Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout15-21 PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT OF AND IMPACT AND LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR ROAD DRAINAGE 1st Reading: June 24, 2015 2nd Reading: July 22, 2015 Public Hearing: July 22, 2015 Adopted: July 22, 2015 Effective Date: July 22, 2015 Sponsored by: City Manager ORDINANCE NO. 15-21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE 04-09 PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT OF AN IMPACT ON LAND DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF OPA LOCKA FOR PROVIDING ROAD DRAINAGE AND RELATED FACILITIES NECESSITATED BY SUCH NEW DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND REPEALER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Opa-locka passed Ordinance 04-09, imposing impact fees on new land development in the City to provide and maintain an adequate level of road drainage to meet growth needs in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Commission's legislative findings justifying the imposition of such impact fee, as well as the data and studies used to calculate that fee are incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS,The City retained Burton and Associates to conduct a comprehensive study on impact fees and they recommend modifications based on current data and projections. Their report was presented to the City on May 5th, 2015 and is incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS, This recommended Amendment to the Road Drainage Impact Fees is necessary in order to provide and maintain a level of service to new growth in the City; and WHEREAS,The current Roadway Drainage Fee is outdated and as a matter of public policy should be updated every five years; and WHEREAS, to be consistent with current industry practices and also be consistent with the methodology used for the existing storm water utility Ordinance, the impact fees should henceforth Ordinance No. 15-21 be calculated using ERU's, as that term is defined in Section 21-93 of the City's Stormwater Utility Ordinance; and WHEREAS, in order to receive one hundred percent (100%) cost recovery, the calculated stormwater impact fee should be$829.00 per ERU, as opposed to the current$582.00 per ERU. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA,FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals to the preamble herein are incorporated by reference. Section 2. Ordinance 04-09 imposing an impact fee on land development to provide for Roadway Drainage is Amended as follows: 1. Henceforth, impact fees for roadway drainage shall be calculated based on ERU's as that term is defined in Section 21-93 of the City's Stormwater Utility Ordinance 2. For Roadway Drainage, the Impact Fee shall be $829.00 per ERU, as opposed to the current $582.00 per ERU. Section 3 All ordinances or Code provisions in conflict herewith are hereby_repealed. Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 5. CODIFICATION. This Ordinance shall be codified in the Code of Ordinances when the code is recodified. Section 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall upon adoption, become effective immediately. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2015. Ordinance No. 15-21 /-- ■ / AO/ ra L. Taylor ayor Attest to: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: '6; i 4 i Joa a Flores Vincent T. Brown CitiClerk The Brown Law Group City Attorney Moved by: COMMISSIONER KELLEY Seconded by: VICE MAYOR HOLMES Commissioner Vote: 4-0 Commissioner Kelley: YES Commissioner Pinder: OUT OF ROOM Commissioner Santiago: YES Vice Mayor Holmes: YES Mayor Taylor: YES OQp•�ock4 O F o9 u r. --1Gy OppORAt E� City of Opa-locka Agenda Cover Memo Commission Meeting June 10, 2015 Item Type: Resolution Ordinance Other Date: (EnterX in box) X Yes No Ordinance Reading: 1st Reading 2nd Reading Fiscal Impact: (EnterX in box) X X Public Hearing: Yes No Yes No X (EnterX in box) X X Funding Source: (N/q) Advertising Requirement: Yes No N/A (EnterX in box) X Contract/P.O. Required: Yes No (EnterX in box) X RFP/RFQBid#: N/A Yes No Strategic Plan Priority Area: Strategic Plan Obj./Strategy: Enhance Organizational D N/A Strategic Plan Related Bus.&Economic Dev (EnterX in box) X Public Safety Quality of Education 0 Qual. of Life&City Image • Communication Sponsor Name City Manager Department: Community Development Short Title: An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Opa-locka, Florida, relating to the regulation of the use and development of land in the incorporated areas of the City of Opa-locka, Florida; Imposing an impact fee on land development in the City of Opa- locka for providing new stormwater and related facilities necessitated by such new development; stating the authority for adoption of the ordinance; providing definitions; providing findings and declarations of the city commission; providing for the payment and time of payment of a stormwater impact fee; providing for review of stormwater impact fees and the fee schedules; providing for the establishment of stormwater impact fee districts; providing for the placement of revenue collected from stormwater impact fees into stormwater impact fee trust funds established for that purpose; providing for exemptions and credits; providing for refund of unexpended funds; providing for use of funds derived from stormwater impact fees; providing that stormwater impact fees may be pledged toward payment of bond issues and similar debt instruments; providing for penalties for violation of this ordinance; containing a repealer provision, severability clause and providing for an effective date. Staff Summary Currently, the City of Opa-locka charges impact fees for public safety, parks and recreation and road drainage (stormwater). These impact fees were designed in 1999 by Dr. James Nicholas. As an industry best practice, the impact fee cost basis should be updated once every five years, ansd as such the current fees are due for an update. The City Commission approved Ordinance Impact Fee-Stormwater 1 Resolution to authorize Burton & Assoicates to conduct an impact fee study and provide conclusions and recommendations for the current impact fees. In addition,the City requested recommendations for water and sewer impact fees. This item describes the calculation of the stormwater impact fee for the City, (previously called road drainage impact fees). This section describes the calculation of the capacities and Equivalent Residential Connections(ERU's)for the stormwater system. To remain consistent with the existing stormwater utility ordinance,the impact fees developed herein will calculate ERU's based upon the definition as described in section 21-93 of the Cuity's Stormwater Utility Ordinance: Equivalent Residential Unit(sometimes hereinafter referred to as"ERU")shall mean the statistically estimated average horizontal impervious area of residential developed property per dwelling unit. One(1) ERU, used for commercial purposes, will be equal to one thousand five hundred forty-eight(1,548)square foot[feet]of impervious area. For the purposes of this areticle, each dwelling unit, to wit, single-family residence, mobile home, multifamily, or condominium, is assigned one(1)ERU. The existing stormwater/road drainage impact fee is charged per developed square foot and varies by property type. As an industry practice, developing an impact fee to be consistent with definitions in the existing stormwater utility fee ordinance is recommended. Therefore the new fees are recommended to be charged on a per ERU basis as defined in the ordinance. Based upon the cost and capacity information provided by the City and the methodology presented herein,the study has calculated a stormwater impact fee at 100%cost recovery of$829 per ERU verses the current fee of$582 per ERU. The impact fee per ERU would be charged in the same manner as the stromwater utility rate where a single family home or multi-family dwelling unit is considered one ERU. For all non-residential properties,the ERU's are determined by dividing the impervious square footage of the property by 1,548 and multiplied by$829 for the the Stormwater Impact fee. (See Stormwater Impact Fee examples in the attached study) The Burton &Associates study provides the following: 1. The City should adopt the calculated stormwater impact fee of$829 per ERU. 2. The City should amend the imposition of stormwater impact fees to an ERU basis, whereas the stromwater utility ordinance ERU definition is used. 3. Debt Service credit applied to fee:Avoids double recovery of debt-funded costs. 4. See Study Calculations for Stormwater Impact Fee. Proposed Action: Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance . Attachments: 1. Burton &Associates FY 2015 Impact Fee Study Draft Report 2. Burton &Associates FY 2015 Impact Fee Study PowerPoint Presentation 3. Ordinance 04-09 4. Ordinance 04-10 5. Ordinance 04-11 Ordinance Impact Fee-Stormwater 2 U �n. Memorandum TO: Myra L.Taylor, Mayor Timothy Holmes,Vice Mayor Terrence K. Pinder, Commiss •ner Joseph Kelley, Commissione Luis B. Santiago, Commission.r FROM: Kelvin L. Baker, Sr., City Manag r 1 DATE: Ma y 13 2015 RE: An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Opa-locka, Florida, relating to the regulation of the use and development of land in the incorporated areas of the City of Opa- locka, Florida; Imposing an impact fee on land development in the City of Opa-locka for providing new stormwater and related facilities necessitated by such new development; stating the authority for adoption of the ordinance; providing definitions; providing findings and declarations of the city commission; providing for the payment and time of payment of a stormwater impact fee; providing for review of stormwater impact fees and the fee schedules; providing for the establishment of stormwater impact fee districts; providing for the placement of revenue collected from stormwater impact fees into stormwater impact fee trust funds established for that purpose; providing for exemptions and credits; providing for refund of unexpended funds; providing for use of funds derived from stormwater impact fees; providing that stormwater impact fees may be pledged toward payment of bond issues and similar debt instruments; providing for penalties for violation of this ordinance; containing a repealer provision, severability clause and providing for an effective date. Request: An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Opa-locka, Florida, relating to the regulation of the use and development of land in the incorporated areas of the City of Opa-locka, Florida; Imposing an impact fee on land development in the City of Opa-locka for providing new stormwater and related facilities necessitated by such new development; stating the authority for adoption of the ordinance; providing definitions; providing findings and declarations of the city commission; providing for the payment and time of payment of a stormwater impact fee; providing for review of stormwater impact fees and the fee schedules; providing for the establishment of stormwater impact fee districts; providing for the placement of revenue collected from stormwater impact fees into stormwater impact fee trust funds established for that purpose; providing for exemptions and credits; providing for refund of unexpended funds; providing for use of funds derived from stormwater impact fees; providing that stormwater impact fees may be pledged toward payment of bond issues and similar debt instruments; providing for penalties for violation of this ordinance; containing a repealer provision, severability clause and providing for an effective date. Description: Currently, the City of Opa-locka charges impact fees for public safety, parks and recreation and road drainage (stormwater). These impact fees were designed in 1999 by Dr. James Nicholas. As an industry Ordinance Impact Fee-Stormwater 1 best practice, the impact fee cost basis should be updated once every five years, and as such the current fees are due for an update. The City Commission approved Resolution to authorize Burton & Associates to conduct an impact fee study and provide conclusions and recommendations for the current impact fees. In addition, the City requested recommendations for water and sewer impact fees. This item describes the calculation of the stormwater impact fee for the City, (previously called road drainage impact fees). This section describes the calculation of the capacities and Equivalent Residential Connections (ERU's) for the stormwater system. To remain consistent with the existing stormwater utility ordinance, the impact fees developed herein will calculate ERU's based upon the definition as described in section 21-93 of the City's Stormwater Utility Ordinance: Equivalent Residential Unit(sometimes hereinafter referred to as "ERU") shall mean the statistically estimated average horizontal impervious area of residential developed property per dwelling unit. One (1) ERU, used for commercial purposes, will be equal to one thousand five hundred forty-eight(1,548) square foot[feet]of impervious area. For the purposes of this article, each dwelling unit, to wit, single-family residence, mobile home, multifamily, or condominium, is assigned one (1) ERU. The existing stormwater/road drainage impact fee is charged per developed square foot and varies by property type. As an industry practice, developing an impact fee to be consistent with definitions in the existing stormwater utility fee ordinance is recommended. Therefore, the new fees are recommended to be charged on a per ERU basis as defined in the ordinance. Based upon the cost and capacity information provided by the City and the methodology presented herein, the study has calculated a stormwater impact fee at 100% cost recovery of$829 per ERU verses the current fee of$582 per ERU. The impact fee per ERU would be charged in the same manner as the stormwater utility rate where a single family home or multi-family dwelling unit is considered one ERU. For all non-residential properties, the ERU's are determined by dividing the impervious square footage of the property by 1,548 and multiplied by$829 for the Stormwater Impact fee. (See Stormwater Impact Fee examples in the attached study) The Burton &Associates study provides the following: 1. The City should adopt the calculated stormwater impact fee of$829 per ERU. 2. The City should amend the imposition of stormwater impact fees to an ERU basis, whereas the stormwater utility ordinance ERU definition is used. 3. Debt Service credit applied to fee: Avoids double recovery of debt-funded costs. 