHODOLOGY Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida The Parks and Recreation Facilities impact fees include three components.Figure 4 illustrates the Parks and Recreation impact fee components and methodology.An Incremental expansion cost methodology was usedto calculate the developed parkland and park improvements components.Acost recovery methodwasusedto calculate the recreation facilities component.All capital costshavebeen allocated 100 percent to residential development. Based on recent growth trends and discussions with City staff,TischlerBise calculated a base year population estimate of 11,979,for use In the Impact Fee Study.Please note:because population estimates used inthe impact feestudy are based on year-round population,estimates and projections presentedhereinrepresentmore conservative figures thantheUniversityof Florida's Bureau of EconomicandBusinessResearchhouseholdpopulationdata. Figure 4:ParksandRecreation Faciifties Impact FeeMethodologyChart lischlerBise Persons per Housing Unit Developed Parkland (incremental) Residential Development nraltiplied by Net Gtpital Cost Per Person plus Park Improvements (incremental) plus Recreational Facilities (cost recovery) impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS AND COSTS Developed Parkland TheCity of South Miami does not anticipate purchasingadditionalparklandin the foreseeable future. Rather,the Cityplanstomaintainthe current levelofservicefordevelopedparklandwithacitywide servicearea that itprovidestoexistingdevelopment.Thus,the incremental expansion methodology is usedtocalculatethis component oftheParksandRecreation Facilities impactfees. TheCityintendstouseimpactfeestodevelopaportionofitsundevelopedinventoryofparkland.In order tohostimprovementssuchasathleticfields,playgrounds,parking,picnicand other amenities, parklandmustfirstbedevelopedIn terms ofbasicinfrastructure (e.g.,sewer/water,parking,grading, etc.).Figure 5 providesa current inventory of CJty-maintaJned parkland,including10acresof undevelopedlanddesignatedasSouthMiamiPark,and34.94acresof developed parkland,all witha citywide service area. As shown In Figure 5,the current level of service h 2.92acresper 1,000 residents (rounded),based ona dividing the 34.94 developed acresby the currentpopulation of 11,979. the cost per person is calculated by multiplying the current LOS (2.92 acres per thousand persons)by the estimated cost to develop a park acre provided by the City ($175,000 per acre)and dividing this total by1,000.Thisresultsina current parkland development cost per person of $511.00. Figure 5:incremental Expansion -Developed Parkland •City of South Miami Parkland Oante Fascell Park Brewer Park Murray Park Fuchs Park Marshall Williamson Park Jean Willis (FloweringTree)Park AH-Amerlca Park Van Smith Olson Palmer Pa rk/S.M.Field South Miami Park TOTAL Source:Oty ofSouth Miami Level ofService (LOS)Standards Inventory of Parkland Acres 2013 Oty Papulation 7.50 1.50 3.50 5.00 3.50 0.50 1.40 1.14 1.00 9.90 10.00 LOS:.Acr.eSLnerJ.hQusand.Rersort__l-:---II—:—: Cost Analysis LOS:Acres per Thousand Person Land DeveloDment Cost ner Acre Parkland Cost per Person TischlerBise 10.00 34.94 34.94 11,979 2.92 $175,000 $511.00 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida PARK IMPROVEMENTS The park improvementscomponent is basedonthe incremental expansion methodology.The City of SouthMiamimaintainsactiveandpassivepark improvements foruseby the.current population.As the residentpopulationgrows,the City intendstouseimpactfee revenue toaddpark improvements to existingparksas necessary to maintain the current levei of service of 3.59 units per1,000 residents.As shownbelow,the Cityhas43parkimprovementsincludingsportsfieldsandcourts,playgrounds,and picnic amenities.The combined value of park improvements Is$5,075,586.Thecalculationto determine levelofserviceisas follows:43units/(11,979/1,000 residents)-3.59unitsper1,000residents (rounded).Theaveragecostperunit of existing parkimprovementsis$118,037.To calculate the costof parkimprovementsper capita,the average costperunitis multiplied by the levelofservice resulting in apark improvements cost per capita of $423.75. Figure6:Incremental Expansion -Park Improvements Handball Courts Total' 'Units'.. .''..Cost per '•;•-Total . .•'•Unit,"';•Value'' Pavilion 3 $15,000 $45,000 Playgrounds 5 $55,000 $275,000 Football/Soccer Fields (Lighted)1 $175,000 $175,000 Base/Softball Fields (Ughted)7 $200,000 $1,400,000 Open Fields (Unllghted)4 $150,000 $600,000 Tennis Courts 10 $30,000 $300,000 Basketball Courts 3 $47,225 $141,675 Volleyball Courts,Sand 2 $17,000 $34,000 Restrooms/Concesslon 3 $110,000 $330,000 Pool 1 $1,654,911 $1,654,911 TOTAL 43 $5,075,586 Average Costper Improvement ••$118,037 Source:Oty ofSouthMiami Level ofService (LOS)Standards Inventory of Park Improvements Total Park Acres Improvements per Acre 2013 Qty Population LOS:Improvements per Thousand Person Cost Analysis LOS:Acres per Thousand Person. Average Cost per Improvement Improvement Cost per Person • TischlerBise 43 34.94 1.23 11,979 3.59 $118 037 $423.75 Impact Fee Study Oty ofSouthMiami,Florida RECREATION FACILITIES In2001,aneedwasidentifiedfora recreational facility toservecurrentdemandsand expected development In the Oty of SouthMiamiAsshown In Figure 7,the cityconstructedthe22,032square foot Murray/Gibson-Bethel CommunityCentertoservearesidentpopulation of approximately 14,000 people(bothexistingand new residents),andreserved25 percent of the total facility to serve non resident members.Therefore,a25percentreductionfactorisappliedto the total square feet to determine the 16,524 squarefeet of the totalspacethat will beusedtocalculate the level of servicefor this component. Basedonanadjustedsquarefootage of 16,524andacapacitytoserveapproximately14,000residents, a cost recovery methodology is used to calculate the level of service of 1.18 square feet per resident by dividing 16,524 squarefeetby14,000residents.TheCity spent $2.5millionto construct the 22,032 squarefootfacility,which equates toacostpersquarefootof$113.Thecostperpersonisderivedby multiplying the 1.18 LOS by the costpersquarefoot($113),resulting in acostperperson of $133.34. Figure 7:Cost Recovery-Parks and Recreation Facilities Murray/61 bson-Bethel Cdmm.Cntr Reduction Fadorfi^f^g^^g^ Share ofFacility For Oty Residents £ Source:Oty ofSouthMiami Level ofService (LOS)Standards Inventory ofSquare Feet Oty Population to be Served LOS:Square Feet per Person : CostAnaiysis LOS:Square Feet per Person Cost per Square Foot Recreation Facility Cost per Person TischlerBise 16,5241 16,524 1.18 ^•#;$2ii3> 10 impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida PARKS AMD RECREATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO SERVE GROWTH Parks and Recreation Facilities Capacity In 2001,the Oty ofSouth Miami constructed^new recreation facility designed to serve a resident population of approximately14,000people,withadditionalspacetoserve non-resident guests.Issuance ofageneralobligationbondprovided the necessary fundingtoconstruct the new facility. Based ona capacity toserve14,000residentsand the land useassumptions(seeAppendixA)usedto projectthepotentialrate of newdevelopment,thereremainsenoughcapacitytoserveapproximately twentyyearsofgrowth.Shownin Figure 8isthe annual residential demandforthe recreational facility square footage foreachyearpastcurrent demand,until the remaining capacity is utilized byfuture development. Figure8:Recreational Facility Remaining Capacityto Serve Growth TischlerBise Demand for Remaini Population LOS FacilitvSF 1L979 I1WWIB^mS2^\ 12,074 1.18 14,247 2,277 12,169 1.13 14,359 2,165 12,266 1.18 14,474 2,050 12^63 1.18 14,588 1,936 12,460 1.18 14,703 1,821 12,559 1.18 14,820 1,704 12,658 1.18 14,936 1,588 12,759 1.18 15,056 1,468 12,859 1.18 15,174 1,350 12,961 L18 15,294 1,230 13,064 1.18 15,416 1,108 13,167 1.18 15,537 987 ^^^^^^^m 13,271 1.18 15,660 864 ^^^^^^^m 13,376 1.18 15,784 740 13,482 1.18 15,909 615 ^M^K^mKBc^f^SC^T^Sff 13,589 1.18 16,035 489 13,696 LIB 16,161 363 13,805 L18 16,290 234 ^P^^^^S^^^^13,914 1.18 16,419 105 Sfl£8HHSP»14,024 1.18 16,548 0 ii Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Projeoion of Growth-Related Infrastructure Needs Weeds duetofuturegrowth were calculatedusing the currentlevels of serviceand cost factorsfor the incrementalexpansion of developed parkland andparkImprovements.Growth-related needs area projection of the amount of existinginfrastructureand estimated costs over a specified period needed tomaintaincurrentlevels of servicefor expected populationincreases.Figure 9 below isa summary of the growth-relatedneedstoincrementallyexpand the number of developedparkacres,andpark improvements. Thepaceand location of newdevelopmentwill drive decisions regarding the timing of individual improvements.Additionally,as new development occurs,the City may choose to negotiate for developers to make capital investments inreturnforcreditsagainst the Parksand Recreation Facilities Impact Fees. Figure9:Parks and Recreation Incremental Improvement Needs Parkland 1 Park ImDrovempnK till 2.92 Acres per Thousand Persons 3.59 Improvement Thousand Persons lii $175,000 Land Development Cost per Acre $118,037 Average Cost per Improvement iiMff)ffroiiEf!T^ Demand 1 Unit:Projected 1 Year Population ParkAcres1 Base 2013 11,979 35 1 2014 12.074 35 2 2015 12,169 36 3 2016 12,266 36 4 2017 12,363 36 5 2018 12,460 36 6 2019 12,559 37 7 2020 12,658 37 8 2021 12,759 37 9 2022 12,859 38 10 2023 12,961 38 COst of Necessa ry Parkland Cost of Necessary improvements Cost of Necessary Parkland Cost of Necessary Improvements [1]Shown as rounded numbers $245,791 $501,802 43 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 46 46 47 $203,825 $416,125 12 COST FOR IMPACT FEE STUDY impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Included in the fee is the cost for preparation ofthe Parks and Recreation Facilities impact fees.As shown in Figure 10,this is calculated based onthe projected growth In South Miami population over the next five years,which is the recommended period oftime impact fees should beineffect before reevaluatlon to reflect changes in development and levels of service.Between 2013 and 2018,the City of South Miami population is projected to grow by481 persons.The consultant costto prepare the 2013 Impact Fee Study {$18,000}is divided bythe 5-year net increase in population (481)to derive a per person cost of$37.42. Figure 10:Impact Fee Study Preparation Cost (Parks and Recreation Portion) TischlerBise 1 Fee Component.• 1Proportionate Share "'.•'.'