4. See Study Calculations for Stormwater Impact Fee. Financial Impact: There is no negative financial impact to the City to adopt this Parks & Recreation Impact Fee Ordinance. Implementation Time Line: 90 Days from adoption Legislative History: Ordinance 04-09 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance. Planning Council Recommendation: No Planning Council Review. Ordinance Impact Fee-Stormwater 2 Attachment(s) 1. Burton &Associates FY 2015 Impact Fee Study Draft Report 2. Burton &Associates FY 2015 Impact Fee Study PowerPoint Presentation 3. Ordinance 04-09 4. Ordinance 04-10 5. Ordinance 04-11 Prepared By: Gerald Lee, Zoning Official Josue Leger, City Planner Gregory Gay, Director of Planning &Community Development Dept. Ordinance Impact Fee-Stormwater 3 Sponsored by: City Manager Resolution No. 07-7113 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA,FLORIDA,AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BURTON&ASSOCIATES,IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, IN THE AMOUNT OF FIFTY-NINE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY EIGHT DOLLARS ($59,728.00)AS THE MOST RESPONSIBLE AND RESPONSIVE PROPOSER TO THE CITY'S REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS,RFP #07-0622, "WATER, SEWER, SOLID WASTE, OVERHEAD & COST ALLOCATION RATES STUDY&UPDATE",PAYABLE FROM ACCOUNT NO. 17-513312 WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted Resolution No.07-7088 soliciting a proposal to conduct a comprehensive study of water, sewer and solid waste rates;and WHEREAS, three firms submitted proposals,to wit: The Consulting Group of South Florida; Burton&Associates MuniFinancial;and WHEREAS, Burton&Associates was deemed to be the most responsible and responsive proposer. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA,FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals to the preamble herein are incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into and execute an agreement with Burton&Associates as the most responsive and responsible proposer,pursuant to RFP#07- 0622,"Water,Sewer, Solid Waste,Overhead&Cost Allocation Rates Study&Update,in an Resolution No. 07-7113 amount not to exceed fifty-nine thousand seven hundred twenty-eight dollars($59,728.00),payable from Account No. 17-513312. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25 day of JULY ,2007. MA OR Attest to: Approved as to form . d legal sufficiency: CITY C , RK C el(//17 O• ,k 1707 D Moved by: VICE MAYOR JOHNSON Seconded by: COMMISSIONER MILLER Commission Vote: 4-1 Commissioner Tydus: YES Commissioner Holmes: YES Commissioner Miller: YES Vice-Mayor Johnson: NO Mayor Kelley: YES C:\Documents and Settings\vmcleary\My Documents\Resolutions\Agreement-Burton&Associates.doc Sponsored by: City Manager Resolution No. 07-7088 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA, FLORIDA SOLICITING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF WATER,SEWER AND SOLID WASTE RATES WHEREAS, Miami-Dade County is currently conducting a rate study that will affect all cities that purchase water and treat sewer through the County;and WHEREAS, in anticipation of increased rates by Miami-Dade County,the City is desirous of seeking a comprehensive study of water, sewer and solid waste rates by assessing the City's current rate structure and providing recommendations. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA,FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals to the preamble herein are incorporated by reference. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to solicit an RFP to conduct a comprehensive study of water, sewer and solid waste rates. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23'l day of May,2007. MA R Resolution No. 07-7088 A •• Approved as to fo •• • legal sufficiency: ii� ll CITY CLERK C A ' O' ' DATE Moved by: Vice Mayor Johnson Second by: Commissioner Holmes Commission Vote: 4-0 Commissioner Tydus: Yes Commissioner Holmes: Yes Vice-Mayor Johnson: Yes Mayor Kelley: Yes c:tnocwmeoa and Setfings tvmclary\My DocmnentAltesohrtions\RFP for Water,sewer&solid waste Rates.doc 1"Reading/Public Hearing: SEPTEMBER 8, 2004 2nd Reading/Public Hearing: SEPTEMBER 22, 2004 Adopted: SEPTEMBER 22, 2004 Effective Date: DECEMBER 22, 2004 Sponsored By: City Manager ORDINANCE NO. 04-10 PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA- LOCKA, FLORIDA RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAND IN THE INCORPORATED AREAS OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA, FLORIDA; IMPOSING AN IMPACT FEE ON LAND DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC SAFETY NECESSITATED BY SUCH NEW DEVELOPMENT; STATING THE AUTHORITY FOR ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;PROVIDING FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS OF THE CITY COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT AND TIME OF PAYMENT OF A PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR REVIEW OF PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES AND THE FEE SCHEDULES; PROVIDING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF REVENUE COLLECTED FROM PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES INTO A PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE TRUST FUND ESTABLISHED FOR THAT PURPOSE;,PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS AND CREDITS;PROVIDING FOR REFUND OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS;PROVIDING FOR USE OF FUNDS DERIVED FROM PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES MAY BE PLEDGED TOWARD PAYMENT OF BOND ISSUES AND SIMILAR DEBT INSTRUMENTS; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OPA-LOCKA, FLORIDA: Section One: Legislative Findings The City Commission of the City of Opa-locka finds, determines and declares that: Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 1 A. The City of Opa-locka must expand its Public Safety capital facilities in order to maintain current standards if new development is to be accommodated without decreasing current standards. This must be done in order to promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare; B. The Florida Legislature,through the enactment of Florida Statutes Chapter 163 163.3202 (3)has sought to encourage Qpa-locks to enact impact fees. C. The imposition of impact fees is one of the rp_Fferred methods of ensuring that ,development bears a proportionate share of the cost of PONIC.-4it> ty_capital facilities necessary to, acco m`o�C ate such-development. This must be done in order to promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare. D. Each of the types of land development described in Section Seven hereof, will create a need for the construction, equipping,or expansion of Public Safety capital facilities. E. The fees established by Section Seven are derived from, are based upon, and do not exceed the costs of providing additional Public Safety necessitated by the new land develop- ments for which the fees are levied. F. The report entitled"Methods and Data Used to Calculate Police, Park & Recreation and Public Works Impact Fees", dated July 19,2004, sets forth a reasonable methodology and analysis for the determination of the impact of new development on the need for and costs for additional Public Safety in the City of Opa-locka. Section Two: Short Title.Authority and Applicability. A. This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "The City of Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordinance." B. The City Commission of the City of Opa-locka has the authority to adopt this ordinance pursuant to Article IV of the Constitution of the State of Florida, and Chapter 166 of the Florida Statutes. C. This ordinance shall apply in the incorporated area of the City of Opa-locka. Section Three: Intents and Purposes A. This ordinance is intended to assist in the implementation of the City of Opa-locka Comprehensive Plan. B. The purpose of this ordinance is to regulate the use and development of land so as to Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 2 assure that new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of capital expenditures necessary to provide Public Safety in the City of Opa-locka. Section Four: Rules of Construction A. The provisions of this ordinance shall be liberally construed so as to effectively carry out its purpose in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare. B. For the purposes of administration and enforcement of this ordinance, unless otherwise stated in this ordinance,the following rules of construction shall apply to the text of this ordi- nance: (1) In case of any difference of meaning or implication between the text of this ordinance and any caption, illustration, summary table,or illustrative table, the text shall control. (2)The word "shall" is always mandatory and not discretionary; the word "may" is permissive. (3) Words used in the present tense shall include the future; and words used in the singular number shall include the plural, and the plural the singular, unless the context clearly indicates the contrary. (4)The phrase"used for" includes"arranged for", "designed for", "maintained for", or"occupied for". (5)The word "person" includes an individual, a corporation, a partnership, an incorporated association,or any other similar entity. (6) Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, where a regulation involves two (2) or more items, conditions,provisions, or events connected by the conjunc- tion "and", "or" or"either...or", the conjunction shall be interpreted as follows: (a) "And" indicates that all the connected terms, conditions, provisions or events shall apply. (b) "Or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or events may apply singly or in any combination. (c) "Either...or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions or events shall apply singly but not in combination. (7) The word "includes" shall not limit a term to the specific example but is intended to extend its meaning to all other instances or circumstances of like kind Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 3 • or character. (8) "City Manager"means the City Manager municipal officials he/she may designate to carry out the administration of this ordinance. Section Five: Definitions A. A "feepayer" is a person applying for the issuance of a building permit. B. "Building permit"is the approval issued by the City of Opa-locka that authorizes the construction or placement of a building, dwelling, mobile home, recreational vehicle or other structure on a site. C. "Capital Equipment" is buildings, vehicles, weapons, and communications equipment, all with an expected use life of three years or more. "Capital Equipment"shall include the cost of training new police officers when such new officers constitute a net expansion of the Opa-locka protective force. D. "Development Order" means a regulatory approval by the City of Opa-locka. Section Six: Imposition of Public Safety Impact Fee A. Any person who, after the effective date of this Ordinance seeks to develop land within the City of Opa-locka, Florida, by applying for a building permit, is hereby required to pay a Public Safety impact fee in the manner and amount set forth in this ordinance. B. No new building permit for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee pursuant to Section Seven of this ordinance shall be issued unless and until the Public Safety impact fee hereby required has been paid. C. No extension of a building permit issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee pursuant to Section Seven of this ordinance shall be granted unless and until the Public Safety impact fee hereby required has been paid. Section Seven: Computation of the Amount of Public Safety Impact Fee A. At the option of the feepayer, the amount of the Public Safety impact fee may be determined by the following fee schedules. Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 4 Public Safety Fee Schedule Residential Floor Area Cost Per Sq.Ft. I $0.116 Business Floor Area ,Cost Per Sq. Ft. 1 $0.116 (1). If a building permit is requested for mixed uses, then the fee shall be deter- mined through using the above schedules by apportioning the space committed to uses specified on the schedules. (2). If the type of development activity that a building permit is applied for is not specified on the above fee schedules,the City Manager shall use the fee applicable to the most nearly comparable type of land use on the above fee schedules. The City Manager shall be guided in the selection of a comparable type by the City of Opa-locka Comprehensive Plan, supporting documents of the City of Opa-locka Comprehensive Plan, and the City of Opa-locka Zoning Ordinance. If the City Manager determines that there is no comparable type of land use on the above fee schedules then the City Manager shall determine the fee by considering demographic or other documentation which is available from the City of Opa-locka planning Department, and state and regional authorities. (3). In the case of change of use, redevelopment,or expansion or modification of an existing use which requires the issuance of a building permit, the impact fee shall be based upon the net positive increase in the impact fee for the new use as compared to the previous use. The City Manager shall be guided in this determi- nation by the sources and agencies listed above. B. If a feepayer opts not to have the impact fee determined according to paragraph (A)of this section, then the feepayer shall prepare and submit to the City Manager an independent fee calculation study for the land development activity for which a building permit is sought. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. The City Manager shall consider the documentation submitted by the feepayer but is riot required to accept such documentation as he/she shall reasonably deem to be inaccurate or not reliable and may, in the alternative, require the feepayer to submit additional or different docu- mentation for consideration. If an acceptable independent fee calculation study is not presented, the feepayer shall pay Public Safety impact fees based upon the schedule shown in paragraph(A) of this section. If an acceptable independent fee calculation study is presented, the City Manager may adjust the fee to that appropriate to the particular development. Determinations made by the City Manager pursuant to this paragraph may be appealed to the City Commission by filing a written request with the City Manager within ten (10) days of the City Manager's determination. Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 5 Section Eight: Payment of Fee A. The feepayer shall pay the Public Safety impact fee required by this ordinance to the City Manager or his/her designee prior to the issuance of a building permit. B. All funds collected shall be properly identified by and promptly transferred for deposit in the Public Safety Impact Fee Trust Fund to be held in separate accounts as determined in Section Ten of this ordinance and used solely for the purposes specified in this ordinance. Section Nine: Public Safety Injpact Fee Trust Fund Established A. There is hereby established a Public Safety Impact Fee Trust Fund. B. Funds withdrawn from this account must be used in accordance with the provisions of Section Ten of this ordinance. Section Ten: Use of Funds A. Funds collected from Public Safety impact fees shall be used solely for the purpose of acquiring, equipping, and/or making capital improvements to Public Safety facilities under the jurisdiction of the City of Opa-locka, the County, or the State of Florida, and shall not be used for maintenance or operations. B. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are issued for advanced provision of capital facilities for which Public Safety impact fees may be expended, impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities provided are of the type described in paragraph A above. C. At least once each fiscal period the City Manager shall present to the City Commission a proposed capital improvement program for Public Safety,assigning funds, including any accrued interest, from the several Public Safety Impact Fee Trust Funds to specific Public Safety improvement projects and related expenses. Monies, including any accrued interest, not assigned in any fiscal period shall be retained in the Public Safety Impact Fee Trust Fund until the next fiscal period except as provided by the refund provisions of this ordinance. D. Funds may be used to make refunds required under any Development Order hereto- before or hereafter issued or entered into by the City of Opa-locka as such refunds pertain to the subject matter of this ordinance. E. Funds may be used to provide refunds as described in Section Twelve Section Eleven: Refund of Fees Paid Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 6 A. If a building permit expires without commencement of construction, then the feepayer shall be entitled to a refund,without interest, of the impact fee paid as a condition for its issuance except that the City shall retain three percent(3 %)of the fee to offset a portion of the costs of collection and refund. The feepayer must submit an application for such a refund to the City Clerk of the City of Opa-locka within 30 days of the expiration of the permit. B. Any funds not expended or encumbered by the end of the calendar quarter immediately following six (6)years from the date the Public Safety impact fee was paid shall, upon application of the then current landowner,be returned to such landowner with interest at the rate of three percent( 3 %)per annum,provided that the landowner submits an application for a refund to the City Clerk of the City of Opa-locka within 180 days of the expiration of the six year period. Section Twelve: Eemntions and Credits A. The following shall be exempted from payment of the impact fee: (1) Alterations or expansion of an existing building where no additional units are created and where the use is not changed. (2) The construction of accessory buildings or structures. (3) The replacement of a building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use. (4) The installation of a replacement mobile home on a lot or other such site when a Public Safety impact fee for such mobile home site has previously been paid pursuant to this ordinance or where a mobile home legally existed on such site on or prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. Any claim of exemption must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. B. Credits: (1) Public Safety land and/or Public Safety capital improvements may be offered by the feepayer as total or partial payment of the required impact fee. The offer must request or provide for a Public Safety impact fee credit. If the City Manager accepts such an offer, whether the acceptance is before or after the effective date of this ordinance, the credit shall be determined and provided in the following manner: (a) Credit for the dedication of land shall be valued at: Opa-locka Public Safety impact Fee Ordnance Page 7 within one(1)year of the acceptance of the offer by the City Manager, the amount of the security shall be increased by ten per cent(10%)compounded, for each year of the life of the security. The security shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commission prior to acceptance of the security. If the Public Safety construction project is not to be completed within 5 years of the date of the fee- payer's offer, the City Commission must approve the Public Safety construction project and its scheduled completion date prior to the acceptance of the offer by the City Manager. (2) Any claim for credit must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. (3) Determinations made by the City Manager pursuant to the credit provisions of this section may be appealed to the City Commission by filing a written request with the City Manager within ten(10)days of the City Manager's determination. Section Thirteen: Review The fees contained in Section Seven(A) shall be reviewed by the City Commission at least once each fiscal biennium. Section Fourteen: Penalty Provision A violation of this ordinance shall be prosecuted in the same manner as misdemeanors are prosecuted and upon conviction the violator shall be punishable according to law; however, in addition to or in lieu of any criminal prosecution,the City of Opa-locka shall have the power to sue in civil court to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. Section Fifteen: Repealer Provision All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section Sixteen: Severability If any section, phrase, sentence or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision,and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 9 (i) 115%of the most recent assessed value by the Property Appraiser, or (ii) by such other appropriate method as the City Commission may have accepted prior to the effective date of this ordinance for particular Public Safety improvements, or (iii) by fair market value established by private appraisers acceptable to the City. Credit for the dedication of Public Safety land shall be provided when the property has been conveyed at no charge to, and accepted by, the City in a manner satisfactory to the City Commission. (b) Applicants for credit for construction of Public Safety improvements shall submit acceptable engineering drawings and specifications,and construction cost estimates to the City Manager. The City Manager shall determine credit for construction based upon either these cost estimates or upon alternative engineering criteria and construction cost estimates if the City Manager determines that such estimates submitted by the applicant are either unreliable or inaccurate. The City Manager shall provide the applicant with a letter or certificate setting forth the dollar amount of the credit, the reason for the credit, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. The applicant must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his/her agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate and return such signed document to the City Manager before credit will be given. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within sixty(60)days shall nullify the credit. (c) Except as provided in subparagraph (d),Credit against impact fees otherwise due will not be provided until: (i) the construction is completed and accepted by the City, the County, or the State, whichever is applicable; (ii) a suitable maintenance and warranty bond is received and approved by the City Clerk of the City of Opa-locka, when applicable. (d)Credit may be provided before completion of specified Public Safety improve- ments if adequate assurances are given by the applicant that the standards set out in Subparagraph(c)will be met and if the feepayer posts security as provided below for the costs of such construction. Security in the form of a performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit or escrow agreement shall be posted with and approved by the City Clerk of the City of Opa-locka in an amount determined by the City Manager. If the Public Safety construction project will not be constructed Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 8 Section SeventeeD: Effective Date This ordinance shall become effective on December 22, 2004. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED THIS 22 Day of SEPT. , 2004. rThr MAYOR ATTEST: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: CITY LERK C A O' c/p - DATE Moved by: COMMISSIONER TYDUS Second by: VICE MAYOR JOHNSON Commission Vote: 4-0 Commissioner Tydus YES Commission Holmes: YES Vice-Mayor Johnson: YES Mayor Kelley: YES Opa-locka Public Safety Impact Fee Ordnance Page 10 H W a 0 2 Q CIS 0 0 ac �+ CO V 0 : �.+ rn- 2 1 A o) coo 014 is,� to 44 7 v =es Q.i ?,t tn .. a L. 1- 0 1 ar Oki ts? 0 1-0 = -0 i '2 c 0 ..1 it l i 1 To 0 qo 0 ›% N E 3 Ca •L � W L 411 40 -0 •ril Q 0 U) W 0 Q z 0 I- oc CD 4) Q a) LL .O O •— a)O co 17„„ S. u ..0 O W a) a) au c CO 073 E inn" cu E s,v) E i a) m N W 4-1 C � a N a) O co •u a) a_+ O U 2 a)— CU s_ > 0.0 Q 0f •> > CO CU O `" co C r- O O —_ eZ • Ca 4- co 0 O N E -a cu c co OU > (.7) 73 EL) p v V) O 0 - - D U E c -0 +-' o ° W a, a a a, CU CU . (O > ti) V) a, 4- v N — .4J 0 CO O •� v CU CU aJ Q o O a) ,_ O : v X a oa, +; 4""d-- a) N U O cn 4-1 c CU �> a) O a) c i s a = +-J U too +-► v o a v ca Q "O O 3 X " c t 8 Q. E ej v.) > a) > Q.) 0 4-.J " X 2 -' a) cv v -a 4_, a, o -0 4-1 a) CD a) .0 O al O v 0" v � a) 4�- C N ' O X O a1 L Q) U (Z (/') O a--+ N E • U c c6 .— i cn O " u cn rum 2- 0_ 0� E t1A = 2 z c w = Q ■ A. ■ A. A. rn CA W Q V 0 22 0 = a) Q U E 0o a)(I') N ° Z cu v U a"0 W N N IA co LL ra - N N 4- r c o (, -0 4," Wc . . N E • p Li. a� °c +J v OC_cs_. . 4- E c E _ W 0 a.) cts ._, c CU W LPL N N ° LL. • a)• / z — W L N L f2 M N U a) 44_ Q.J d U M c--I v -I Q () U 03 U oo — 3 O -c)- "LA E +-+ � w al Dl N C O 06 O Ov L 0 v Q1 tl? th 4„J O (t) 2 W W W S— c„ o C a- nL > o v el i 0 cu 4_.