.Residential 100% Consultant Fee $18,000 $18,000 1Demand Unit -''Person " Increase in Population E3ESISRSI 481 [Cost per Demand Unit $37,421 13 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida CREDIT FOR FUTURE PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS The City ofSouth Miami borrowed moneyto fund construction ofthe Murray/Gibson-Bethel Community Center.Because ofthis,TischlerBise recommends the Parks and Recreation Facilities impact fees include acreditforfuture principal paymentsontheexisting General Obligation debt.New residentialdevelopment that pays the Parks and Recreation Facilities impactfeeswill also contribute to future principal paymentspaidfrom property taxrevenue.Toaccountforthetimevalue of money, annual principal paymentsarediscountedusinganetpresentvalueformulabasedon the estimated average interest rates over the life of the bond.Acreditisonly necessary forprincipal payments because the recreation facilities component wasbasedon the constructioncost of thefacilityandnot thedebtserviceschedule.Figure 11showsthecredit calculated basedon the projected principal payments startinginfiscalyear2014through the remainderof the bond's term. Theapplicable net presentvalue ofthe creditforresidential development is $85.51perperson.This will be subtracted from the grosscapitalcostperperson to deriveanetcapitalcostperperson to be used in calculating the maximum supportable impactfeeforParksandRecreation Facilities. Figure11:CreditforFuturePrincipal Payments on Parksand Recreation Facilities wmmMmwmi& Person Fiscal Year Principal Persons 2014 $60,000 12,074 $4.97 2015 $65,000 12,169 $5.34 2016 $70,000 12,266 $5.71 2017 $75,0)0 12,353 $6.07 2018 $75,000 12,460 $6.02 2019 $80,000 12,559 $6.37 2020 $85,000 12,658 $6.72 2021 $90,000 12,759 $7.05 2022 $90,000 12,859 $7.00 2023 $95,000 12,961 $7.33 2024 $100,000 13,064 $7.65 2025 $105,000 13,167 $737 2026 $110,000 13,271 $8.29 2027 $120,000 13,376 $8.97 2028 $125,000 13,482 $9.27 2029 $130,000 13,589 $9.57 2030 $135,000 $1,610,000 13,696 Discount Rate* $9.86 TOTAL $124.16 4.00% Net Present Value $85.51 *Average estimated interest rate over life of loan. Source:Oty of South Miami 14 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida PARKS AND RECREATION INPUT VARIABLES AND IMPACT FEES Figure 12 provides asummaryoftheinput variables (described inthechaptersectionsabove)usedto calculate thenet capital costperpersonofdeveloped parkland,parkImprovements,and recreational facilities.The Parks and Recreation impact feesarethe product of persons per housing unit(see AppendixA -Land UseAssumptions),bytype,multiplied bythetotalnet capital costperperson. Fees are provided for multifamily unitsandan average sizedsingle family unitAsanoption,feesare also presented bysizeof single family housing unit,basedon household size established bynumberof bedrooms (see Appendix A for further explanation).Each Persons per Housing Unit factor is multiplied by the netcapitalcost per persontoderivetheimpactfeeperunit. Anexampleofthe calculation foran average single family unit Is:thenet capital costper person ($1,020.00)multiplied bythe persons per housing unit for that size unit (2.80)to derive the Impact fee per average single family unit of $2,856. Figure 12:Parks and Recreation Input Variables and Maximum Allowable Impact Fees Parksand Recreation CapitalCosts Parkland Park Improvements Parks and Recreation Facilities impact Fee Study Land Development Developed Parks Parks andRecreationDevelopmentFeeSchedule per Housing Unit Per Person $511.00 $423.75 $133.34 $37.42 [1]PPHU Recommended multipliers arescaledto make the average valueby typeof housing for FL PUMA 4014matchtheaveragevalueforthe Gty derived from2011American Community Survey data,withpersons adjusted tothe dtywfde average of2.80 persons per single family unit. TischlerBise 15 CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Thissectionsummarizes the potentialcash flow totheOtyofSouth Miami,ifdevelopmentoccursas projected,and the Parks andRecreationImpactfeeis implemented at the maximumallowable amounts. The cash flow projections arebasedonthe assumptions detailed inthischapter,andthedevelopment projectionsdiscussedin Appendix A-LandUse Assumptions.Thecashflowprovidesanindication of the impact feerevenuegenerated bynew development,andcapital expenditures necessary tomeetthe demandfornew parks and recreation facilities broughtaboutbynewdevelopmentandtheexisting debtserviceforthe Murray/Gihson-Bethel Community Center General Obligation bond. Necessary expenditures associatedwiththeIncrementalexpansion of developed parkland,andpark Improvementsarecalculatedbasedoncurrentcostsperunit,andonmaintaining the currentlevels of service.For the costrecoveryexpendituresassociated with the recreation facility GeneralObligation bondthetotalpaymentsforthe10-year period areshowninthe capital costsection.Thecash flow deficit represents the portion ofthe full debt service not recouped throughimpactfeerevenues.The cash flow Is also affectedby the reductionofimpactfeerevenuedue to acredit for future paymentsof theGeneralObligation debt forthe recreational facility. Figure13:Cash Flow Summary i Parks and Recreation Cash Flov Net Cost per Population New Population ft] Potential Revenue,2013-2023 (rounded) Parks and Recreation Necessary Improvements Recreation Facility Debt Service [2] impact Fee Study Total Capital Costs,2013-2023 -^-ea-s-H-Fl^w1^1—" Cumulative Surplus/(Deflclt) $1,020.00 982 $1,001,643 $917,927 $1,332,483 $18,000 $2,268,410 ($1,266,768) [1]TischlerBise,LandUse Assumptions [2]Reflects the total debt service obligation (principal and Interest) TischlerBise 16 Implementation and Administration Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida All costs In the Impactfee calculations aregivenin current dollarswithno assumed inflation rate over time.Necessarycost adjustments canbemadeaspartof the recommended annualevaluationand updateof impact fees.Oneapproachistoadjustfor inflation in construction costsbymeansofan index like theone published by Engineering News Record (ENR).This index canbe applied against the calculatedimpactfee.Ifcostestimateschange significantly the City shouldrecalculatethefees. There are certain accounting procedures that should be followed bythe City!For example,monies receivedshouldbeplacedina separate fundandaccountedfor separately andmay only beusedforthe purposesauthorizedinanimpactfeeordinance.Interestearnedonmonies In the separatefundshould be credited to the fund. CREDITS AND REIMBURSEMENTS Ifadeveloperconstructsaparksand recreation facilities componentthatwas included inthefee calculations ordedicates land forfuture investments,it will benecessarytoeitherreimbursethe developeror provide acreditagainstthe Parks and Recreation Facilities impactfees.Thelatteroptionis more difficult toadministerbecauseitcreatesuniquefeesforspecificgeographicareas.Basedon TischlerBise's experience,ItIsbetterfortheOtyto establish a reimbursement agreement with the developerthatconstructsasystem Improvement.The reimbursement agreement should be limited toa payback period ofno more thanten years and the City should not pay interest onthe outstanding balance.The developer must provide sufficient documentation ofthe actual cost incurred forthe system improvement.The City should only agreetopaythelesserof the actualconstructioncostorthe estimatedcostusedintheimpactfee analysis.If the Oty paysmorethan the costusedinthefee analysis,there will be insufficient fee revenue.Reimbursement agreements should only obligate the City of South Miami to reimburse developers annually according to actual fee collections from the benefiting area. COLLECTION AND EXPENDITURE ZONES The reasonableness of impact fees Is determined inpart by their relationship tothe local government's burden to provide necessary public facilities.The need to show a substantial benefit usually requires communities toevaluate collection and expenditure zonesforpublic facilities thathave distinct geographic service areas.Therefore,developments paying fees will be benefiting from the provision of additional capital improvements in their service area.The impact fees prepared for the City of South Miami arebasedoncapital improvements that will have citywide benefits;therefore,a citywide service area is appropriate. TischleiBise 17 Appendix A-Land'UseAssumptions" INTRODUCTION Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Aspart of our Work Scope,TischlerBisehasprepared documentation on demographic dataand development projections that will be used in the City of South MiamiParksand Recreation Facilities Impact feU Study.The demographic estimates for2013 will be used in the fee calculations.The development projectionsareusedsolelyto illustrate apossiblefuturepaceforservice demands,impact fee revenues,andcapital expenditures. Baseyearresidential development estimates were developed based onhistoric trends,current data maintained by the Miami-Dade County Assessor's Office,and discussions with staff. Threeassumptionsinformed the calculation of projections foreachyearpast the base.First,TischlerBise assumedhistorictrendswouldcontinue.Second,the twenty-year projectionsdonotincludeany large- scaledevelopmentprojects that would diverge forhistoricgrowthpatterns.Lastly,the projections assume the CityofSouthMiamiwouldnotannex additional Sands for development inthe twenty-year projection window. Thedatahereinarefor the City of SouthMiami2013ParksandRecreation Facilities ImpactFeeStudy. TischlerBise 18 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Impact Fee Study Oty ofSouthMiami,Florida Current Housing Unit Estimates Impactfeesrequirean analysis ofcurrent levels of service.Forresidentialdevelopment,current levels of service are determined using estimates of population and housing units.Toestimatecurrent housing units in the City ofSouth Miami,TischlerBise began by calculating the distribution of housing unitsby typeof structure from the decennial census andthe 2011 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates.According tothe Census data,the housing unit inventory inthe City is65percent single units and35percent units in multi-unit structures.Single Unit includes detached,attached-condominiums, and manufactured home structures.According to Miami-Dade County data,the City has 3,643 single unit housing structures (single family detached and condominium),and95structures with multiple housing units. Figure A14:City of South Miami Residential Structures Property Type Single Family Condominium Multifamily Total Source:Miami-Dade County PropertyAppraiser.(Uull3) 2013 Assessment RoilChangebyPropertyType Holding the 2011 U.S.Census unitdistribution constant,the number of housing units inthe95 multi-unit structurescanbe calculated as follows:(3,643 single units /65%)X35%=1,988 housing unitsin multi- unit structures.This equatestoabaseyear estimate of 5,631 total housing units inthe City of South Miami. 2,854 789 3,643 Figure A15:Residential HousingUnitsintheCityofSouth Miami Structure Type Single Unit [3] 2+Units Total 2011 Distribution [1] 2^54 789 95 3,738 [1]U.S.Census Bureau,2011 AmericanCommunitySurvey5-Year Estimates:Table B25024 [2]Gty of South Miami [3]Single Unit includes detached,attached,and manufactured homes Source:Cityof South Miami Based on household characteristics and data availability,TischlerBise recommends using two housing unit categories forthe impact feestudy:(1)Single Unit and (2)2+Unit.(Further discussion on housing characteristics by housing unit typeand bedroom count is provided attheendofthis memo.) TischlerBise 19 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Persons Per Housing Unit According tothe U.S.Census Bureau,a household Is a housing unitthatis occupied by year-round residents.Impact feesoftenuseper capita standards and persons per housing unit (PPHU)or persons perhousehold (PPH)to derive proportionate-share feeamounts. •When PPHU Is used In thefee calculations,infrastructure standards arederivedusing year- round population. •When PPH isusedinthefee calculations,theimpactfee methodology assumesailhousingunits will be occupied,thus requiring seasonal orpeak population tobeusedwhen deriving infrastructure standards. TischlerBise recommends that impactfeesforresidential development in the Oty of SouthMiamibe imposed according to thenumberof year-round residentsperhousingunit (PPHU).This methodology assumes some portion of the housingstock will bevacant;andaccording to the U.S.Census bureau ' American Community Survey,the Cityhada2011vacancyrate of 16.6 percent Personsperhousingunit (PPHU)requiresdataonpopulationinoccupiedunitsand the types of unitsby structure.Thesedataarecoiiected in the U.S.CensusBureau,AmericanCommunitySurvey (ACS).Figure A16belowshows2011ACS5-yearestimatesfortheCityof SouthMiami.Tocalculatethe PPHU,persons inoccupiedunits(11,507)isdividedbytotalhousingunits (5,034).Dwellings withasingleunitper structure(detached,attached,andmanufacturedhomes)averaged2.80personsperhousingunit. Dwellingunitsin structures with multiple unitsaveraged1.34personsper housing unit The 2011 averagepersonsper housing unit (PPHU)of 2.29 wilt be held constant over the projection period since the impact fees represents a "snapshot approach"of current levels of serviceand costs.The 2.29 PPHU factor will be applied to the baseyear2013housingunit estimate calculatedabove. FigureA16:Persons per Housing Unit by Type of Unit,2011 American Community Survey 2011 Summary by Persons Type ofHousing Houses Persons per Housing Persons Per holds Household Units HsgUnit Housing Mix Single Unit ...9,125 :3,flm .3.03 .'