• '� Q) _.4:: a -a t. 1/4-z ocu c; = , 0_ O.E -a >- ,_ V o C .N (U v N to c a) v v 0� 0 N 4- a) a; a, U v N i 3 j - Q E +�+ N o '� U cn >' Q t0 co L O W W U N . m F°— F°— +, 0 iA o L L 0 I— ,; U 0 U cn I"" W Q L c o CU CO �o �, CC E C„ � • w Q 0 ea N.F., Z E v, CU 0 CZ C O cn O CO CU a`i 4 � o XOO CO 'C 3 N N N t^ll n v CO^ n N •O c N �O N l0 M e^-1 ri N S` O Iv Q . 3 ,, In. i/1• ill• in. in. in in- N L LLL E w tD O O 00 lD O O O ..—.. O W >. E N c-1 N M l0 O D Q 0) 4--1 L r I U w ° CU 'N w 341 (O co v L.a Q�1 C coo d- IP o rn rn o E D C E cu c I N M 1.. rl CD '-I s.- i CO U *3 a 4' c 0 Cl) co - a� 3 in .n. .n. in. in v} . in. N L - O Q O CU N ^, ` W W r-1 N In 00 N o W CC ID^ , 4-J V 0 iii W u N L ow — CU CO O C 3 u N C •t/1 (n •E 2 \ A r 1 N m l0 00 06 D L-- CT N O LL w 4- 4- CU CU Q i N W Q ^N, V CI. ea a Q o ul E m - GJ ^ CO N. oo co �, r1 r cri r cri LL N N l0 r1 lfl Z tn. I- CC E rn 0 cc O ca m X CO 1.1.1 II II II II II II II II L �..1 w {d co W 3 a cc EW u, in u, Ln u, u, Ln a) -. L e'•1 l'••1 r %' r-1 r-1 %'1 1 W a) a N N I. N N N N LL V1 N N N N N N N aE H L.L. -1•-0 E O os u VW X X X X X X X X CO a7 CJ H a t D o Ln o 0 0 0 o W r-I N o0 'A Ln N rLei E a E ti 3 °J -c N u in H V t t L t U U U U U U h- (1) E_ C C C N C C_ I- ' r-1 N Cr c-1 Cr M M 3 2 r1 a)W E Cl.) v °X' C N 8 _ = E E 4C3 ■C VI >- >. 0 0 N v o 06 3 4 m c c 4.0 E E to m CD ai cu cu c c a a V) N U co Q Q cu _a ED ED CD c ro N J V) _1 C Q I - - - ---, 8 N 1 Q) ___ 8 L ,, _— - __..__ s a)L (10) 3 H 0 � 8 fl.E o Q M a >. ._ o� CO L W I W O U •V MF/ ----I O Q .c - - —- E N C A' L W [w __ s0 U w ) -CI E m S p Ln VVCO } L II(11) '', Ill i T T T T T T coC s v = * * t al CC C f6 N "� ut v) U �'' of In C f0 N i a1 C CO CO U C.7 a!in f6 O O pip m L 2 v1 m p v1 co V E v) " 2 Q +j o J a E .— -aa ca v . cl, Z Y 52 E 0 3. N o ■ o z CO o (r) 0 z 0 U) W 4 Co) 0 -0 4 02 c a U cu N a Ca a) L D u- 0 (J) CO cc U > 0 N W c� F- a) = O_ ._ tr W n ' CO W i s a� a; to LL v °' `o E 4—) � v w i o 0 Uco • `'' LL CO cc E ' c� > O N oo if) ri N a) -. u, >, 00 E . ,..,_ _c U +) 4--1 0 u- D % 4., L 03 c `+-' N c� ce o E ±-' Q - c N W v a) o W >, Cr) C L cu a) v N aJ 0 Q o a ,_ LL a� N oo O >, — ) 4.0 }' >, V) v 0 ° O > — :>_ a, w L C N — X �, • U v Lu T N _ Q a) W -0 +>+ 0 co 7 U Cl) L -0 - Co, 0 N cu au � a-J w — U - N cn cu Cl) S 0_ + - °C o to a E +2 •> O Q `v o +• E o c a� o el,co L ° W � _ Q . a, ( v �• m cu N co c!) •0 W Q1 � U, .L OA -0 N 0 LA < 0 0 p z u' v n m > U p , U u_ ti w Ak CO U) W Q V 0 a) a • ati LL LL 0 CO t N N M c g i.r N ct C E . CC CO V P.•vMM/ Wv N i/T m D Ln X � � W L cu �..L ^ /� Q m N N N N N N N W a� 000000000000 C -0 d W fn° i/} i/1- i/} 1/)- 1f)-°3 i/i- (1) • • 0 U. •F—� X X X X X X X X,,, W V CO `^ n °o °o N Ln "1 LL N c6 -3 c� E W � � � � MNI X00 .- cu X it II II ti ti it tt II WTI f• i L D LL W 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 • • co 0 a5 L Ln Ln 111 Ln Ln Ln Ln CO D O {A Q ,-1-. ri rl rl 'I 'I i ` v cC c� •i a �. ,,,_, a) E Ln E S.— 1-- >. 3 c� ° 2 ° Sp M �� i Q Q p O 0_ E 3 Q. a z z N o ^ o g /1 /- N °' °' GX1 X C CD a, � � I E E N s X V � -� > > 0 0 i1 O CL 44 CO O ).. L L L L N aJ 1]A m„..- co >, 1-- 1_,_ E ..7.90) 2_.) 1 .4-7 Pe. a. MI (13 E L • G) W — Q ,4-ms V) Q ° — v =CL) 4--+ CD E CD a Eo c as L CD D •O ca O c > JIA J O � 5 Q •E a a--I E W ” a) (L)aj ci O ._vn O 73 U) W Q C > 0 Ea) ct V) 0 O oZ3 N i Z N Q a O i>_C2 N CC W C13 V Cl) a) N O U 0 01 Q. co fp L V L Cti 00 "N,, + a--' co") o a ( i" v E N r.,1 U(0 Lri oo VI + LL (f) • • .- Cl)■ LL (1)aC in- O + co C O N . N v Q u_ •"—' t11 m E L c6 w •— -0 co 0 Q 000 U cu -0 D. •� •— vv) co p 4- ai d) N C Q. < O m 4— 0 QJ O N 0 L m W 4-' U U °op -0 CD E v o o } 3 i a) cm r-+• 0 "J O N ca o a C Q E v () L U (.� N „ Q O 111 Q CO U L •5 U CC w u O o - co a--+ o = u aJ c a O Cl 06 L (/1 Q L- v1 c/) C11 N tn. c (o Q) N w Y o C 1 U L 0 CU C L.L.LI- V1 ° ' 1. CO La > o a) °° N 0 mm S— > o m v s- ln Ti o V Q L1 QLJ c/1 "_ Ov) a. N °C Q uM(0 a N ° T a) — N - U C^, ice-+ W L °C) O V) 1 - J Z }�.� L W o U x , o CU R3 D a o L H � W C o 0 0 0 o Q 0 5t .0 co 00 00 00 M m m m m O tso L� o o 8 a CO o N M LI) aIf W aQ 4) o o 0 E co^ � o 00 0 v N -LA. LL V1 L a) VLL V x y off V Ol N d �l al u. N V r-I N cri co a a co E E n II II II n II � (1) 4• 00 00 00 00 00 O CL U. rn -rn CT) a) N rn •_ u. x x x x x x CO a) CC Y S S o U o ° 0 0 0 V 4.) 4J N X X ?� >. 0 0 V V a C `° C C o LL v, L v (5 C � C f6 c0 a a _ > vi Q Q CIO -76 E Q ME) J 8 W CJi " _ �..___—_- - ° I l P"'..... (3) c o I Law ICC z 8 i `O^ oc a) L} 1 co a) i th W Q C) 0 co Q co o tlo 0:15 N L Z (..) 0 O 4 � a do LO ix 4) o N ko r' m � o U N . E >,,, °' O .I_ J °1 O V o Q . . CO N c LPL >. O_ °' ° L a) M c' v N cn m E — N LE 0 U N Ca �/l v I c�} > — r-1 O D a 4J X 1.. a) O v � O a is; N 4- Q. +J > LID 2.). o C O O -51_, W W a) L... v 4...) a) co n r-I If) CO c cu 7, >' o oNO s v o o _ O V V -a a, 00 ,0- a W O � a as c E c a o Ni _ O � 'n CV U O i co Q a - N Q O '(J} E— •— CI) E V C U Q D N L l-I co U N Q u s- U 3 v O N U Q) Ov w p L 4- 0. = C CU v v) c w U Cu .V CU 0 a, N a. v L ° W v a O > i L Q v cj (.9 c° .— U - C O O O N C x C 7--- -.5 N CO L v) 0 U w O0 u7 d O L w' OD N O To cn }, N 3 U (n u 3 CO v C3 N N (a a — (/� ._ i — 4-1 1— _J Z CO p 4_J u. O _ > alp (/) v) m C. 9 v) U U 0 (1) < X O . d. w — W — (/) o 0' 0 o 0 0 0 0 t m M M M M M M e W ,:,.. Q 0. = m O m II/ LD N Ln Ln N Lc' Ln E U in- 4" iNh iN V {} H = co t M Q Q h. W . X E Ln o ° °° N FR 8 W ++ " e�-I N ^ n cu in t/1 in t/. in. /)). a) LLV a) N z. w LL el N CO la' 00 x N t O lr0 , M Qom) ) V Q. '-fl- if? i�h '" , N V �, 1 E ..,. Co LL a 0.o II II II II II II II II E Q. LL ° ° ``-I VI- . u. til X x x x x x x x /% u 75 TS "�—J o LL ° ° ,, Rik °a 0 0 O 0 Q a) cr N Li, V) > VI e-i N dF N cu R� Cv A 41 X X C a) UJ N 4J O = O p E a cci O `° z E E +-, t N o U N v x0 V aoE4, D � •- 47 C C C LW > LP1 LL cu E E CI) c CO to bo t t '% C cu co m u G. j t/1 Q Q 0 OM Q 4A CD tao a J E - 2 NI- 1 — -- — — - N ur 4 a a 0 g a (1) Z ce > 0 V) CD � s (I) LL ate, c 4—) i V a — cp CO , ro EU ,,, ., cu +>, _ Q H ot. • ix,. ci, 4— L 8 0Ln EO N (o >- U •— o ��\�J c —O -T IT 111_ y� -: L, * * * * 'p > ^ L - 4J U 3 E +-. 0 v, f0 ++ E +' u u LA v_ v en cn U1 LO N d1 coif co O U1 O, O co U - (o N — a m m in a N -c (o c!1 m = E i OL U a) v 't W L7 V' O O a co Ln _ 0 72 z cv ca u' co U 2 >- Q N C 10 U O O c0 = Q O N +v-+ 2 a O Z z 0 i i 1 1 v► Tr 01 01 10 �v�pp1 1�(p11 �V�pp1 N pg O M 1. e-I lC 11 �t I" w ONO (NI aM-I O^1 L.0 �O tC M C Tr a-1 N 10 M ONO N W To is I.L M 01 n l0 LN Lf1 LH 111 M M M N N N N e-1 LA' em-I N LU ot c c u 4 O O 4. w co N CO V N LAD Ul 1O n A I N 1 1 N N 1-.. Q 3 t a) 01 to . 0 m Q et rig ut 1 N tC 01 00 N 1i M 11� M us. 1l1 111 M M M N N N ei M cri. N z 3 c O E ,2 u i CC L N CO CU ^ T f0 ao a) i E > H VI- i/} 'V>• i/1• i/T IA- i/)• VI i/1• V? i/} -(/? ih I/? i/} il1- ,...1 00 * m t * * Ql O O u'1 O m * u'1 t!1 u1 r-1 111 O Ol r-1 * lfl 00 * * N . e-'1 00 d' N e-4 * 00 N N at CN" V) M 00 lf1 lD N lD 0 M e--I lD Ol M M M ( / ' in 00 l0 N e-I r-I N N 00 a "cu W LI- ^ ' �n * m * * 00 m O M * LD at Ln Ln 00 W M l� * r1 m * * UI N 1N O * In at N M N lD r-1 N 111 u1 ci C1 r-1 d' e-I N lD w V a° ro CO C U N •(� i/} VI- VI. VI. i/T VI- ill• i/} in i!1• tn. in Q at a O. .- m * LO r1 0 * * lD 0 0 0 O lD r-I O f6 Co E co UI * 001 %�-1 * * N M Tr %�-1 I I I 00 I .�-I Tr "1 U W N M' T r-I v e1 e4 M � O J N (U a V N � O •. i/). Ail. in tn. in in. An. in i/? i/? i/l. in in. o N U1 * u1 O1 N * * 01 O N� 01 N 0 N Ol O U N N O1 00 * * m O N N N ul ul Q1 lfl c N O1 O m 111 co lD ■ 00 M et. co M ate+ L N N M rl r-I ei rl ei e-1 M C 0 NN Q1 (0 0 O i 13 O _ _ v 0 i1- VI- -0 ill- i/1 V? i n- i/)• i/} ill' .N, iR i/} C a c L h N ^ �` �. ` _Y LJ �"�'� •G •E as Rc .V c W 'c vii u — u C r o�Jo =o_o SQ W L m l0 w E c 01 C H 'L. t0 E w f0 w U t0 J % t a d L = U H To c � a a v n. _ % i a, 0. .1 2 U t c f0 11, * Q Q 0 t = As * g f° 0 `�' a 0 , — z an to m N C W 0^0� M 1.0 1/1 1Nl1 00 00 0000 a in M ee l d Q 00 In or cn f� to r 0000 N fj y LL a-1 a M N N N 0 0 0 0 00 tD N N .-i O N-i N O � � ea N 75 C c o tJ V► w 7 In 0 111 .7 03 • in g ,44 � � � A � � LL N N fY1 lA ,1` 0 0 1� a0 l0 N N e•1 Ol N N O C a0a C u 8 g g -8 a ' 3 Z a VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT in in v. in VT VT VT 0 (2) E Z' N N i ■ i i i i i i i i i • VT VT to VT VT V? V? VT VT VT VT VT VT V VT VT N N N ^ h N N a: s_ O mom c-i .d ri rd c E 01 01 ^ O — / 0 VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT V? VT g l0 * N * * l0 l0 * ll1ppp O.1 * l`00 * * 0011 00) * 1N0 Q1 1.0 (3.) u l. Ili to N t!1 N in +n to N V? VT V? VT VT VT Vt VT E * * m * * Cl) * n $ m V/' ` * * O * * tO * O m l0 C m t� LL {/} VT VT V1. VT VT VT VT VT `� •6 1 * * N * * N N. N * i i 1.0 i i i N 01 N N N * * m * * N N * N N m N t0 ,toy e-I Cl- V' N to c-1 V V ix VTR in � � � � C N 01 'O l0 I � ■ � r � 1 � I 1 O 1 M l l 110 1.0 m a CO 1p M V1 E m• VT V1 V} N t/T t!T VT VT VT t/T VT VT VT VT VT VT C i i i O 0 N pO po to FL 03 N N N ONO C C O Fa. in in in in VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT L ^ 1 as N ONO W 00 V € .t_ 0 LIT VT an in VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT Q , a� m * 01 ct * * O an * 00 O t!1 m 0 Ul l0 .-1 to O 01 t!7 * N 03 * * ci 00 * 00 00 CO W a-1 1-1 N 01 �+ Cl) t!1 N lD 1.0 M 00 0 Cr 1.0 ci 01 � M � U CO \ ,�[ 00 N vs' rl N N 00 T C T 10 0. `u CL w ,� OOC vT VT ur VT vT VT in in VT VT vT VT u o M Cl) 'it M * 1*E N * 3 v L/) o N v N m N h o J X 1.0 N tf1 U 1 i a c a r M 10 OJ (0 O v a LL UM! 0 V VT VT V VT V 0 m N to D o * * o o * t! Ol VT VT VT VT VT VT * o o N 00 o N a 3 n U(_■ 3 N ci l0 I,. l0 * LA Ol N C m ,-I ■ Ct Ol l0 c-/ to• V? v} in in VT in VT VT c 1 M = try VT VT VT VT VT >. 0 N N t!1 Ol «1 an N * * p O1 * n 0 N N o 0 LL Q1 N 01 N Cl) 00 * * O N * N LA N V1 pp11 U1 0 • N O 01 V .7 U1 t0 00 M CO .4 O m U "O Q 3 N m N ri Al ~ VT VT VT 'VT l/t in in in in to VT VT VT O y 0 J C m E 01 N C Ol 'i i 0) m my U t0 m C m J L 3 O O t C 01 'O m m m 1.. Ol i• to a0 • A''' r = o u1 to a E d E Q W _CO 7 C. CO 2 o .� J M LL > = u CO 2 to N1 s m v 7 Y CO L C J to — N Eu _ C J to = O to * Q Q o. aE Z O 0 0 z N W Q t,) 0 N a W Z .1..' 0 CO M 00 N M O O O Q Q p O Q Q 0 cc E rti Ln N 000 O O 0 O VO VO O VO 0 CO } M r.4- M N d� N N o lD O 00 O 01 0 LO M LC) V N " ui M M N u mimmii/) t/). t/? VI. t/- t/- V1 L1.1 d d' N Q0 0 0 p0 0 0 0 p c 0 0 L 0 ON 00 v- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 } N C r-i r-i N ri r-i 000000 W � N N 00 Li) M N N r�-I N r■ r-■ r-1 tn. t/ t/. t/. t/ AA (1) �p N l0 M O O v. O O N O O O O Q 8 0 0 0 0 0 ce O } L l0 O O' O N ^ , M C31 00 lO r-I 00 W Lh N r+ eri t/4 t4 t!} t.4 t4 4.4 UC U 4J 4J p V 'a (1) (1) N 0O U 3 n , cum O CC N O N c0 O 0O1 5 N N i1 CD I U U O O O O v cc d 0C +.+ 0! 4J O OZS N o?S w fII L O LL p Y Y t V > m Q m a oe E E U Ca E O E _ 3 01 U > co 3 ea t; 7 E. E 3 U co 0 W a) a O CI) a)v ) Q ate--+ �O 0 ca ? u- cn c V) V) cn ( ) N N_ Cr) a + CO L CO �'� 'N 'N O LL - CO 4U 0 ' Cl.) v v _ 4U Z E E °- 0 > °6 V) W a 'N 0 = 4 ti) u_ c 0 oc o O co a, co cc a1 " 0 aD C >11 i -0 to D ,... a CI- a) +-' c .— w w o- • • lD O 4J . . a- a� N ,0 r! 0 O v) E O 1.1- 45 (Da) E 0 > m N v CD C1 I' "0 a) 4-a 4A Q 4-) p a� In � C c E co °,0) Q � a) .— " " E ° CC Ca W Q C.) I G k,,2 • @ z,• •J n . .. 2 „ .. „. . ,.. . .. t u U . . Cr) • _ . t i . 0 N OQp•LOCk4 O4 / City Opa-Locka,of FL ,.... , •,,,,fm-1,..,,,T: $0-__-_-:-_,,G4, ot„-_,_ ,,, FY 2015 Impact Fee Study Water & Sewer Stormwater Public Safety Parks and Recreation Draft Report May 8, 2015 Prepared by: BURTON & ASSOCIATES UTILITY Pi.]FS • ASSESSMENTS • FINANCIAL PLANNING BURTON & ASSOCIATES May 8, 2015 Ms. Faye Douglas Budget Administrator City of Opa-Locka, FL 3400 NW 135 ST, Bldg B Opa-Locka, FL 33054 Re: FY 2015 Impact Fee Study—Draft Report Dear Ms. Douglas: Burton & Associates is pleased to present this Draft Report of the FY 2015 Impact Fee Study that we have performed for the City of Opa-Locka. We appreciate the fine assistance provided by you and your staff in the provision of the data required for the analysis, and in the interim reviews of the analysis. I ask that you please distribute this report to the appropriate individuals at the City of Opa-Locka for their review and comment in addition to your own. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call me at(813)443-5138. Sincerely, j; 7:1 Andrew J. Burnham Senior Vice President AJB/cs Enclosure BURTON&ASSOCIATES 200 Business Park Circle,Suite 101 •St. Augustine,Florida 32095•Phone(904)247-0787•Fax(904)241-7708 1000 N.Ashley Drive,Suite 513•Tampa,Florida 33602•Phone(813)443-5138•Fax(813)443-8289 E-mail:aburnham @burtonandassociates.com FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 1 1.3 OBJECTIVES 3 1.4 GENERAL METHODOLOGY 3 SECTION 2. WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES 5 2.1 COST BASIS 5 2.2 CAPACITIES&ERU DETERMINATION 6 2.2.1 Water System ERU's&Capacities 6 2.2.2 Sewer System ERU's&Capacities 8 2.3 RESULTS 10 2.3.1 Impact Fee Amounts 10 2.3.2 Water and Sewer Impact fee Survey 11 2.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 SECTION 3. STORMWATER IMPACT FEES 14 3.1 COST BASIS 14 3.2 CAPACITY&ERU DETERMINATION 15 3.2.1 Stormwater ER Us 15 3.2.2 Stormwater system capacity 15 3.3 RESULTS 16 3.3.1 Impact Fee Amounts 16 3.