•'..v.3i25£^:?2^8Q:-.1 65% ^mmmmmmm^mmjmm:W0$$8$&mmrnsm msmm mmmmkmmm Subtotal 11,507 Group Quarters 56 4,198 2.74 5,034 2.29 Vacancy Rate 16.6%TOTAL 11,563 4,198 5,034 Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2007-2011 American Community Survey TischlerBise 20 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida Year-round Population Estimates and Projections Based on recentgrowthtrendsanddiscussionswithCitystaff,TischlerBise calculatedabaseyear population estimate,forusein the impactFeeStudy.Please note:because population estimates used in the impactfeestudyarebasedonyear-roundpopulation,estimates andprojectionspresented hereinwill be lower than the University of Florida's Bureau of EconomicandBusinessResearch household population data. To calculate a2013 year-round population,TischlerBise usedannualintercensalJuly population estimatesfromthe U.S.CensusBureaufor2006-2010toestablishapopulationgrowthtrendanda relationship between City ofSouth Miami and Miami-Dade County population.According to Census estimates,overthelastdecadetheCityofSouth Miami hashostedon average 0.47percentofthe annual Miami-Dade County population,butthe share has decreased slightly each year.The2013 City of South Miami impact Fee Studyassumesthe City will notannex additional land inthenexttwenty years. Therefore,the share of Cbunty population inthe City isnot likely to increase,but through more intensity of land use,the assumption usedto calculate projected population estimatesisthattheshare will decrease only0.01 percent by2033. The Florida Office of Demographic Research estimates the County has a 2013 population of 2,577,768. According tothe Office's long-term growth projections,the population of Miami-Dade County is projected toexceed3 million by2033.This equatesto roughly a0.89 percent growth rate for the Miami- Dade County population between 2010 and 2033.By applying theCit/s share of County population to the 2033 projected population itis projected the City of South Miami will have a 2033 population of just over 14,000.See Figure A17for additional detail.The exponential growth rateof0.79 percent calculated from the City's 2010 and 2033 population estimates was used to estimate a 2013 base year population of 11,979 for the City of South Miami. Figure A17:PopulationEstimatesand Projections for CityofSouthMiami Exponential GrowthRates ._2010*33CityofSouthMiami11,273 11,3921 ••ir.S99|&)(%&^Sjp^^X:$W<m& Miami-DadeCountyl 2,405.9111 2^36;062|2fS05379|T 2516JS37T 2.551,2901 2:5777681 -3.072^731 IllwiSS M^BSS Cityshareof County 0.47*0.47%0.47%0.47%0^47*0.47%0.4fi% fl]U.S.Census:IntercensalPopulationEstimates [2]Florida OfficeofDemographicResearch:CountyPopulationProjections {3\Florida Office of Demographic Research:County Population Projection.Oty projection calculated from.46%aty shareofCounty population trend 21 impact Fee Study Oty ofSouthMiami,Florida Demand Indicators by Size of Detached Housing TischlerBise analyzed demographic datainanefforttorefinetheimpactfeescheduletobemore progressive for residential development.This canbedoneby developing feesbysizeofhousingunit basedonbedroom count Household size can be derived using custom tabulations of demographic data bybedroomrangefromsurveyresponsesprovidedbythe U.S.CensusBureauinfilesknownasPublic Use Micro-data Samples (PUMS).Because PUMS dataare only available forareasofroughly 100,000 persons,the CityofSouth Miami is In Florida Public Use Micro-data Area (PUMA)04014.Dataisfirst analyzedfor the PUMA areaand then calibratedtoconditionsin the City. TischlerBise used2011 ACS 5-YearEstimatestoderive persons perhousingunitbynumberofbedrooms. Asshownin Figure A18,recommended multipliers were scaled tomakethe average valuebytypeof housingfor Florida PUMA 04014matchthe average valuederivedfrom ACS dataspecifictoSouth Miami.As the number of bedrooms increases,personsperunitincreases. Figure A18:AveragePersonsand Trip EndsbyBedroomRange In CityofSouthMiami Unit Type Single Unit 0-3 Bdrms Single Unit 4+Bdrms B TischlerBise wmmmmMM Mult!family Units Total GRAND TOTAL HI 5,472 2,469 AmericanCommunitySurvey,PublicUse MIcrodata Samplefor FLPUMA 04014 (unweighted data for2011). [2]PersonsperHousingUnitfactorsarescaledtomaketheaveragevalueby typeofhousingfor FL PUMA 04014matchtheaveragevaluederived fromAmericanCommunitySurvey2011data,withpersons adjusted to the Citywide average of2.80personspersingle unit POPULATION ANDHOUSINGUNIT PROJECTIONS TischlerBise useda two-step processtoprojecthousingunitsforeachyearpastbaseyear2013.First,to calculateunitsaddedeach year,the annual net populationincreasewasdividedby the PPHU factor (2.29).Thetotalunitsestimatewasthen distributed bytypeofstructureusing the assumed2013unit mixfromabove(65 percent singleunitand35percentmulti-unitstructures).Over the 20-year projectionperiod,the share of singleunitstructuresdecreasesby less thanone percent.See Figure A19 belowfora summary of populationandhousingunitprojections. Population andhousingunitprojectionsareusedtoillustrate the possiblefuturepace of service demands,revenues,andexpenditures.Asthese factors willvarytothe extent thatfuture development varies,there will bevirtuallyno effect ontheactualamountoftheimpactfees. 22 FigureA19:PopulationandHousingUnitProjectionsinCity of South Miami,2013-2033 SUMMARY OFDEMAND PROJECTIONS (Citylimits) TOTAL YEAR-ROUND POPULATION 0.79%^.'##79 12,074 12,169 12,26612,363 12,460 12,559 12,658 12,759 12,859 12,961 13,482 14,024 TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 2.29 PPHU >VS,631 5,672 5,713 5,755 5,797 5,839 5,882 5,925 5,969 6,013 6,058 6,285 6.523 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT "jfi v.,.v.• HousingUnits 2011 Single Units 65%fr'-$643 3,660 3,6863,713 3,741 3,768 3,795 3,823 3352 3380 3,910 4,057 4,210 Multifamily Units 3S%r:l;988 2.012 2.0272,0422.056 2.071 2.0862.1022.117 2.133 2,148 2.228 2.313 Impact Fee Study City ofSouthMiami,Florida 2,045 892 102 45 707>U 5,713 S.7S5 5.797 5339 5382 5325 5,969 6.013 6.0S8 6,285 6,523 S67 325 892 28 16 45 ANNUAL INCREASES (Oty Umtts)12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20*21 21-22 22-23 27«28 32-33 Year-Round Population Housing units 95 41 95 41 97 42 97 42 Source:Florida Office of Demographic Research;City of South Miami;TischlerBise TischlerBise i>ntwwv«Kui|«<t\ 97 42 99 43 99 43 101 44 100 44 102 45 106 46 110 48 102 45 23 Impact Fee Study CityofSouthMiami,Florida Appendix B -Elori da statute:163.31801 TITLE XI 163.31801 -IMPACT FEES;SHORT TITLE;INTENT;DEFINITIONS;ORDINANCES LEVYING IMPACT FEES Florida Impact Fee Act (1)This section maybecitedasthe "Florida Impact FeeAct." (2) (3) (4) The Legislature finds that impact fees areanimportantsourceofrevenuefora local government to use in funding the infrastructure necessitatedbynewgrowth.The Legislature further finds that impact feesarean outgrowth ofthehomerulepowerofa local government to provide certain services within Its jurisdiction.Due tothegrowthofimpactfeecollections andlocal governments'reliance oh impact fees,itIstheintentofthe Legislature toensure that,whenacountyor municipality adoptsanimpactfeeby ordinance oraspecialdistrict adoptsan impact feeby resolution,the governing authoritycomplieswiththissection. An impact fee adopted byordinanceofacountyormunicipality or byresolution of; district must,at minimum: 3p€CSSi (a)Require that the calculationof the impactfeebebasedonthe most recent andlocalized data. (b)Provideforaccountingandreportingofimpactfeecollectionsand expenditures.Ifa local governmental entity imposesanimpact fee to address its infrastructure needs,the entityshallaccountfor the revenuesandexpendituresofsuchimpactfeeina separate accounting fund. (c)Limit administrative chargesforthecollectionofimpactfeestoactualcosts. (d)Require that notice beprovidedno less than 90days before the effective date ofan ordinance or resolution imposinga new or increased impact fee.A county or municipality Is not required to wait 90days to decrease,suspend,or eliminate an impact fee. Auditsof financial statements of local governmental entities and district school boards which are performed bya certified public accountant pursuant to s.218.39 and submitted to the Auditor General must includeanaffidavitsignedby the chief financial officer of the local governmental entity or district school board stating that the local governmental entity or district school board has complied withthis section. (5)in anyactionchallenginganimpact fee,thegovernmenthastheburdenofprovingbya preponderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of the fee meets the requirements of state legal precedent or this section.The court may not use a deferential standard. History.—s.9,ch.2006-218;s.1,ch.2009-49;s.5,ch.2009-96;s.5,ch.2011-14;s.1,ch.2011-149. TischlerBise 24 ii^MiSli^S^^ife fe^;*/ mrttfT City of South Miami Table of Contents CONCURRENCY REVIEW 1 INTRODUCTION 1 BRIEF HISTORY OF FLORIDA LAW.2 SOUTH MIAMI CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENTSYSTEM 5 CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY ASSESSMENT 7 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREAS (TCEA)9 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICTS (MMTD)......14 SPECIALTY LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)ANALYSIS 17 SUMMARYAND RECOMMENDATIONS 21 Tables TABLE1 CONCURRENCY REVIEWREQUIREMENTS IN SOUTH MIAMI 5 TABLE 2SOUTH MIAMI LOSSTANDARDS 6 TABLE3 FOOTS GENERIC COST PER MILEMODELS S TABLE 4 SOUTH MIAMI TCEA PLANNING EFFORT (PRELIMINARY)13 TABLE 5 SOUTH MIAMI MMTD PLANNING EFFORT (PRELIMINARY)15 Figures FIGURE 1CITYOF SOUTH MIAMI BOUNDARY 3 FIGURE 2 CHANGES AFTER THE REPEAL OF THEGROWTHMANAGEMENTACT4 FIGURE 3 SOUTH MIAMI URBANINFILL&REDEVELOPMENT AREA 7 FIGURE4 SOUTHWEST VIEW OF SOUTH DIXIEHIGHWAY 8 RGURE 5MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TCEA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPARISON 11 FIGURE 6MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS INAND AROUND SOUTH MIAM112 FIGURE 7MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT CHECKLIST.16 FIGURE 8 POUCE,FIRE,ANDHOSPITALFACILITIES IN SOUTH MIAMI 18 FIGURE 9ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILYVOLUMES FOR URBANIZED AREAS ...2.0 alter;Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami mmmmsmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmm CONCURRENCY REVIEW Introduction InSeptember2013,theCity of SouthMiami(City)contained approximately 231 squaremiles of land,hadan estimated population of 11,998/and was one of34 incorporated municipalities in Miami- DadeCounty(County).Together,the34 incorporated municipalities covered approximately 217.59 squaremilesandthe unincorporated areas covered approximately 1,761.77 square miles.2 In January 2013,theCountyreportedatotalpopulation of 2,496,435with 1,102,955individualslivinginunincorporatedareasand1,393,480 individuals livingin incorporated municipalities.Assuch,theCity containedapproximately0.12percent of theCounty'slandand0.48 percent of the County's population(variesslightlydependingupondata source),figure 1 illustratestheboundary of theCity,whichislocatedadjacenttotheCity of CoralGablestothe eastandtheVillageofPinecrestto die south,butismostly surrounded by unincorporated areas. TheCountyisresponsibleforprovidingpublicfacilitiesandservicestomost oftheresidentsand businesses inthe unincorporated areas..Thisplacesalarge burden ontheCounty's resources, andinsome unincorporated areas,has resulted inlesserqualityorlesser convenient accessto public facility facilities and services (e.g.,police response times)thanare typically provided in the incorporated municipalities.On November 20,2012,theBoard of County Commissioners unanimously approved Resolution No.R-983-12,Resolution Creating Task Force to Review Pending Annexation and Incorporation Proposals andto Make Recommendations onHowthe County Should Proceedto Address the Remainder of the Unincorporated Communities.The intent wasto create an Annexation and Incorporation Task Force that would provide the County with recommendations onhowthe remainder ofthe unincorporated areascouldeithercreate new incorporated municipalities orbeannexedbyanexisting one.Thiswassimilartowhathasbeenlong encouraged by MIAMI-DAI^Flliii Broward County fa order to allow more localizedIil#-\I uVLJJ+LJCfflml municipalities address and implement policy for their own localizedissues,therebyallowingBrowardCountyto concentrate on more regional issues.wmmm In recent years,the City has made proposals to annex some ofthe surrounding unincorporated areas (primarily those just north and south ofthe City boundary),but those proposals were temporarily setasideuntilfurther studies could be completed toanalyze public sentiment, financial feasibility,andother factors.AstheCitycontinuestoconsider annexation opportunities and also new development opportunities withinitscurrent boundary,itwas necessarytoreviewtheCity's concurrency review procedures andLevels of Service (LOS) standardsthatareinplacetoensurethatadequatepublicfacilitiesandservicescontinuetobe maintained.The purpose ofthisstudyisto analyze concurrency requirements within theCityfor 12013 Impact Fees:Demographic Memo,TischlerBise,August 28,2013. 2The square miles were calculated from GIS parcel data that was obtained from Miami-Dade County. aker Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami new development,redevelopment,and revitalization project proposals and to present urban planning concepts that may be considered by the City to potentially increase the viability and number ofsuch project opportunities. The remaining sections of this study cover the topics below.TheCity should use the information presented to determine whether some of their existing policies can be modified tobe less restrictive for new development proposals (e.g.,whether programs canbe implemented to reduce impact fees).The information should also be useful for understanding some of the implications associated with annexing potential unincorporated areas in terms of maintaining adequate LOS standards forpublic facilities andservices within those areas. •BriefHistory ofFlorida Law •SouthMiamiConcurrency Management System •Citywide Transportation CapacityAssessment •Transportation Concurrency ExceptionArea(TCEA) •Multimodal Transportation District(MMTD) •SpecialtyLevels ofService(LOS)Analysis •Summary and Recommendations Brief History of Florida Law The 1985 Florida Growth Management Act (GMA)was passed,largelyin part,tomakesurethat all of thestate'scitizenswereaffordedaccessto adequate public facilities andservices.The GMA required localgovernmentstodevelop state-approved comprehensiveplansthatincluded LOS standards andgoals,objectives,andpoliciesforvariouselements(landuse,transportation, openspace,etc.).The GMA alsorequiredlocalgovernmentstoperformconcurrency reviews forcertain development proposals.Concurrencywasmandatedbythestateto make surethat adequate public facilities wouldcontinuetobe provided afternewdevelopmentsare constructed. Forexample,if anew development wouldresultin increased trafficonlocalroadsand500 new residentstoalocalpopulation,aconcurrencyreviewmaydeterminethatimpactfeeswouldbe requiredtopayfor improved roadwayinfrastructureand new parkfacilities.Governor Rick Scottrepealedthe GMA in 2011 which subsequentlyleftituptolocal governments approve theirown comprehensive plansand LOS standards.The Governor feltthatthe GMA was prohibitivetoeconomic development inthestateandwasalsoacontributingfactortosprawl because many businesses decidedtodevelopoutside ofcongestedurbanareas where they would notbesubjecttosignificantimpactfees (if any)—specificallythosethatwouldbedetermined duringthe transportation concurrencyprocessthatwaspreviouslymandatedbythestate. However,theCitycontinuestobesubjectto various statelawsthatpertaintoconcurrency review proceduresthataredescribedthroughoutthisstudy.Figure2 highlights some of the changesthatoccurredfollowingtherepeal oftheGMA. aker Concurrency Review Study City ofSouth Miami aker Figure 1 City of South Miami Boundary SW92ndSt £ a* Source:Michael Baker Jr.,Inc.,2013. mLaf/fto I i&MMoo Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Figure 2 Changes After the Repeal of the Growth Management Act ;The€hange^X)iIdrVs«::SifeW; LAHn USB Pfi AM fSHflWOSa, OLD fteqtifir§dapproval from theFlorida Department of immunity Affairs. Staffed by «planners and assistants. mm €TcqroBBaBy«wrf NEW (flSCffi C&iohSy object on Impart to "Important Sate resources and fadBtJ^^now undefined. Staffedby32plannersand assistants* PgBLtCLSEKVICaKS ftI>KVKTiOPKR FKBfL ^L OLD Developers were required to pay for Improvements to streets,schools,parks, water,garbage*drainageandsewer systems their developments wouldcauseto fall below standards. NEW Local governments are now responsibleforcontrolling die Impactof growthon streets,schoolsand parks. iwcaawftMatiMMim^iiiirriMH Source:Northeast Florida Regional Council Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami mmmmmmm South Miami Concurrency Management System Florida Statute163.3I80(lb),Concurrency,statesthat The local government comprehensive plan must demonstrate,for required or optional concurrency requirements,thatthelevels of serviceadoptedcanbereasonably met Infrastructure needed toensurethatadopted level-of- service standardsareachievedandmaintainedforthe5-yearperiod of thecapital improvement schedulemustbeidentifiedpursuanttotherequirements of FS 163,3177(3).'Hie comprehensive plan must includeprinciples,guidelines,standards,andstrategiesfortheestablishment of a concurrency management system."Inotherwords,everylocalgovernmentisresponsiblefor making suretheirfive-yearcapitalimprovementscheduleistailoredsuchthat improvements will beconductedtomaintainthe LOS standards setforthinthe comprehensive plan.As $ew development,redevelopment,and revifalization projectsoccurinthe City,the capita] improvement schedule may needtobeadjustedtoaccountformaintainingconsistent LOS standards forpublic facilities.Therefore,theCity's concurrency managementsystemisusedto trackandassesswhenpublic facilities andservicesmayfallshort oftheadoptedLOS standards andtodeterminewhatcapitalimprovement projects maybenecessarytocombatthoseimpacts. TheLand Development Code oftheCity of SouthMiami describes the City's currentconcurrencyreview procedures.TheLand Development Codeindicatesthat "A development permit,Certificate of Completion(CC), Certificate of Occupancy(CO),orCertificate of Useand Occupancy (CU)shallnotbeissuedwhenLevel(s)of Service(LOS)forpublicservicesandfacilitiesdonot meet or exceed LOS standards,or when the issuance of a developmentpermit and/or CC and/or CO and/or CU wouldresultinareduction of'the actualLOSforany service or facility belowthe established LOS standards..."Table1 shows the concurrency review requirements fortheCity -specifically what types of projects require a concurrency determination.Concurrency determinations are conducted bythe City,County,and other applicable agencies to review potential impacts to streets,sewage,water,drainage,solid waste, andrecreational facilities.Table 2summarizesthecurrent LOS standardsas identified in the Land Development Code.Consequently,non-exempt projects are subject to concurrency reviews that compare the development proposal totheLOS standards for each category shown. Table 1 Concurrency Review Requirements in South Miami Non-Exempt Projects (Concurrency Required) New development on vacant land. Building additions which increases gross floor area by 5,000 square feetormoreand increases public facility usage. Changesofusewhichincreaserequired parking by 25 spaces. Source:Land Development Code oftheCityofSouth Miami. aker Exempt Projects (No Concurrency Required) Changes in use which clearly do not cause an increase in demand uponanypublic facility (or which cause a reduction in demand)and that donot require more than 25 parking spaces. Single-family and two-family residences on previously platted lots. Public uses that the City Commission finds essential to the health and safety ofcity residents: Projects approved prior to the adoption of the Land Development Code on October 26,1989. Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Table 2 Soutb.MiamLLOS Standards -South Dixie Highway-150%of"D'Capacity -Bird Road-120%of "E*Capacity -Principal and Minor Arterials (Sunset Drive,Red Road,and Kendall Drive)-V Capacity -Collectors (SW48*Street,Miller Drive,SW 62nd Avenue,and Ludlam Road)-"E*Capacity (except those located in the Count/s Urban Infill Area"which areexempt from concurrency review) -Certain projects areexemptIftheyare located inthe County's Urban Infill Area fseetfj9note atthebottom ofthetable lor ageneraldescription of tho various capacity levels) -Disposal systemshalloperate with a design capacity ofnolessthan2%abovetheaveragedaily flow forthe precedingyear(asdeterminedbytheCounty) -Water system shall operate with a rated capacity ofnolessthan 2%above the maximum daily flow for the preceding year(asdeterminedbytheCounty). -Waterisdeliveredatapressurenp less than20 PSI andnogreaterthan 100 PSI andminimum fire flowsmustbe maintained asapprovedbytheCounty Fire Department The pubfic(City andschoolboard recreational lands)parklandwithintheCityshallequalatleast4acresper 1,000 persons. Source:Land Development Code of the Cityof South Miami Note:LOScapacitylevelsfor streets rangefrom "A*to "P anddependonthe number of lanes andthe average daily trafficvolumes.LOS "A"isgenerallyafreeflow street,withlowtrafficvolumes andhigh speeds,whereas LOS "F describes forced flow operation atlowspeedswherestoppagesmayoccurforshortandlong periods oftime. Because much of theCityisalreadyfully-developedwithrelativelyaginginfrastructure,itcan bedifficultfortheCitytoattractnewdevelopmentopportunitiesthat would resultina significant economic boost for the community.Inadditiontothecostsrequiredfora company to constructa new facilitythat may bringnumerous jobs and/or residentstothe City,under the current concurrency review requirements,the company may have topay significant impact fees to modernize theinfrastructuretomaintainadequateLOSstandardsforpublicfacilitiesand services.As mentioned inTable2,certainprojectsare exempt fromtransportation concurrency if theyarelocated within theCounty-designatedurbaninfilland redevelopment area,whichis depictedin Figure 3.That areaispart of the County's TCEA,andassuch,projectsthat encourage use of public transportationare exempt fromtransportation concurrency if they are consistent with fee City's comprehensive plan.Furthermore,theentire City islocated within the County's TCEA andcertainprojectsinotherparts of the City arealso exempt from transportationconcurrency,but therequirementsforproject exemptions aremorestringent if theyarelocated outside theurbaninfilland redevelopment area.Since impact feesfor maintaining adequate LOS standardsfortransportationcanbe significant ina congested urban area,thestate provides municipalities with otheroptionsto emphasize andplanfor enhanced multimodal transportation infrastructure projects (public transportation,pedestrian,bicycle,etc.), one of whichis by implementing a TCEA,inordertoreducecongestiononlocalroads.Those options are also explored laterinthis study. laker Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Figure 3 South Miami Urban Infill&Redevelopment Area §SW76thSt Source:Michael Baker Jr.Jnc. Citywide Transportation Capacity Assessment The previous section identifiedthe current LOS standards for various roads withintheCity.In order to determine if roadway projects could be conducted to enhance capacity (e.g.,by adding additional lanes),Michael Baker Jr.,Inc.