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 17 SECTION 4. PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES 18 4.1 COST BASIS&LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS 18 4.2 RESULTS 21 4.2.1 Impact Fee Amounts 21 4.2.2 Public Safety Impact fee Survey 22 4.3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22 SECTION 5. PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEES 24 5.1 COST BASIS&LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS 24 5.2 RESULTS 27 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics I Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.2.1 Impact Fee Amounts 27 5.2.2 Parks and Recreation Fee Survey 28 5.3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 28 APPENDIX A—WATER&SEWER IMPACT FEES SUPPORTING SCHEDULES 30 APPENDIX B—STORMWATER IMPACT FEE SUPPORTING SCHEDULES 38 APPENDIX C—PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE SUPPORTING SCHEDULES 41 APPENDIX D—PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE SUPPORTING SCHEDULES 47 APPENDIX E—CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE SURVEY 53 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY INTRODUCTION SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION Burton & Associates has completed an impact fee Study (Study) for the City of Opa- Locka (City). This report presents the comprehensive results of the Study, including background information, legal requirements, an explanation of the calculation methodology employed, results of the analysis, as well as a comparative impact fee survey. 1.1 BACKGROUND Impact fees are assessed against new development in an attempt to cover the cost of providing capital facilities (infrastructure) needed to serve new development. Such charges are the mechanism by which new growth can "pay its own way" and minimize the extent to which existing residents must bear the cost of new or expanded facilities, which are necessitated by new residents. Impact fees are commonly referred to as impact fees, capacity fees, development fees, and connection charges, and for purposes of this report, the use of the terms, impact fees, capacity fees, development fees, or connection charges is interchangeable with impact fees. The City currently charges impact fees for public safety, parks and recreation and road drainage (Stormwater). These impact fees were designed in 1999 by Dr. James Nicholas. As an industry best practice, the impact fee cost basis should be updated once every 5 years, and as such the current fees are due for and update. In addition, the City has requested recommendations for water and sewer impact fees. 1.2 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Many of the legal precedents and requirements for Impact fees in Florida date back to a Florida Supreme Court decision in the case of the Contractors and Builders Association of Pinellas City versus the City of Dunedin, Florida. This case identified certain conditions to support a valid Impact fee that were ultimately embodied in statutory guidelines enacted by the Growth Management Legislation passed in 1985. These legal BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka 1 Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY INTRODUCTION standards require that impact fees must 1) bear a reasonable relationship to the benefit received by those who pay it, 2)must not exceed the proportional share of the cost of new facilities or services needed to serve new development and must include credits for contributions the development will make toward deferring that cost, and 3) must be earmarked and expended in such a way as to ensure that those paying the fee receive benefit from that payment. Also, legislation was passed in recent years (Senate Bill 1194) that created Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes that has also come to be known as the "Florida Impact fee Act". This legislation outlined additional requirements regarding the calculation and accounting of impact fees. Most notably, this legislation requires 1) that the calculation of impact fees be based upon the most recent, localized data, 2) separate reporting/accounting of impact fee revenue and expenditures in a distinct fund, 3) that the administrative charges collected in impact fees be based upon actual costs, and 4) that 90 days' notice be given prior to the effective date of an ordinance imposing or amending an impact fee. In summary, the courts and subsequent legislation have addressed three areas associated with the development of impact fees. These areas include: 1) "fair share" allocation rules dealing with payment of impact fees by the affected property owners, 2) "rational nexus" standards, which focus on the expenditure or purpose of impact fees, and 3) "credit" allowances, which recognize offsets in the calculation of impact fees. The "fair share" allocation rules require that an impact fee can only be used for capital expenditures that are attributable to new growth. Additionally the "fair share" allocation rules recognize that the cost of facilities used by both existing customers and new development must be apportioned between the two user groups, such that the user groups are treated equally and one group does not subsidize the other. The "rational nexus" standards require that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for capital facilities and the benefits received by new customers for which the impact fee will be expended. There are two conditions that limit where and when impact fees can be collected and used. With respect to the first condition, although there is no BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 2 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY INTRODUCTION specific limit as to distance between an applicant paying the impact fee and the capital expenditure to be constructed by the fee, there should be a general geographical relationship between fee collection and use. The second nexus condition recognizes that the property must receive a benefit from the service for which the impact fee is being applied. With respect to the water and sewer impact fees, the water and sewer facilities are used by and constructed on behalf of all properties within The City service area, and they benefit both residential and commercial customers. As such, all new growth requesting capacity from The City will be subject to impact fees. The "credit" allowance requirements recognize that if a public agency has received property in the form of cost-free capital or if there is another revenue source that will be used for the capital expenditures necessitated by new growth, a credit should be included within the determination of the impact fees. Specifically, "credits" should be reflected as part of calculating impact fees to recognize any grants, contributions by developers, assessments, and other sources that provide funds for the same capital expenditures included in the basis of impact fees to avoid a double-recovery of costs. 1.3 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Study were to determine the full cost recovery impact fees for the following systems/funds: • Water and Sewer Systems • Stormwater System • Public Safety/Police • Parks &Recreation As well as to provide a comparison of these results to the City's current impact fees, and the charges of neighboring and other generally comparable utilities. 1.4 GENERAL METHODOLOGY There are three primary approaches to the calculation of impact fees. One approach is to determine the replacement cost of each system's major functional components as the cost BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 3 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY INTRODUCTION basis for the impact fee calculation. This approach is most appropriate for a system with considerable excess capacity such that most new connections to the system will be served by that existing excess capacity. The second approach, which was used in this study, is to use the portion of a system's multi-year capital improvement program(CIP)associated with the provision of additional system capacity by functional system component as the cost basis for the impact fee calculation. This approach is most appropriate where 1) the existing system has virtually no excess capacity to accommodate growth, and 2) the CIP has a significant number of projects that provide additional system capacity for each functional system component to be representative of the cost of capacity for an entire system. The third approach is to use a combination of the two approaches described above. This approach is most appropriate when 1) there is excess capacity in the current system that will accommodate some growth, but additional capacity is needed in the relatively short- term as reflected in the CIP, and 2) the CIP includes a significant amount of projects that will provide additional system capacity, but does not necessarily have a sufficient amount of projects in each functional area to be reflective of a total system. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 4 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES SECTION 2. WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES This section describes the calculation of the water and sewer impact fees for the City. The City currently does not impose water and sewer impact fees, and due to the robust nature of the water and sewer system's capital improvement plan, the City has requested a calculation of appropriate impact fees to aid in the funding of future growth. 2.1 COST BASIS The first step in calculating water and sewer impact fees was to determine the capacity cost for each major system function: water transmission, water distribution, sewer transmission, and sewer collection. It should be noted that the City does not operate treatment facilities, and as such treatment costs are not included in the fee calculations. The cost basis for the calculations herein is the multi-year CIP for each system. Schedules 4 and 5 in Appendix A identify the multi-year water and sewer CIPs used in the Study. The CIP was developed by EAC Consulting in the Potable Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Improvement/Planning documents developed in June 2014. Once the capacity costs were identified for each system function, an adjustment was made to include interest costs associated with capacity costs that have been or will be funded with debt. Based upon the most recent Revenue Sufficiency Analysis performed for the City's water and sewer fund, the full CIP for each system is planned to be funded by State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans, and therefore the costs of financing were included in the capacity costs for each fee calculation. A subsequent credit was also included in the calculation based upon the net present value of the debt service that will be recovered in user fees after new customers connect to the water and/or sewer systems to avoid double recovery of debt-funded costs. Upon connection to the water and/or sewer systems, new customers will begin to use water and/or sewer services and will pay the rates associated with those services. The rates for those services recover the principal and interest payments (debt service) associated with BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 5 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES the debt incurred to fund the capital costs of the water and sewer systems. Therefore, in order to avoid a double recovery of those capital costs in the Impact fees and user fees, a credit was calculated based upon the net present value of the annual debt service(through the term of the debt) that the average connection(connecting at the mid-point of the term of the debt)will pay after connecting to the water and sewer systems, respectively. 2.2 CAPACITIES & ERU DETERMINATION This section describes the calculation of the capacities and Equivalent Residential Connections (ERU) for the water and sewer systems. 