(Baker)performed a general assessment ofthe existing roadway infrastructure.The assessment consisted of a Google Earth street viewtour oftheCity to determine ifthere were cost-feasible opportunities to add additional lanes orto conduct large- scale roadway modifications to improve traffic flow.As shown inFigure 4,because theCityis largely built-out withexisting infrastructure,road edges tendtobecloseto buildings,parking lots,andother features thatseverelylimit roadway expansion possibilities.For example,within this view of SouthDixieHighway,the M-Path multi-usetrailandtheelevated Metrorail track preventexpansion of thesouthboundlanes,whereasbuildingsandparkinglotsprevent expansion of thenorthboundlanes.Althoughthisisonlyone view of the City's roads,itwas provided to illustrate thatlimitedoptions for wholesale corridor improvements are available aker Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami LmmmMMmmmimmiUkMmmmmmm <'mui*<ff*»i~fotivmn within the City,unless a significant amount of property acquisition and demolition is conducted. Itisnotedthat Baker onlyconductedawholesalecorridorassessmentanddidnotconductan intersection by intersection analysis to determine if signalization,signage,and turn lane improvements couldbe conducted in some locations toease traffic congestion.For reference purposes,variousconstruction"CostPer Mile"estimatesare provided in Table 3fromthe FloridaDepartment of Transportation's (FDOT)Generic CostPerMileModels worksheet (updated April 8,2013).The estimates are representative oftheentirestate ofFloridaanddonot include the additional costs thatwould be required for design,property acquisitions,demolitions, utility relocations,etc.Duetothe extreme costs and impacts thatwouldbe associated with roadway widening,theCityis actively considering conducting multimodal transportation improvements thatwould encourage greater useof bicycle,pedestrian,andmasstransit facilities withthe goal of placinglessemphasisonautomobileutilization,whichisdiscussedinthe followingsections ofthis study. Figure 4 Southwest View of South Dixie Hlc hway Table 3 FOOT'S Generic Cost Per Mile Models Description Cost Per Mile Add2 Lanes toExisting2LaneUrbanUndivided Arterial(1LaneEachSide)with 4'Bike Lanes $3,472,028 Widen 2 Lane Urban Arterial to4 Lane Divided with 22'Median &4'Bike Lanes $4,065,273 Add2LanestoExisting3LaneUrban Undivided Arterial (1LaneEachSide)with Center Turn Lane &A*Bike Lanes $3,637,222 Widen 4 Lane Urban Divided'Arterial to6 Lane Urban Divided with 22'Median &4* Bike Lanes $3,774,587 Widen 6 Lane Urban Divided Arterial to8 Lane UrbanDivided with 4'Bike Lanes $4,276,798 Two Directional,12'Shared Use Path $231,279 Sidewalk Construction -5*One Side,4"Depth $110,392 Source:FDOTs Generic Cost Per MileModels worksheet (updatedApril 8,2013). aker Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEA) As previously mentioned,theentire City islocated within the County's TCEA.The 2009 Community Renewal Act (CRA)classified the entireCountyasa TCEA aswellasalllocal governmentsqualifiedasDense Urban LandAreas(DULAs),whichisaclassificationthatis determinedbasedon specific populationanddensity criteria.Eight DULA countieswere identifiedinthe CRA including Miami-Dade,Broward,Palm Beach,Orange,Seminole,Lake, Hillsborough,andPinellas.Non-rural areas withinthosecounties were identifiedas TCEAs (exceptMiami-Dade which wasentirelyidentifiedasa TCEA).Within the TCEAs,thereisno longerastate-mandaterequiringlocalgovernmentsto conduct transportationconcurrencyandto collectimpactfeesfromdevelopers;rather,the CRA allowedlocalgovernmentstocollect mobility feesfrom developers inorder to implement multimodal transportationprojectsthatare intendedtoreduce vehicular traffic.Although the City iscurrentlydesignatedasa TCEA,itis stillsubjecttotransportationconcurrencyreviewinordertomaintaintheadoptedLOSstandards -unlessaproposeddevelopmentisexemptpertherequirements oftheCounty's TCEA.If the Citywantedtoexpanduponitsabilityto exempt development proposalsfromtransportation concurrency,it would needtoupdateitscomprehensive plan toincludevarious elements requiredfor the establishment ofa TCEA,asdescribedin this section.Itis noted that FDOT,the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEC),andtheCounty Planning Department shouldbeconsultedtodeterminewhattype of planning effort is appropriate fortheCity consideringthe City's intentionstoeasedevelopmentrestrictionsand hefty transportation impact fees* In short,the TCEA isintendedtooffsettheadverseimpacts of transportation concurrency by encouraging thedevelopment of multimodal transportation infrastructure throughavariety of planning strategies thatmustbe incorporated intoa comprehensive plan.If aTCEAis adopted bytheCity,thennew developments inthesubject area arenotsubjecttoa transportation concurrencyreviewaslongastheyareconsistentwiththeadoptedcomprehensiveplan.There arefivespecifictypes of areas thatmaybe designated asaTCEAand the comprehensive plan must address differentobjectivesand policies for each:1)urban infill area,2)urban redevelopment,3)downtown revitalization withinthe central business district,4)urbaninfilland redevelopment area,and5)an urban servicearea (i.e.,an area intended forpublic facilities). InordertoestablishaTCEA,itmustbe documented inalocalgovernment's comprehensive plan andmustalsobecompatiblewiththe various elements ofthe plan.The comprehensive plan mustprovidesupportforthesizeand boundaries of the TCEA includingatrafficstudythat considers existing conditions aswellas future conditions after multimodal transportation strategies areimplemented.ItisnotedthataTCEAmaycross jurisdictional boundaries andthat thecomprehensiveplanmust address subsequent impactsthatmayoccuroutsidethe TCEA after multimodal transportation projectsare carried out(aswellastothe Florida Interstate Highway System).The February 2007reportbythe Florida Department of CommunityAffairs(nowthe DEC)titled AGuide for theCreationand Evaluation ofTransportation Concurrency Exception Areas describesthebasic TCEA elementsthatmustbeincludedinacomprehensiveplan,as listed below. aker Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami •B Support Mobility •M FundMobility •0 Support the Purpose of the Designation (urban infill,urban redevelopment,downtown revhallzation,urban infill and redevelopment) •0ImplementAlternativeModes ofTravel •EI Demonstrate HowMobilitywillbe Provided •0Address Urban Design •H Identify Appropriate LandUses Mixes •El Establish Minimum Intensity and Density Standards for Development •El AddressNetwork Connectivity •0 Mitigate Impacts tothe Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) 0 »Covered intheCity's Comprehensive Plan El =Not Covered intheCity's Comprehensive Plan The 2007 report also includes a detailed evaluation of the County's TCEA and howthe comprehensive plans of its various local governments address their role withintheTCEA.As shown in Figure S and also inthe bullet list above,the City's comprehensive plan is currently missing manyofthe elements identified as basic TCEA requirements.Figure 6 illustrates some of theCity's existing multimodal transportation infrastructure.Generally speaking,in order to be designated asaTCEA,theCitywouldhavetodevelopamore detailed multimodal transportation infrastructure plan that is financially-feasibible and that supports greater mobility for public transportation,pedestrians,and bicyclists inthe TCEA.By implementing sucha plan, theCitywouldhavea guidebook for better supporting,funding,and managing mobility projects that would reduce vehicular traffic (thus reducing impact fees and creating additional development interest).As part ofthisstudy,theCity requested information onthelevel ofeffort that would be necessary to update its comprehensive plan to include the required TCEA elements.Baker,prepared the preliminary cost estimate inTable4,including general descriptions of the associated effort,to assist theCitywith determining the appropriate level of effortforsuchacomprehensiveplanupdate. raker 10 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Goals,objectives,andpoliciesthatsupportMiami-Dado's TCSA(puipoft<:fo6%radawtownw^andtr»n»IQ Jurisdictions In Urban Infill Area* MiamMSadt county Aventura Bel Barbour Bay Harbor Islands Biscayne Park Coral Gables 8 Ported Golden Beach Hfateah Indian Creek VWage Key Biscayne Medtey Miami Miami Beach Miami Gardens Miami Lakes Miami Shores Miami Sonnos North Bavvmaae North Miami North Miami Beach Opa-Locha Palmetto Bay PInecrost South Miami Sunny Isles Beach Surfsfde Vftgnfa Gardens West Miami I 3 Figure 5 Miami-Dade County TCEA Comprehensive Plan Comparison Basic TCEA Requirements Other Elements 1 JSL £L Rating Scale 0-DoesnotmentionaTCEAorreferencesthe future designation ofaTCEA. 1-DesignatesaTCEAbut addresses few if anyoftheevaluationcriteria. 2-Mentionsthe TCEA inbasicdetailSatisfactionoftheevaluationcriteria(s notlinkedtotheTCEA. 3 -ProvidesexplicitdetailontheTCEA.SatisfactionoftheevaluationcriteriaislinkedtotheTCEA. (1)Coral Gables and North Miami are included oninthis table to provide additional information on their independent TCEAs.They arealsoincludedintheTable5. (2)Policies 4.1 and4.2ofthe Transportation Element statethat Aventura will Implement a local public transit systemto operate exclusively within the local TCEA. (3)Miami Shores Transportation Element Policy 1.12andMiami Springs Transportation Element Policy 1.1.8 seta priority to evaluate the potential effectiveness of TCEAs andfor TCMAs butdonotactually designate eitheronein either city. (4)RCEA =s Redevelopment ConcurrencyExceptionArea UDB ~Urban Development Boundary UIA=Urban Infill Area Source:A Guide for the Creation and Evaluation of Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas,Florida Department of Community Affairs,February 2007. aker 11 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami mimmmmimmmmmsmm Figure 6 Multi-Modal Transportation Options in and Around South Miami ^Mt\*5£i* Source:Michael Baker Jr.,Inc.,2013. 12 sw a.ttb s- N Kendall Dr Concurrency Review Study CityofSouthMiami B Support Mobility B FundMobility 0 Support tho Purpose oftheDesignation(urban Infill,urban redevelopment, downtown revftallzatlon,urban Infill and redevelopment) 21 Implement Alternative Modes ofTravel 8 DemonstrateHowMobilitywill boProvided B Address Urban Design B Idontify Appropriate Land Use«Mixes B Establish Minimum Intensity and Density Standards for Development B Addroes Network Connectivity SI MKIgateImpacts totheStrategic Intensodal System (SIS) General Coordination,Meetings,and Documentation Source:Michael Baker Jr.,Ino,2013. 0 »Covered In the City's ComprehensivePlan H =Not Covered inOre City's Comprehensive Plan identify and IBusbate alternative modes oftransportation,parking management strategist (particularly inthedowntown area" where merchants feei that parking lacurrently deficient),bwslentorientad design standard!,land usestrategies, intsreonnectivity plans between various modesof transportation,etc Seven)concepts win be evaluated todole/mine a refined mobiGly conceptthatbestintegratesthe varu^ local roads.Itv/ill benecessarytombwnize the niobllfy The editing bikeway plan andother elements wllhln theCity's comprehensive plan wit)also be reviewed for consUtency with TCEA requirements. A financially-feasible capital Improvement funding systemIdentifying sources suchas pubQe investment through ledeveloamarif taxesor grants,parking revenues,private inmtment bydevelops*to fund IteTC This may Include acash flow analysis tofflualrate the Cihte ability toafford the implementation cfmuMmarfpi importation prelects. Provide theJustification foridentifying various portions of(hecityesoiie ofthealtowatfe TCEAa purpose,and goals).Although theCity's comprehensive plan currently provides some ofthis information,theTCEA planning effortwillindudeareviewofallareasoftheChVthatcouMpotentially be efipjbte farbeingdesignatedasa TCEA, A detaJed Implementation schedule wBJ be identified for eachmodeoftransportation Identified,Although theQt/e comprehansrve plan currently contains potrsies far supporting and funding mobility projects,It wiQ benecessary toreview thepreviousanalysesforconsistencywithTCEArequirements. Thiscomponentelaborates onthe taptementotion scheduleby ioentif^ prtvatel toIllustratehow and when the mobittv protects wffl be provided. TheCity's comprehensive plan currently addresses design guidelines toraccessiblytotransit faculties.Detailed deafen"-"" soetificalfansmustbe Identified Inordertodevelopa elan mat suaoorts aid Implements the moblimr stratanlas farthe TCEA. Land usestrategies wDl be Identified inoroerto encourage mobility v^n thoTC&and toleducof^ transportation.Thekeyisto encourage waOongandbaungwBhin the TCEA,so complementary landuse maouwillbe identified In order to accomplish that goal. intensity anddensity standards wifl be identified in order to effectiveV manage traffic flows within the TCEA (e.g.,residents and employees per ecre). Connectivity between the Identified mobility strategies arel the greater matropoOtan area alsoneedto Aseuch.lt Floriaeis nwte up ofstrategic triuisportatianr^^ commercialairportsand weight rafllinee).FDOTwllJ bocontactedto determinewrwt SIS facU^ surrounolno areas,andthe mobBltvstrategies willattempttominimizeimpactstothosefacilities. Throughoutthe TCEA planning process,regular coorttrtatton andmeeting*with FOOT andCftyatafr will be necessary.tt¥~ antidpated thatpublic meetings end Cfty Council meetings willalsobeconducted. Total (PraUmTnarvT 13 $30,000 $15,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 $10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 $120.000 ConcurrencyRoview Study City of South Miami Multimodal Transportation Districts (MMTD) Similar to TCEAs,MMTDs areintendedtoreduce automobile traffic by assigning primary prioritytoothermodes of