2.2.1 Water System ERU's& Capacities The calculation of the water system ERU's and associated capacity is based upon the population projections calculated by EAS Consulting in the Potable Water Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document, the total number of current connections to the water system as identified by City staff, and an analysis of the water system's CIP. The population projections are presented below, and are referenced in multiple areas of this study. City of Opa-locka Population Breakdown by Census Data Census Tracts Census Block Groups 2010' 2012 Z 2014 Z 2034 Z Population Population Population Population FL086000403 FL086000403-2 37 38 39 53 FL086000403-3 2,788 2,877 2,969 4,068 FL086000403-4 1,249 1,289 - 1,330 1,822 FL086000413 FL086000413-3 978 1,009 1,041 1,426 FL086000503 FL086000503-1 1,620 1,672 1,726 2,365 FL086000503-2 1,514 1,562 1,612 2,209 F L086000503-3 1,055 1,089 1,124 1,540 FL086000503-4 2,593 2,676 2,762 3,785 FL086000504 FL086000504-1 1,778 1,835 1,894 2,595 F L086000504-3 1,279 1,320 1,362 1,866 FL0869808001 FL0869808001 3 3 3 4 FL086000505 _ FL086000505-2 322 332 343 470 Total 15,216 15,702 16,205 22,203 1 Data obtained from US Census Bureau 2 Estimated Population BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 6 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES 2.2.1.1 Water Transmission System ERU's The water transmission system ERU's are calculated by first identifying the portion of transmission piping to be replaced by the system's CIP, where transmission piping is determined to be all pipes larger than or equal to 8" in diameter. We first identified the total amount of transmission piping in linear feet currently in the water system, and then the amount of transmission piping that will be replaced by the CIP. The analysis shows that of the existing 175,6701 linear feet of transmission piping, 102,0842 linear feet will be replaced, or 58.1%. This percentage is applied to the City's current population of 16,205 to first determine the system capacity in ERUs of existing customers that the new CIP benefits. We then added the projected new population by 2034 of an additional 5,998 to calculate a capacity population of 15,415. This population capacity is then converted to water transmission system ERU's by dividing the capacity population by the current population per connection of 1.58, resulting in a total transmission system capacity of 9,736 ERUs. 2.2.1.2 Water Distribution System ERU's The second component of the water impact fee is the water distribution system. The total ERU's for the water distribution system are calculated in a similar way as the water transmission system. The water distribution system ERU's are calculated by first identifying the portion of distribution piping to be replaced by the system's CIP, where distribution piping is determined to be all pipes less than 8" in diameter. We first identified the total amount of distribution piping in linear feet currently in the water system, and then the amount of distribution piping that will be replaced by the CIP. The analysis shows that of the existing 213,3691 linear feet of distribution piping, 73,2832 Reference: Table 2-2 of EAC Consulting's Potable Water Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document,July 2014 2 Reference: Table 4-3 of EAC Consulting's Potable Water Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document,July 2014 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka 7 Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES linear feet will be replaced, or 34.3%. This percentage is applied to the City's current population of 16,205 to first determine the system capacity in ERUs of existing customers that the new CIP benefits. We then added the projected new population by 2034 of an additional 5,998 to calculate a capacity population of 11,563. This population capacity is then converted to water distribution system ERU's by dividing the capacity population by the current population per connection of 1.58, resulting in a total distribution system capacity of 9,304 ERUs. 2.2.1.3 Water System Capacity Determination The ERU's of each water system function were ultimately converted to water system capacity based upon the City's level of service standards. The City provided its existing LOS planning standards of 220 GPD per ERU for water. By multiplying the 220 GPD per ERU by the larger of the two systems ERU's (transmission ERU's: 9,736), the water system capacity of 2.14 MGD is calculated. The capacity costs for each system function were then divided by the capacity for each function expressed in ERUs to determine the capacity cost of each system function per ERU as presented in the impact fee calculation section below. 2.2.2 Sewer System ERU's& Capacities The calculation of the sewer system ERU's and associated capacity is based upon the population projections calculated by EAS Consulting in the Wastewater Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document, the total number of current connections to the sewer system as identified by City staff, and an analysis of the sewer system's CIP. 2.2.2.1 Sewer Transmission System ERU's The sewer transmission system ERU's are calculated by first identifying the portion of transmission piping to be replaced by the sewer system's CIP, where transmission piping is determined to be all pipes larger than or equal to 8" in diameter. We first identified the total amount of transmission piping in linear feet currently in the sewer system, and then the amount of transmission piping that will be replaced by the CIP. The analysis shows BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 8 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES that of the existing 44,4063 linear feet of transmission piping, 63,0254 linear feet will be replaced or added. Due to the fact that all of the transmission piping will be replaced, plus additional piping for increased capacity, 100% of the current population is included in the ERU calculation. The City's current population of 16,205, plus the projected new population by 2034 of an additional 5,998 results in a projected capacity population of 22,203. This population capacity is then converted to sewer transmission system ERU's by dividing the capacity population by the current population per connection of 2.10, resulting in a total sewer transmission system capacity of 10,595 ERUs. 2.2.2.2 Sewer Collection System ERU's The second component of the sewer impact fee is the sewer collection system. The sewer collection system ERU's are calculated by first identifying the portion of collection piping to be replaced by the system's CIP, where collection piping is determined to be all pipes less than 8" in diameter. We first identified the total amount of collection piping in linear feet currently in the sewer system, and then the amount of collection piping that will be replaced by the CIP. The analysis shows that of the existing 181,6403 linear feet of collection piping, 107,4254 linear feet will be replaced, or 59.1%. %. This percentage is applied to the City's current population of 16,205 to first determine the system capacity in ERUs of existing customers that the new CIP benefits. We then added the projected new population by 2034 of an additional 5,998 to calculate a capacity population of 15,582. This population capacity is then converted to sewer collection system ERU's by dividing the capacity population by the current population per connection of 2.10, resulting in a total collection system capacity of 7,436 ERUs. 3 Reference: Table 2-2 of EAC Consulting's Wastewater Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document, July 2014 4 Reference: Table 4-3 of EAC Consulting's Potable Water Infrastructure Improvement Planning Document,July 2014 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 9 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES 2.2.2.3 Sewer System Capacity Determination The ERU's of each sewer system function were ultimately converted to sewer system capacity based upon the City's level of service standards. The City provided its existing LOS planning standards of 220 GPD per ERU for sewer. By multiplying the 220 GPD per ERU by the larger of the two systems ERU's (transmission ERU's: 10,595), the sewer system capacity of 2.33 MGD is calculated. The capacity costs for each system function were then divided by the capacity for each function expressed in ERUs to determine the capacity cost of each system function per ERU as presented in the impact fee calculation section below. 2.3 RESULTS 2.3.1 Impact Fee Amounts Based upon the cost and capacity information provided by the City and the methodology presented herein, the Study has identified a total water impact fee at 100% cost recovery of$1,439 per ERU. The resulting total sewer impact fee at 100% cost recovery is $1,276 per. Thus, the total combined water and sewer impact fees are$2,715. A table presenting the calculated impact fees assuming 100% cost recovery from this Study is presented below. Detailed schedules of the impact fee calculations are presented in Schedules 2 and 3 of Appendix A. Calculated Water&Sewer Impact Fees per ERU Water Sewer Combined $ 1,439 $ 1,276 $ 2,715 Water meter size is used to determine ERU's for water and sewer customers. Single Family homes represent one ERU as they typically have a 3/4" x 5/8" water meter. For larger meter sizes, the following table shows the ERU's for each meter size and resulting water and sewer impact fees by meter size. The ERU's for each meter size are determined by the AWWA maximum flow criteria for each meter size. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka 10 Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES Calculated Water&Sewer Impact Fees by Meter Size Combined Water Water Impact Sewer Impact Water&Sewer Meter Size ERUs Fee Fee Impact Fee 3/inch 1 $ 1,439 $ 1,276 $ 2,715 1 inch 2.5 $ 3,598 $ 3,190 $ 6,788 1-1/2 inch 5 $ 7,195 $ 6,380 $ 13,575 2 inch 8 $ 11,512 $ 10,208 $ 21,720 3 inch 16 $ 23,024 $ 20,416 $ 43,440 4 inch 25 $ 35,975 $ 31,900 $ 67,875 6 inch 50 $ 71,950 $ 63,800 $ 135,750 8 inch 80 $ 115,120 $ 102,080 $ 217,200 It is important to note that the City has discretion regarding the percentage of cost recovery utilized in the establishment of impact fees. The impact fees can recover any amount up to but not in excess of the full cost recovery amounts identified herein. Adoption of impact fees at full cost recovery would lessen the pressure on user fees or rates by maximizing the impact fee revenue available to pay for expansion-related capital projects, thus reducing the debt to be recovered in the user fee rates that would otherwise be necessary to fund those projects. However, the City has discretion to adopt any amount up to 100% of the amounts identified herein. 2.3.2 Water and Sewer Impact fee Survey In order to provide additional information to the City regarding the calculated water and sewer impact fees, a comparison of the fees for the City to those of neighboring and other generally comparable utilities was prepared. These comparisons are presented in Schedule 7 of Appendix A and provide a comparison of the City's calculated water and sewer impact fees for single-family residential connections (i.e., one ERU) to the fees currently imposed by neighboring and other generally comparable water and sewer systems. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka 11 Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES It is important to note that the reader must view the comparison with caution as no in depth analysis has been performed to identify the methods used in the development of the water and sewer impact fees imposed by the other public utilities, nor has any analysis been performed to determine whether 100% of the cost of new facilities is recovered from such fees (or if some percentage of the costs are recovered through user fees). Additionally, no analysis was conducted as to the types of capital facilities currently in service or planned for the utilities surveyed. For example, the cost of sewer effluent disposal utilizing a deep injection well system generally has a higher capital cost per unit of capacity than use of a surface water discharge. Moreover, the capital costs associated with constructing reverse osmosis water treatment facilities that treat brackish water are higher than those of lime softening facilities that treat freshwater. Some reasons why Impact fees differ among utilities include the following: • Source of supply • Proximity to source of supply • Type and complexity of treatment • Effluent disposal method • Density of service area • Availability of grant funding to finance CIP • Age of system • Utility life cycle (e.g., growth-oriented vs. mature) • Level of service standards • Administrative policies As shown on Schedule 7 of Appendix A, the calculated combined water and sewer impact fees for the eleven (11) surveyed utilities average $2,984 per single-family residence / ERU. The calculated combined water and sewer impact fees for the City are about$269 lower than the average of the surveyed utilities. BURTON&ASSOCIATES 1 2 City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEES 2.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fundamental conclusions and recommendations of the water and sewer impact fee calculations are as follows: • The City should adopt the calculated water impact fee of $1,439 per ERU to reflect the City's current water system expansion-related capital costs. • The City should adopt the calculated sewer impact fee of $1,276 per ERU to reflect the City's current sewer system expansion-related capital costs. • We recommend the City adopt the water and sewer impact fees at the 100% cost recovery levels identified herein to maximize the recovery of expansion-related capital costs from new customers while minimizing the burden of these capital costs to existing customers. • We also recommend that the City separate its water impact fee into transmission and distribution components based upon the information as presented on Schedule 2 of Appendix A. This will provide flexibility in the application of the fees in situations where only one of the components of the fee should perhaps be applied. • We also recommend that the City separate its sewer impact fee into transmission and collection components based upon the information as presented on Schedule 3 of Appendix A. This will provide flexibility in the application of the fees in situations where only one of the components of the fee should perhaps be applied. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 13 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY STORMWATER IMPACT FEE SECTION 3. STORMWATER IMPACT FEES This section describes the calculation of the stormwater impact fees for the City. The City currently imposes stormwater impact fees (currently labeled Road Drainage Impact fees), and dude to the robust nature of the stormwater system's capital improvement plan, the City has requested an update of the fees to aid in the funding of future growth. 3.1 COST BASIS The first step in calculating the stormwater Impact fee was to determine the capacity cost for the system. The cost basis for the calculations is the multi-year CIP as developed by EAC Consulting in the Stormwater Infrastructure Improvement/Planning document developed in June 2014. Schedule 2 Appendix B identifies the multi-year stormwater CIP used in the Study. Once the capacity costs are identified for the stormwater system, an adjustment was made to include interest costs associated with capacity costs that have been or will be funded with debt. Based upon the most recent Revenue Sufficiency Analysis performed for the City's stormwater fund, the full CIP is planned to be funded by State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans, and therefore the costs of financing were included in the capacity costs for each fee calculation. A subsequent credit was also included in the calculation based upon the net present value of the debt service that will be recovered in user fees after new customers come onto the system to avoid double recovery of debt-funded costs. Upon entering the City's stormwater system, new customers will pay the monthly stormwater utility rate. The rate recovers the principal and interest payments (debt service) associated with the debt incurred to fund the capital costs of the stormwater systems. Therefore, in order to avoid a double recovery of those capital costs in the impact fees and user fees, a credit was calculated based upon the net present value of the annual debt service (through the term BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 4 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY STORMWATER IMPACT FEE of the debt) that the average customer(entering the system at the mid-point of the term of the debt)will pay after joining the City's stormwater system. 3.2 CAPACITY & ERU DETERMINATION This section describes the calculation of the capacities and Equivalent Residential Connections(ERU) for the stormwater system. 3.2.1 Stormwater ERUs To remain consistent with the existing stormwater utility ordinance, the impact fees developed herein will calculate ERUs based upon the definition as described in section 21-93 of the City's Stormwater Utility Ordinance: Equivalent residential unit (sometimes hereinafter referred to as "ERU') shall mean the statistically estimated average horizontal impervious area of residential developed property per dwelling unit. One (1) ERU, used for commercial purposes, will be equal to one thousand five hundred forty-eight (1,548) square foot[feet] of impervious area. For the purposes of this article, each dwelling unit, to wit, single-family residence, mobile home, multifamily, or condominium, is assigned one (1)ERU. 3.2.2 Stormwater system capacity The stormwater system currently serves 10,642 ERUs as determined by dividing the FY 2013 stormwater rate revenue of$242,628 by the effective annual rate per ERU of$22.80 ($1.90 per month per ERU x 12). By using the population projections presented earlier in this report, 201 ERUs per year are projected to be added to the City's stormwater system. The CIP is designed to fully serve the City at build-out in 2034, therefore the total projected ERUs by 2034 is 14,855. This represents the system capacity in ERUs. The capacity costs for the system were then divided by the capacity expressed in ERUs to determine the capacity cost of the system per ERU as described in the next section. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 15 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY STORMWATER IMPACT FEE 3.3 RESULTS 3.3.1 Impact Fee Amounts Based upon the cost and capacity information provided by the City and the methodology presented herein, the Study has calculated a stormwater impact fee at 100% cost recovery of $829 per ERU verses the current fee of $582 per ERU. The Impact fee per ERU would be charged in the same manner as the stormwater utility rate where a single family home or multi-family dwelling unit is considered one ERU. For all non-residential properties, the ERUs are determined by dividing the impervious square footage of the property by 1,548. The detailed calculations of the fee are presented in Schedule 1 of Appendix B The existing stormwater/road drainage impact fee is charged per developed square feet, and varies by property type. As an industry practice, developing an impact fee to be consistent with definitions in the existing stormwater utility fee ordinance is recommended. Thus the new fees are recommended to be charged on a per ERU basis as defined in the ordinance. It is important to note that the City has discretion regarding the percentage of cost recovery utilized in the establishment of impact fees. The impact fees can recover any amount up to but not in excess of the full cost recovery amounts identified herein. Adoption of impact fees at full cost recovery would lessen the pressure on user fees or rates by maximizing the impact fee revenue available to pay for expansion-related capital projects, thus reducing the debt to be recovered in the user fee rates that would otherwise be necessary to fund those projects. However, the City has discretion to adopt any amount up to 100% of the amounts identified herein. It should be noted that no neighboring municipalities currently impose a stormwater impact fee. We feel that the fee is appropriate for the City due to the magnitude of the City's stormwater capital improvement requirements to expand the system. BURTON&ASSOCIATES 16 City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY STORMWATER IMPACT FEE 3.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fundamental conclusions and recommendations of the stormwater impact fee calculations are as follows: • The City should adopt the calculated stormwater impact fee of$829 per ERU • The City should amend the imposition of stormwater impact fees to an ERU basis, whereas the stormwater utility ordinance ERU definition is used. • We recommend the City adopt the stormwater impact fee at the 100% cost recovery levels identified herein to maximize the recovery of expansion-related capital costs from new customers while minimizing the burden of these capital costs to existing customers. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE SECTION 4. PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES This section describes the calculation of the Public Safety impact fees for the City. The City provides police services to all residents and businesses within the corporate limits of the City. Therefore, the costs eligible for inclusion in a public safety impact fee are determined as those costs necessary to provide the observed levels of service to new growth and will be recovered from all new residential and commercial growth within the City. 4.1 COST BASIS & LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS The need for police equipment and assets is driven by sworn officers and the need for sworn officers is driven by population growth relative to the current number of sworn officers per 1,000 population. In order to maintain the current level of service, as growth occurs, additional sworn officers must be added and the additional equipment and facilities necessary to support the additional sworn officers must be purchased. If such an approach is not adopted, additional growth will degrade the level of service provided as the number of sworn officers per 1,000 population decreases with additional population. In order to develop public safety impact fees for the City we first reviewed the existing level of service standards with City staff. We also determined the relationship between the need for additional equipment and facilities and number of sworn officers. For example, for each sworn officer added to meet the demands of growth, additional equipment sets and patrol cars will be needed. We also determined the need for other supporting equipment and facilities relative to the number of sworn officers such as headquarters space, dispatch equipment, computers and related equipment, etc. Based upon discussions with City staff and an analysis of existing public safety assets, the table below presents the total costs per sworn officer and the exiting level of service standard. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 18 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE Public Safety Impact Fees Existing LOS Standard&Cost Basis 2014 Population: 16,205 2014 Sworn Officers: 57 Existing LOS (Officers per 1,000 persons): 3.5 Existing Assets Costs Vehicles $ 718,269 Vehicle Equipment $ 49,816 Officer Equipment Set $ 427,373 Furniture And Equipment $ 440,074 Total Existing Asset Costs $ 1,635,533 Existing Asset Costs Per Sworn Officer Vehicles $ 12,601 Vehicle Equipment $ 874 Officer Equipment Set $ 7,498 Furniture And Equipment $ 7,721 Total Existing Asset Costs Per Sworn Officer $ 28,694 We then used the population projections as discussed earlier in this report to determine the number of sworn officers needed in 10 years to serve population growth. The existing cost of assets per sworn officer is applied to the total new sworn officers required to serve the projected population. We then included the portion of the City's public safety CIP that will serve the new population. The City currently estimates the new public safety facility to cost approximately $4,000,000. City staff estimates approximately 50% of the costs will be funded by grants, and therefore cannot be recovered by impact fees. Since the fees calculated herein are driven by growth, only the new population's share of the remaining costs is applied to the impact fee calculations. By 2024, the new added population of 2,999 to the current population of 16,205 will represent 15.6% of the total population of 19,204. Therefore, the new population's share of the remaining public safety facility costs are 15.6% of $2,000,000 ($4m less 50% grant funding), or $312,331. The table below presents the full costs included in the impact fee calculations. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 19 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE Public Safety Impact Fees Projected LOS Standard &Cost Basis 2024 Population: 19,204 LOS (Officers per 1,000 persons): 3.5 2014 Sworn Officers 57 2024 Projected Sworn Officers 68 New Sworn Officers Required to meet 2024 LOS: 11 Total Existing Asset Costs per Sworn Officer: $ 28,694 Total Asset Costs to Serve Projected new Sworn Officers: $ 302,682 Additional Costs for new Public Safety Facility: $ 312,331 Total Costs in Impact Fee Calculation: $ 615,013 The costs are then divided into the total projected square footage growth by 2024. By using data provided by the Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser, we were able to convert population growth into estimated growth in developed square feet as demonstrated in the table below. Public Safety Impact Fees Projected Developed Square Footage 10-Year Population Growth: 2,999 Residents per Household(1): 2.94 Total 10-Year Household growth 1,020 Average Sq Ft per Single Family Home(1): 1,281 Total 10-Year Residential Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 Existing Ratio of Non-Residential to Res. Sq Ft (1): 1.55 Total 10-Year Non-Residential Sq Ft Growth 2,019,832 Total 10-Year Developed Sq Ft Growth 3,326,865 (1):Based upon data provided bythe Miami-Dade Property Appraiser BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 20 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE 4.2 RESULTS 4.2.1 Impact Fee Amounts To determine the impact fee amounts, the total costs identified above are divided amongst the total projected developed square footage to determine the cost per square feet. A subsequent credit was then included in the calculation based upon the net present value of the debt service that will be recovered in ad valorem taxes or other taxes/fees after new properties come onto the City to avoid double recovery of debt-funded costs. Upon entering the City, new properties will pay the ad valorem and other taxes/fees that fund public safety in the General Fund. These taxes and fees recover the principal and interest payments (debt service) anticipated to fund the capital costs of the new public safety facility. Therefore, in order to avoid a double recovery of those capital costs in the impact fees and other taxes/fees, a credit was calculated based upon the net present value of the annual debt service (through the term of the debt) that the average property (entering the system at the mid-point of the term of the debt) will pay after entering the City. The table below presents the public safety impact fee calculation. Public Safety Impact Fees Impact Fee Calculation Total 10-Year Sq Ft Growth 3,326,865 Total Police Costs for Growth: $ 615,012 Calculated Cost per Square Feet: $ 0.185 Less: Debt Service Credit: $ (0.019) Impact Fee per Sq Ft: $ 0.166 Existing Fee per Square Feet: $ 0.116 $Change $ 0.05 Change 43% It is important to note that the City has discretion regarding the percentage of cost recovery utilized in the establishment of impact fees. The impact fees can recover any amount up to but not in excess of the full cost recovery amounts identified herein. Adoption of impact fees at full cost recovery would lessen the pressure on user fees or rates by maximizing the impact fee revenue available to pay for expansion-related capital BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 21 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE projects, thus reducing the debt to be recovered in the user fee rates that would otherwise be necessary to fund those projects. However, the City has discretion to adopt any amount up to 100% of the amounts identified herein. 