transportation.FDOPs Multimodal Transportation Districtsand Areawide Quality ofServiceHandbook (Handbook)describesthe requirements necessaiy fora municipality toestablisha MMTD.Like TCEAs,comprehensive plans must beupdatedto includeplansfor implementing alternativemodes of transportation(public transit,pedestrian, bicycle,etc.),but unlike TCEAs,comprehensiveplanupdatesfor MMTDs adopt LOS standards forthosealternative modes of transportation.The intent of the MMTD is to reduce transportation impactfeesbyreducingautomobiletraffic.Thecollection of impactfeesis typicallyusedtopayfortheplannedimprovementstothe MMTD (e.g.,additional bikelanes) andnotnecessarilyforroadwayimprovementsthatwouldprovideadditionalvehicularcapacity. Whenanewdevelopmentis proposed withinaMMTD,itissubjectto transportation concurrency review andtheassociatedLOSstandardsforall modes of transportationidentified inthe comprehensive plan (within TCEAs,projects are exempt from transportation concurrency because multimodal strategies are already in place toreducetraffic).UnlikeTCEAs,MMTDs are not limited to urban infilland redevelopment areas.The Handbook identifies the following basic criteria for a MMTD; •Provision of a complementary mix of land usesincluding residential,educational, recreational,and cultural uses. •Provision of an interconnected network of streets designed to encourage walking and bicyclingwithtrafficcalmingwhere desirable. •Provision of appropriate densities and intensities of land uses within walking distance of transit stops. «Provision of daily activities within walking distance of residences;public infrastructure that is safe,comfortable,and attractive for pedestrians;adjoining buildings open to the street;and parking facilities structured to avoid conflict with pedestrian,transit, automobile,and truck travel. •Provision of transitservicewithinthe designated area,oradefinitivecommitmenttothe provision of transit.This definitive commitment should be found in local planning documents and in the approved capital improvements program.For new developments, transit connectivity tothe major urban area must also be included,ora definitive commitment for transit connections,again evident in both planning documents and the approvedcapitalimprovement program. Baker prepared the preliminary cost estimate in Table 5,including general descriptions of the associated effort,to assist the City with determining the appropriate level of effort for a MMTD planning effort (in accordance with the Handbook).Figure 7 identifies the successful indicators forestablishinga successful MMTD. aker 14 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Assess Seals of Development Analyze Land Uae Mixand Organization Analyzo NetworkConnectivity Define Modal Network Areawide Quality/Levelof Servica Analyefo FinalEvaluationofProposedMultimodalTransportation District GeneralCoordination,Moatingsand Documentation Source:Michael Baker Jr..Inc..2013. General Description TheMMTD win oodenned as part ofthiseiementand various mapsof exictina condib'ons andmulumodal trawportaion Inmsslmcturav^beDnuented.Current demoflraphlc and land use Uilonm^MfatelwwtoMQttipti&tawBW Adeemed enafyals ofland uiuavdhin ma M&OT^ endcomfortable environment far pedestrians,itwill bekeytoinclude residential land usesIntheMMTD because ihw am typlcatythemortaeiytouffllwrnutt^ restaurants). As partem*element,ine cabling muttm^ analyaia.Jtv^be tised to wuiryMvmere potent between complementary land usesthat would encouraga mobiifty.Theresutooftniaelernentv^beiiaodtociefinethemcd^ network.It fa Mttyatad that GlSwUbo utilizedto co^ preKmlnajy LOSstandardswSlbo UeftWIad .Gurvoye of tocajcataa^endbusinesses perceptionsaboutuseofmultimodaltransportationInfrastructure. BeaedontneresurteofthOfiebrOJkonnnacB^ peo^ana,bicyclists,andtfherusm of public ta Trum»shortfalls canthenbeusedtotevatorri^ thatare intended to resolve deficiendes endprovidestrategicmultimodal fecBfliea throuohoutthe Citv TTusetemwrtwainduo^a detailed detamrinasM v^ura^taly be Included tothecomsro^Inaddibon en AreawWdQue^ofService(QOS)oru^v^!l»conduct^ofservice front the user's point ofview. This isthefinal evaluation toteternTta^lii»i^Bd^^.ft,^fofig^gy theproposedareamecjs aBofthe Mndteatem foraSuccessful District*asshown InFigure ft. Throughout the MMTD planning process,tegular coordinason andmeetlnoa with FOOT andCitystart1 win bonoceaatvy h1 bj" anftclpaled mat oubflc meetings and Cftv Council meetinfls will also be conducted. Total (Preliminary! 75 Estimated Coat (preliminary) 910,000 $10,000 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000 $10,090 $15,000 $116.000 Concurrency Review Study City ofSouth Miami Figure 7 Multimodal Transportation District Checklist Criteria for a Multimodal Transportation District Indicators for a Successful District Contra-Indicafors for a District Appropriate Scale of Development •Min.Residential Pop:5,000 •Minimum Population/Jobs Ratio:2to1 •Provision of scheduled transit •Size of District too small or too large to support appropriate intensities and densities •No transit service Complementary Mix ot Land* Uses •3ormore significant land uses ©Physicalintegrationof components. •Single Land Use Land Uses Promoting Multimodal Usage •Land uses that are mutually supporting •Single Land Use Acceptable Separation of Land Uses •Different land uses are located withinthetypically acceptable range forwalking (1/4to 34 mile) •Land uses spaced too far apart for typical pedestrian comfort Appropriate Densities and Intensities of Land Uses •Minimum of 4 residential units per acre formarginalpotential •Minimum of40 employees per acre for marginal potential •Less than minimum residential units per acre and minimum employees per acre Appropriate Organization of Land Uses •Core area of activities and services •Activitycenters along corridors concentrated atkey intersectionspromoting transit usage •isolated or scattered Development Regional Intermodal Connectivity •Regional intermodal connections present ♦Noregional intermodal service Interconnected Multimodal Network •Each modal network meets connectivityindex standard using polygon methodology: recommended minimum of 50 polygonsper square mile •Connected street pattern, generally Gridlike ♦Poor Connectivity on modal networks *Unconnected street pattern with cul-de- sacs and dead ends Acceptable Levels of Service for Each Mode •Meets recommended Level of Service standards for each mode •Transitorienteddevelopment pedestrian,transit,and bicycleLOSofC •Non-motorized oriented development pedestrian and bicycleLOSofC and transit LOSofD •Poor Level of Service AcceptableAreawideQuality of Service for each Mode AreawideQualityofService meets recommended standards Poor Level of Service Source:FDOTs Multimodal Transportation Districts and Areawide Quality ofService Handbook. aker 16 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami SpecialtyLevelsofService (LOS)Analysis Asthe City continues to consider options to annex surrounding unincorporated areas and also to increase mobility within the current City boundary,it was important to review LOS characteristics for emergency services (police,fl^m(j EMSj ^we|j as for multimodal transportation features (pedestrian,bicycle,and public transportation).No recommended LOS standards are provided in this section -only qualitative information is provided such that the City can gain a preliminary understanding as future options are weighed. EmergencyServices LOS Anr,^ Figure 8 illustrates the existing presence of police,fire,and hospital facilities in the City.This section reviews LOS for emergency services within theCity.As annexation continues tobe considered,the City,County,and other emergency services entities mayusethis information to help understand what additional staffing,equipment,and facilities maybe needed to allow for adequate response timesfor existing,and newCity residents and businesses. Police-WithintheCity,police services are provided bytheSouth Miami Police Department (SMPD).The City's Annexation Proposal2012 document Indicates thattheSMPD currently hasan approximate ratio of fiveofficersforevery1,100citizens.The document also indicates that average response timesbytheSMPD arelessthantwominutesforemergenciesandlessthanfive minutes forroutinecalls,whereastheMiami-DadePolice Department (MDPD)has response times of approximately eight minutes foremergenciesand25 minutes forroutinecallsinthe nearby unincorporated areas.AccordingtotheCounty'sPublic Safety Progress Report,3 the County as a whole reported an averageresponsetime of 8.2minutesfortheMDPD,althoughthe MDPD's Business Plan for Fiscal Years2012and 2013 identifies reduced response time asakey objective.Consideringfeeproposed annexation atthetime,theSMPDpolice chief feltthatthe response timescouldbe maintained witha reduction inthe ratio tofourofficersforevery 1,100 citizensandindicatedthattheproposedannexation area isnotsubstantiallylargeinsizeandthat the distance travelledwouldnot drastically increase.Althoughtherearemanyguidebooks availablefordeterminingpolicestaffingdemands,suchasthe U.S.Department of Justice's Guidelines forStartingandOperatingaNewPolice Department^the actual procedures are typicallybasednumerous factors including geographical area of patrol,populationserved, average number of incidents,community goals,budgets,etc.Therefore,the City should continue to monitor itsown needs forpoliceservicesandplanaccordingly,similartowhatwas conducted forthe Annexation Proposal. 3http-7/www.miamidade.gov/results/public_safety.asp. taker 17 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami '-=©eji« Figure 8 Police,Fire,an£wHospfta!Facilities in South Miami 0.idi?Und Mail sw 88th st :: StationEi:-x ^SW 84th S* SW 88th St N Kendall Or Source:Michael Baker Jr.,Inc.,2013. aker 18 Concurrency Review Study City ofSouth Miami Fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS)-Miami-Dade Fire Rescue (MDFR)provides firefighting and EMS services for the City and surrounding unincorporated areas (from Station 14 in South Miami).Other private companies also provide EMS ambulance and paramedic services within the City and there are two hospitals located in the City (South Miami Hospital and Larkin Community Hospital).The adjacent City of Coral Gables has its own fire department and the Village of Pinecrest also relies on MDFR.According to the County's Public Safety Progress Report,the County as a whole reports an average response time of 8.05minutesfortheMDFR.The MDFR's Business Plan forFiscalYears2012and2013 identifies several measures to reduce response times including constructing new facilities,hiring additional firefighters,purchasing additional equipment,improving communications,etc.ThespecificMDFR response timewithintheCityisunknownatthistime;however, the previously-proposed annexation areas are currently served by MDFR and would continue tobe served byMDFR if ultimately annexed by the City. Multimodal LOS Analysis Rgure 9 illustrates the generalized annual average daily volumes for Florida's urbanized areas as obtained from theFDOTs 2013 Quality/Level ofService Handbook.FDOT provides LOS classificationsforbicycle,pedestrian,andbusmodes,buttheinformationdoesnotconstitutea standard.If the City decides to implement LOS standards for Such multimodal transportation features,the FDOT's Handbook notonly provides LOS standards,it also includes suggested design elements forthose features.As part of the MMTD planning process (and toa lesser extentthe TCEA planning process),itis anticipated thataLOS classification systemwouldbe identified and that all roadways within theCity would be classified using that system. Thereafter,LOS standards would be adopted and improvements would be focused on correcting shortfalls inthe multimodal transportation network.For example,theCity of NorthMiami's Transportation MasterPlanutilizedthe regression-based LOS analysis described inthe FDOT's Multimodal Transportation DistrictsandAreawideQuality of Service Handbook toidentify shortfallsinthe existing pedestrianandbicyclenetworksandtodeveloplong-term mobility recommendations* -aker 19 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Figure 9 Annual Average Daily Volumes for Urbanized Areas BICYCLE MODE* (Multiplymotorizedvehicle volumesshownbelowby numberof doecttojal roadwaylaues to detenatae two-way nvudinuinservice volumes.) Paved Shoulder/Bicycle LaneCoverage B C D £ 0-49%*2.900 7,600 19.700 50-84%2,100 6,700 19,700 >19,700 85-100%9,300 19,700 >19.700 ••• PEDESTRIAN MODE2 (Multiply motorized vehiclevolumesshownbelowby urauber of directional roadwaybncs rodetemunetwo-way mansaun service volumes.) SidewalkCoverage 0-49% 50-84% 85-100% B 3,800 1,600 10,700 D 2,800 8,700 17,400 E 9,500 15,800 >19.700 BBSMODE(ScheduledFixed Route)1 (Buses iii peakhour In peak rfucctian) SidewalkCoverage 0-84% 85-100% B >5 >4 C >4 >3 D £3 >2 E £2 >1 mommmrm Source:FDOTs2013 Quality/Level ofService Handbook. aker 20 Concurrency Review Study City of South Miami Summary and Recommendations The following list includes key items that were identified within this concurrency review study: •Concurrency reviews are conducted to make sure that adequate public facilities continue to be provided as new developments occur.The City's concurrency reviews evaluate the impacts to streets,sewage,water,drainage,solid waste,and recreation, •The City is largely built-out and there are limited opportunities for wholesale roadway corridor projects that would improve traffic flows.Consequently,the City has adopted roadway LOS standards that are generally considered inadequate for streets. Furthermore,the City does not currently collect transportation impact fees that would typically be determined through the concurrency review process. •Because no major capacity-enhanciijg roadway projects were identified,the City should focus on enhancing and encouraging alternative modes of transportation (bicycle, pedestrian,and mass transit),thereby reducing emphasis on automobile utilization. •Although theCityis currently located within aTCEA,it does nothavethe traditional elements ofa TCEA that would allow most development proposals to be exempt from transportation concurrency (e.g.,theCity does not currently have a well-defined and financially feasible multimodal infrastructure plan).The TCEA concept is an older concept and many municipalities are nowin favor ofestablishing a MMTD. •AMMTDissimilartoaTCEA,btut theMMTD establishes LOS standards for multimodal facilities and allows municipalities to collect mobility fees to pay for multimodal infrastructure (in lieu of conducting transportation concurrency reviews and collectingimpactfees). •Additional specialty LOS data was presented for emergency services within theCity and also for multimodal facilities.* Based onthe information presented herein and through discussions with the City,Baker has determined that the existing LOS standards are generally considered inadequate for streets. Because there are limited opportunities for wholesale roadway corridor projects that would improve traffic flows within the City,other options should be pursued that place less emphasis on vehicle utilization.By establishing a MMTD and having a long-term plan forthe development of multimodal infrastructure,the City may be able to collect mobility fees to pay for that infrastructure.If successful,that process would eliminate the need for transportation concurrency inallorselect areas withintheCity,aswellasthe collection of potential transportation impact fees.Itisnotedthatthe .City is currently conducting an Intermodal Transportation Plan thatwill evaluate many of the elements of aMMTDstudy.Itmaybe possible to incorporate the elements of the Intermodal Transportation Plan intoaMMTDstudy toreducethecostsshownpreviouslyinTable5. after 21 Concurrency Review Study MIAMI HERALD |MiamiHeratd.com VILLAGE OF P1NECREST Public Notice On Tuesdoy,July 8,2014,ol 8:00 p.m.,tho Village Council will conduct ihe following Public Hearing h be heid ot the Pinecrest Municipal Center,Council Chamber,12645.^necr'es».Porlcway,Pinecrest,Florida: Hearing #2O1'&07$337 Christ the King Lutheran Church,the applicant,is requesting approval ofb conditional use permit and amended sits development plan for the establishment of,a 1-4,400 sauare foot daycare and pre-school/kindergarteo for 216 students wimin^on.existing building In the ?S District with proposed site improvements b include-addiHooal'landscapjhg',fencing and improvement of 16 parking spaces for the property'located o'tJ1$295Red Road. All Interested parties"wi'Mvito *1»««d.Objections ofexpressions otapproval may bemado inperson otrhe hearing orfabd nyrf&g'pitor toor'afthe taring,bteresfed parties requesting Information on aba*tocontact the Ming ond Manning'OcpqrtmW by catling 305.234.2121,via o-moil al pMi^pmecresl&gav or writing to the[deportment of 12645 Ptoecresf tokwoy.PinecroM.Florida 33156.Refer to wfen making oninquiry.>Hooting Nttmber In occoroancD.wtih the Amerlaont with Dbobilitiss Act of 1990,aU persons who ore disabled o»d who mod tpoc'tot occommodotionj to participate inIfiVs meetae bccouso ofthat dboM&y should contact tho Village Cferfc o> (305)234-2121 not later ihon feci bvsinas*days prior losuch proceeding. Should oriy prfnon diode tooppool onydecismn of dieWlogo Council wi&respect toanymaftw considered ol luch meeting orhearing,that person wW need a record of moproceedings end,torsuch purpose,wayneed to ensure toot o.verbatim rocord ofthe proceedings h node,which record incbdos the testimony endevidence upon which theappebl is la bebosed|F.5.286.0105). GuldoH.Ingiwnzo,Jr.,CMC Vifiogederk www.ptnecresHI.gov se SUNDAY,JUNE 8,2014 I 29SE CITYOFSOUTH MIAMI COURTESY NOTICE NOTlce JS HEHEBY given toil tho Cfly Commission oftheCity of South Miami,Florida wilt conduct Public Hearing®at Its regular City Commission meeting scheduled for Tuesday.June 17.2014 beginning at 7:00 pm.In the City Commisuton Chambers,6130 Sunset Drive,toconsider thefollowing utmfs): AHBcoiutioowiiffri2ingttuC^«^ he.tor anamount not toeweed Si.120,418 for a five (5}year period. AR^l^onforSpcdaJ LieApproval topexroitagensfairestaurintat 5701 Sunset Drive.Shops at Sunset Place Unit C110,within theSpectafty RetaS "SR',Hometown District Overlay "KQ-QV". AResolution amending aSpecial UseAppoval tofwmiliputiEccaj-wash it 5795 South DWs Highway, within theTOM lighthdustia!-TODD4Wlohi6g usecfetrict AResotubon authorizing thti Cny Manager toenlwhlD a five (SJymcont/itctw^aiitert LLC Real Estate and Auction Sentes fortiKiMfcfofl services, /An Ordinance amending Sudan 7-3 ofthe Code ofOtdinartcesbuiudingthoestibfislimentof |urireoeatfonfacfihles Impact fee category,and creao^Section 7^ostabSst^regulatiORS I collection ofImpact fees. Aatnter^^pirtiaOTlJVftEdtoattendi^v/Bbenard. ffrftttherlrrtonna6cA please c^^ a parks | s for the / Maria fcLMenesdez,CMC CityCisfk nnuutttoHerUiSlit^afiMia5,iteatyr^ Aowcy erCemateiM wt&ropedtoanyro&tromttma'at fc o*^a Norf^,to orto ^r^s rector tot prated^ i^tWferi^pttpca.sfittfcdpennar^norftDirtw tuttaKrvtsdcutecee^iiitMOaippiBllitoftssnia. Priced to sell at $864,600 1211 Mariana Ave,Coral Gables,FL 33134 Spectacular,move-in-ready,Spanish-Alhambra style Corol Gables home. Built in 2002 with all the modern amenities including impact windows yet with details,feel andcharmofa 1926 home.Located in theNorihGables section of Coral Gables where you are centrally located to the best schools,shopping and dining while remaining in on enclave ofelegance and greenery. •2,515sf •3 Bedroom,3 Bath •Formal dining room •Family room •Cozy courtyardwithfountain•Romeo and Julietbalconies•Marblemaster bath withsteam shower DflBA T HtiV&t**f Caiixto A.Navarro CABA Real Estate calixtorea lestate@gmai I.com cell:786-210-8713 You've Got A Friend in the Real Estate Business MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW Published Daily exceptSaturday,Sunday and LegalHolidays Miami*Mtamf-DaddCounty,Honda STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE: Beforethe undersigned authority personally appeared M.ZALDIVAR,whoonoathsaysthatheor she isthe LEGAL CLERK,Legal Notices ofthe Miami Dally Business Review f/k/a Miami Review,a daily (except Saturday,Sunday andLegal Holidays)newspaper,publishedat Miami In Miami-Dade County,Florida;thattheattachedcopyofadvertisement, being aLegal Advertisement ofNotice in the matter of OTY OF SOUTH MIAMI NOTICEOFPUBLICHEARINGFOR JUNE 17,2014 In the XXXX Court, waspublished In said newspaper In the Issues of' 0670672014 Affiant furthersaysthatthesaid Miami DailyBusiness Review Is a newspaper publishedatMiamiinsaidMiami-Dade County,Florida andthatthesaid newspaper has heretoforebeen continuously publishedtn said Mlaml-Dade County, Florida,eachday(exceptSaturday,Sunday andLegal Holidays) andhasbeenenteredassecondclass mall matteratthepost officein Miami insaid Miami-Dade County,Florida,fora periodof one year next preceding Ihe firstpublicationofthe attached copy ofadvertisement;andaffiantfurther says thatheor shehasneitherpaid norpromisedanyperson,firm or corporation any discount,rebate,commissionor refund forthepurpose of securing this advertisement for^ubticatton inthe said newspaper. (SEAL) M.ZALDIVAR personalty known to me «i ii>i fit idrl idH Ai dJfc 1 ^5^Commission #FF 034747 1 ^%.vS^Bonded Throuoh National Notary As •eyca ft CI ill B.THOMAS &.Notary Public -State ot RotIda $4 My Comm.Expires Nov 2,2017 *»%S$P~Bonded Through National Hotarytesn ^^U IJJ til UP ' Photos,Movie Filimg and Farmer's Market Municipaltty Price Comparisons City of Coral Gables Commercial Permits Still Photography $66 per day/perlocation Video/Movie $303perday/perlocation StillPhotographyatCity Facilities $424 per day/perlocation Video/Movfe at City Facilities $1,102 perday/perlocation Residential Permits StillPhotography $193 per3days Video/MoviePhotography $193 per3days MajorMotion Picture $331 per 14 days Country Club Prado -Park StillPhotography $88 perday/perlocation Video/Movie $303perday/perlocation Vanetian Pool StillPhotography $485 perday/perlocation Video/Movie $303perday/perlocation Farmer's Market $30perbooth per Saturday(January -March) $250perboothfor 11 weeksfromJanuary-March Village of Pinecrest PersonalPhotograhy at PinecrestGardens $100 perday Commercial Stills at Pinecrest Gardens $1,000 perday Commercial Ftlm at the Pinecrest Gardens $1,500 per day No Charges /or theuseof private homes,feesgenerated through Miami Dade County,not the Village of Pinecrest Farmer's Market $1000 perweekinthemonthonNovember $1,400 perweekinthemonthsofDecemberthroughApril $500perweekinthemonthsofMaythrough October Village of Palmetto Bay VideoCommercial/Fflm/Movies onlyintheparks $428 per day CommercialPhotography/PhotoShootonlyintheparks $214 perday Personal Fttotography/Photo Shoot $80.25perday No charges fortheuseof private homes,fees generated through Miami Dade County,notthe Wageof Palmetto Bay. Farmer's Market None Town of Cutler Bay Video Commercial/Film/Movies allaretakencareofthrough Miami DadeCountyFilm Dept.(Costtakencareof through Miami DadeCounty Film Dept.) Ifa Special Event Permit is needed forthe above mentioned thefeethe charge would be $106.88 (Policeservicesarechargedseperately) Farmer's Market None ORDINANCE NO.04-11-2077 An Ordinance oftheMayorandthe City Commission oftheCityofSouth Miami,Florida relating tothe fee schedule;amending ordinance 21-09-2013 asamendedby ordinances to increase some fees,addingnew fees,and deleting some fees fromthe schedule,providing for severability,ordinances in conflict,and an effective date. WHEREAS,the City reviewed fees schedules for Miami-Dade County and several municipalities;and, WHEREAS,the City found that fees forthe County and other municipalities are higher than thosefeesincludedintheSouthMiamiFeeSchedule;and, WHEREAS,thecostof services for Planning;Building;Parking;Parks &Recreation;Public Works;Central Services;and other related fees increased considerably inthepastyear with new servicesbeingrequested;and, WHEREAS,the Mayor andCity Commission desire to adopt anewFee Schedule allowing fundingwhichwillcoverthecost of services provided;and, WHEREAS,any such fees may be waived or reduced bythe majority vote ofthe Mayor and CityCommissionbyway ofresolution. NOW,THEREFORE,BEIT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITYOF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA: Section 1.That Ordinance 21-09-2013 shall be amended bythis Ordinance by replacing the Permit Fee /Fee Schedule with the amended Permit Fee/Fee Schedule as attached. Section 2,Ifany section,clause,sentence,or phrase ofthis ordinance isforany reason heldinvalidor unconstitutional byacourt of competent jurisdiction,theholdingshallnotaffectthe validity of theremainingportions ofthisordinance. Section3..All ordinancesorpartsof ordinances inconflictwiththeprovisionsofthis ordinance arerepealed. Section4.AnysuchfeesmaybewaivedorreducedbytheMayorandCityCommission by way of resolution. Section4.Thisordinanceshalltakeeffectimmediatelyuponadoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4 th day of January ;2011 . Schedule to Fees Revised FY 11 Page 1of2 Additionsshownbyunderlininganddeletionsshownby € Ord.No.04-11-2077 ATTEST: CITY CLERK ^ 1st Reading 12/13/10 2nd Reading 1/4/11 READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUFFICIENCY: CITY ATTORNEY " W:\My Documents\resolutions\Ordinance Schedule of fees update.doc APPROVED: YOR COMMISSION VOTE:4-0 MayorStoddard:Yea Vice Mayor Newman:absent Commissioner Palmer:Yea Commissioner Beasley:Yea Commissioner Harris:Yea Schedule to Fees Revised FY 11 Page2 of2 Additionsshownby underlining and deletions shownby ovcrstriking. To: Via: From: Date: Subject: Background: CUY OF SOUTH MIAMI OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER IN1ER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM South Miami 2001. The Honorable Mayor&Members oftheCity Commission Hector Mirabile,PhD,City Manager /y^f ^^"K^A*-*- Alfredo Riverol,CPA,CrJFA,Chief Financial Officer ^ December 7,2010 Agenda Item No, An Ordinance ofthe Mayor and the City Commission ofthe City of South Miami,Florida relating tothefee schedule;amending ordinance 21-09-2013 as" amended by ordinances to increase some fees,adding new fees,,and deleting somefeesfromthe schedule,providing for severability,ordinances in conflict, and an effective date. TheCity reviewed fees schedules for Miami-Dade County and several municipalities*The City found that fees for the County and other municipalities are higher thanthosefeesincludedintheSouth Miami Fee'Schedule.Thecost of services for Planning;Building;Parking;Parks &Recreation;Public Works; Central Services;andother related fees increased considerably inthepastyear withnew services being requested*TheMayorandCity Commission desireto adoptanewFeeScheduleallowingfundingwhichwillcoverthecost of services provided*Anysuchfeesmaybewaivedorreducedbythemajorityvoteofthe MayorandCityCommissionbyway ofresolution. Backup Documentation: •Schedule of fees. Miami-Dade County Information Technology Department Interlocal Service and Maintenance Agreement andmaterialbasisas mutually approvedbytheparties.The County willdevelopascope of work andprojectplanthat meets business needsinthemostcosteffectivemanner. GIS Graphic Technician /Mapping Product Configuration (GIS Routing, Mobile,Dashboards,etc.) Project Management Systems Programming (Operating&Technical) and Database Administrator Analysis and Programming Network,Engineering,and Consulting Services Telecommunications Technicians $90.00 $100.00 $125.00 $125.00 $120.00 $120.00 $85.00 $135.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $127.50 22- :3&M? if^lll^environment that is conducive to a vibrant 1§|||||^^we concur that the currently established ||§|g|t^of South Miami is indeed compatible to the !||j|j^^continued success through our efforts of carefully ||1^||$which further appropriately encourages and supports ||||r||p^in achieving their objectives. :|S^los^grenco^ ;>%jgy?f 1^2014 ; MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW PublishedDaily except Saturday,Sunday and LegalHolidays Miami,Miami-DadeCounty,Florida STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE: Beforethe undersigned authoritypersonallyappeared MARIAMESA,whoonoath says thatheor she isthe LEGALCLERK,LegalNoticesoftheMiamiDaily Business Review tfk/a Miami Review,adaily (except Saturday,Sunday andLegalHolidays)newspaper,published atMiamiinMiami-Dade County,Florida;thattheattachedcopyofadvertisement, being aLegal Advertisement ofNoticein the matter of CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR 9/16/2014 in the XXXX Court, was published in said newspaper in the issues of 09/05/2014 Affiant further says thatthesaid Miami DailyBusiness Review isa newspaper published atMiamiinsaidMiami-Dade County,Florida andthatthesaid newspaper has heretofore been continuously published insaid Miami-Dade County, Florida,eachday(exceptSaturday,Sundayand Legal Holidays) andhasbeenenteredassecondclassmailmatteratthepost officein Miami insaidMiami-DadeCounty,Florida,fora periodofoneyear next precedingthefirstpublicationofthe attachedcopyofadvertisement;and affiant further saysthatheor shehas neither paid nor^r^rjQisfidanv person,firm or corporation any djscQunt,reb^rCoim^ssion orrefund for the purpose Scuring this ^aveftteoment for publication in the said r newspaper. (SEAL) MARIAMESApersonallyknownto me —B THOMAS X ™¥t M*C°mm-EXP'TfF 0347 7 „IV&JBkyal Commission #?F034"'BI11&ggfeP „••,•..,^1 National ya.Y^J MIAMI HERALD I MiamiHerald.com SE SUNDAY,SEPTEMBER 7,2014 |31SE POLICE REPORT •SOUTH MIAMI A vandal painted redgraf fitionthesignatthe Rosie Lee Wesley Health Center at 6601 SW 62nd Ave.be tween 7p jn.July18and7:45 a.m.July2LDamagewases timated at $220. A thief shattered the front passenger window of a black 2010 Audi TT and stoleabackpack,an Apple MacBook Pro,and a Duo- foldpen,allvaluedat $2,365, inaparkinglotinthe 6200 block of South Dixie Highway between 535 and 6:30p.m.July22. •PINECREST A woman reported dam ageto her 2012 Hyundai when shearrivedatthepo lice department at235 p.m. July 28.The woman,who lives in the T1800 block of Southwest 69th Avenue, said the vehicle had been parked in an unfenced driveway sinceJuly26and hadnotbeen moved again until she discovered the damage,which is valued at $2,300. Police were called to the Bank of America at 9101 S. Dixie Hwy.about 435 p.m. July28inreferenceto verbal threats.The victim reported thata customer hadverbally threatened her.The victim toldpolicethat when the of fender arrived at the bank and inquired why hisac counts had been closed,he became loud and offensive. When the offender was asked to leave,he was re ported to have said,"Don't worry,I will take care of you."The offender wasnot onthe scene when police ar rived and contact was not made with him. A mail carrier called police about 12:30 pm Aug.14after he noticed a broken window ata residence in the 8200 block of Southwest 133rd Street.Police determined that a thief broke into the house and took anunknown number ofitems. •KENDALL A thief smashed the left rear window ofa white 2012 Cadillac Escalade EXT and stole all four rims and tires while the vehicle was in the driveway of a residence in the 12000 block of South west 100th Avenue be tween 9p.m.Aug 4 and 8:45 a.m.Aug.5.Damageandloss were estimated at $3,000. •PALMETTO BAY A woman called policein reference toa personal iden CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI COURTESYNOTICE NOTICEISHEREBYgiventhat the City Commission ofthe City ofSouthMiami,Floridawillconduct PublicI Icaring(s)atits regular City Commission meeting scheduled for Tuesday.September16.2014 beginning at 7:00 p.m.,in the City Commission Chambers,6130 Sunset Drive,to consider the following ireink): An Ordinance grantingtoFloridaPower &Light Company,its successors and assigns,an electric franchise,imposing provisions and conditions relating thereto,providing for monthly payments to the CityofSouthMiami,and providing foran effective date. An Ordinance amendingSection20-7.12oftheCityofSouthMiamiLand Development Code concerning parking requirements forrestaurants withinthe Hometown DistrictOverlay (HD-OV) Zone. An Ordinance oftheCityofSouthMiami,Florida,amending Section 2-7,Administrative department;functions andduties;creatingacost recovery administrative program;providing for repeal of ordinances in conflict;and providing an effective date. An Ordinance relating tothe feeschedule;amending ordinance 04-11-2077 to change the titli 'Schedule of Fees and Fines"andto increase somefees,adding new fees,and deleting some fromthe schedule. ALL interested partiesarcinvitedtoattendandwillbeheard. Forfurther information,please contact theCityClerk's Office at:305-663-6340. Maria M.Mcncndcz,CMC CityClerk I'urMuiiii to Florida Statute*236.0105,theCityhereby advise*thepublic chat if a person decides;to appc-.il anydecision made hythis Hoard.Agency or Commission with ropect tn .mymatterconsidered atit*meeting or hearing,he or she willneed a record ofthe proceeding,and that for >iieh purpose,affected person mayneedtoensurethat a verbatim record of the proceeding*U madewhich record include*thetestimony midevidence uponwhich the appeal isto be based. \" itlc to A lefeesy tification fraud.The wo man,who livesinthe 8900 block of Southwest 150th Street,said that someone used herpersonal identifi cationinformationtotryto changeher home andemail addresses on record at her bank on Aug.18. Police were called in refer ence to a bank fraud after a man,who lives in the 7200 block of Southwest 174th Street,fraudulentlycashed aforged check tohis bank account on Aug.1L •CORAL GABLES One or more thieves broke into and ransacked a resi dence in the 2000 block of Red Road between noon and6:45 p.m.Aug 7. A thief broke into and ran sacked a residence in the 100 block of Oak Avenue between noon Aug.7and 9:30 sum.Aug.9. A 20-year-old woman was arrested andcharged with grand theft aftershetriedto steal $3,088 worth of mer chandise from the Nord strom Department store at 4310 Ponce de Leon Blvd. between 2:30and3p.m. Aug.6. A 51-year-old woman be came a victim of a strong arm robbery in the 500 block of Biltmore Way be tween 3and335 p.m.Aug.6. •CUTLER BAY A thief broke intoagray 2013 Toyota Tundra and stole tools valued at $2,000 fromthe driveway ofaresi dence in the 10500 block of Southwest 200th Ter race between 6 p.m.July30 and10 a.m.July3L A thief broke into a silver 2007 Toyota RAV4 and stole $5in change whilethevehi clewasparkedinthedrive way of a residence in the 18500 block of South west 87th Court between 4 pja July24and 930 a.m. July25. A thief broke into a black 2007 Dodge Ram 3500 parked alongtheroadside near Southwest 103rd Avenue and Caribbean Boulevard,and stole sever al tools anda wallet,allval ued at $9,100,between 12:45 and 1a.m.July 19. T7iis list isasamplingof crimesreportedinMiami- DadeCountycities.The information istakenfrom officialpolicereports,which may notcontain statements fromallparties involved. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITYOF SOUTH MIAMI Planning andZoningDepartment 6130 SunsetDrive;South Miami,Florida33143 Phone:(305)663-6326;Fax#:(305)666-4591 On Thursday September 18,2014 at7:00 P.M.,the City ofSouth Miami's Planning Board will conduct public hearings intheCity Commission Chambers attheabove address onthefollowing items: l.PB-14-008 Applicant:Ponce Davis,LLC. A Resolution oftheCity ofSouth Miami relating toarequest toallow for thecreation ofparcels Aand Bon property specifically located at5980 SW 80th Street;South Miami,Florida within anRS-3;Low Density Single-Family Residential Zoning District,pursuant to provisions pertaining to"Waiver of Plat"setforth inSection20-4.2(B)oftheCityofSouthMiamiLandDevelopment Code,andSection 28-4ofthe Miami- Dade County Code;for thepurpose ofconstructing two new single family homes;and providing for alegal description. 2.PB-14-009 Applicant:CityofSouthMiami Discussion ofthecompatibility between new single family home sizes,and existing homes within thesingle family zoning districts,and possible recommendations for changes totheCity's land development code. All interested parties are urged toattend.Objection!or expressions ofapproval may be made inperson atthe hearing orfiled inwriting prior tooratthehearing.The Planning Board resentstheright to recommend totheCityCommission whatever theboard considers inthebest interest for the area involved.Interested parties requesting information arc asked tocontact the Planning and Zoning Department bycalling 305-663-6326orwritingtothe address indicatedabove. You arc hereby advised that ifany person desires toappeal any decision made with respect toany matter considered atthis meeting or hearing, such person will need a record of the proceedings,and for such purpose may need toensure that averbatim record or*rhe proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal a tobe based (F.S.286.0105).Refer tohearing number whenmakingany inquiry.