4.2.2 Public Safety Impact fee Survey In order to provide additional information to the City regarding the calculated public safety impact fees, a comparison of the fees for the City to those of neighboring and other generally comparable municipalities was prepared. These comparisons are presented in Appendix C and provide a comparison of the City's calculated public safety impact fees for a typical single-family residential home to the fees currently imposed by neighboring municipalities. As shown on Schedule 5 of Appendix C, the public safety Impact fees for the fourteen (14) surveyed municipalities average $389 per single-family residence. The calculated public safety Impact fee for the City is $176 lower than the average of the surveyed municipalities. It is important to note that the reader must view the comparison with caution as no in depth analysis has been performed to identify the methods used in the development of the public safety impact fees imposed by the other municipalities, nor has any analysis been performed to determine whether 100% of the cost of new facilities is recovered from such fees(or if some percentage of the costs are recovered through user fees). 4.3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fundamental conclusions and recommendations of the public safety impact fee calculation are as follows: • The City should adopt the calculated public safety impact fee of $0.166 per developed square feet • We recommend the City adopt the public safety impact fee at the 100% cost recovery levels identified herein to maximize the recovery of expansion-related BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 22 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE capital costs from new customers while minimizing the burden of these capital costs to existing properties. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 23 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE SECTION 5. PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEES This section describes the calculation of the parks and recreation impact fee for the City. Impact fees must be properly allocated to property classes that benefit from the assets being funded by the impact fees. In the case of parks and recreation, the property class that primarily benefits from the assets funded by the impact fees is the residential class because parks and recreation facilities are primarily used by residents. Therefore, all costs associated with the parks and recreation impact fees are allocated 100% to the residential class. The costs eligible for inclusion in a parks and recreation impact fee are determined as those costs necessary to provide the observed levels of service to new growth and will be recovered from all new residential growth within the City. 5.1 COST BASIS & LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS The need for new parks & recreation assets is driven by acres of park space and the need for acres of park space is driven by population growth relative to the current number of acres per 1,000 population. In order to maintain the current level of service, as growth occurs, additional acres of park space must be added and the additional equipment and facilities necessary to convert the land to usable park space must be purchased. If such an approach is not adopted, additional growth will degrade the level of service provided as the number of existing park and recreation facilities per 1,000 population decreases with additional population. In order to develop parks and recreation impact fees for the City we first reviewed the existing level of service standards with City staff We also determined the relationship between the need for additional equipment and facilities and number of park acres. For example, for each new park acre added to meet the demands of growth, additional buildings and equipment sets will be needed to make the park land usable for the population. Based upon discussions with City staff and an analysis of existing parks and recreation assets, the table below presents the total costs per acre of park land and the BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 24 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE exiting level of service standard. Park acreage and asset values were provided by the Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees Existing LOS Standard&Cost Basis 2014 Population: 16,205 Park Acreage data from Property Appraiser Segal Park 2.45 Sherbondy Park 3.72 Ingram Park 25.59 Washington Tot Lot 0.24 Total Existing Park Acres: 32.01 Existing LOS (Acres per 1,000 persons): 1.98 Existing Park Costs From Property Appraiser Segal Park $ 2,963,737 Sherbondy Park $ 3,565,025 Ingram Park $ 1,800,953 Washington Tot Lot $ 14,545 Subtotal Existing Park Costs $ 8,344,260 Less: Grant Funding $ (2,500,000) Total Existing Asset Costs $ 5,844,260 TOTAL EXISTING PARK COSTS PER ACRE $ 182,598 We then used the population projections as discussed earlier in this report to determine the number of park acres needed in 10 years to serve population growth. The existing cost of assets per park acre is applied to the total new park acres required to serve the projected population. We then included the portion of the City's parks and recreation CIP that will serve the new population. The City currently estimates the new cultural arts facility to cost approximately $3,000,000. City staff estimates approximately 50% of the costs will be funded by grants, and therefore cannot be recovered by impact fees. Since the fees calculated herein are driven by growth, only the new population's share of the remaining costs is applied to the impact fee calculations. By 2024, the new added population of 2,999 to the current population of 16,205 will represent 15.6% of the total population of BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 25 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE 19,204. Therefore, the new populations share of the remaining parks and recreation facility costs are 15.6% of$1,500,000 ($3m less 50% grant funding), or $234,248. The table below presents the full costs included in the impact fee calculations. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees Projected LOS Standard &Cost Basis 2024 Population: 19,204 LOS (Acres per 1,000 persons): 1.98 2014 Existing Park Acres 32.01 2024 Projected Park Acres 37.93 New Park Acres Required to meet 2024 LOS: 5.92 Total Existing Asset Costs per Park Acre: $ 182,598 Total Asset Costs for Projected new Park Acres: $ 1,081,576 Additional Costs for new Cultural Arts Facility: $ 234,248 Total Costs in Impact Fee Calculation: $ 1,315,824 The costs are then divided into the total projected square footage growth by 2024. By using data provided by the Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser, we were able to convert population growth into estimated growth in developed square feet as demonstrated in the table below. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees Projected Developed Square Footage 10-Year Population Growth: 2,999 Residents per Household(1): 2.94 Total 10-Year Household growth 1,020 Average Sq Ft per Single Family Home(1): 1,281 Total 10-Year Residential Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 (1):Based upon data provided by the Miami-Dade Property Appraiser BURTON&ASSOCIATES 26 City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE 5.2 RESULTS 5.2.1 Impact Fee Amounts To determine the impact fee amounts, the total costs identified above are divided amongst the total projected developed square footage to determine the cost per square feet. A subsequent credit was then included in the calculation based upon the net present value of the debt service that will be recovered in ad valorem taxes or other taxes/fees after new properties come onto the City to avoid double recovery of debt-funded costs. Upon entering the City, new properties will pay the ad valorem and other taxes/fees that fund public safety in the General Fund. These taxes and fees recover the principal and interest payments (debt service) anticipated to fund the capital costs of the new cultural arts facility. Therefore, in order to avoid a double recovery of those capital costs in the impact fees and other taxes/fees, a credit was calculated based upon the net present value of the annual debt service (through the term of the debt) that the average property (entering the system at the mid-point of the term of the debt) will pay after entering the City. The table below presents the public safety impact fee calculation. Parks and Recreation Impact Fees Impact Fee Calculation Total 10-Year Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 Total Parks Costs for Growth: $ 1,315,824 Calculated Cost per Square Feet: $ 1.007 Less: Debt Service Credit: $ (0.009) Impact Fee per Sq Ft: $ 0.998 Existing Fee per Square Feet: $ 0.722 $Change $ 0.28 Change 38% It is important to note that the City has discretion regarding the percentage of cost recovery utilized in the establishment of impact fees. The impact fees can recover any amount up to but not in excess of the full cost recovery amounts identified herein. Adoption of impact fees at full cost recovery would lessen the pressure on user fees or rates by maximizing the impact fee revenue available to pay for expansion-related capital BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 27 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE projects, thus reducing the debt to be recovered in the user fee rates that would otherwise be necessary to fund those projects. However, the City has discretion to adopt any amount up to 100% of the amounts identified herein. 5.2.2 Parks and Recreation Fee Survey In order to provide additional information to the City regarding the calculated parks and recreation impact fee, a comparison of the fees for the City to those of neighboring and other generally comparable municipalities was prepared. These comparisons are presented in Schedule 5 Appendix D and provide a comparison of the City's calculated parks and recreation impact fees for a typical single-family residential home to the fees currently imposed by neighboring municipalities. As shown on Schedule 3 of Appendix D, the parks and recreation impact fees for the fourteen (14) surveyed municipalities average $2,463 per single-family residence. The calculated parks and recreation Impact fee for the City is $1,184 lower than the average of the surveyed municipalities. It is important to note that the reader must view the comparison with caution as no in depth analysis has been performed to identify the methods used in the development of the parks and recreation impact fees imposed by the other municipalities, nor has any analysis been performed to determine whether 100% of the cost of new facilities is recovered from such fees (or if some percentage of the costs are recovered through user fees). 5.3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fundamental conclusions and recommendations of the parks and recreation impact fee calculation are as follows: • The City should adopt the calculated parks and recreation impact fee of $0.998 per developed square feet BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 28 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE • We recommend the City adopt the parks and recreation impact fees at the 100% cost recovery levels identified herein to maximize the recovery of expansion- related capital costs from new customers while minimizing the burden of these capital costs to existing customers. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 29 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY APPENDIX A Appendix A — Water & Sewer Impact Fees Supporting Schedules Schedule 1 contains a high-level summary of the water and sewer impact fees as presented via the FAMS-XL© Impact fee Module Control Panel Schedule 2 contains the Water Impact fee Calculation Schedule 3 contains the Sewer Impact fee Calculation Schedule 4 provides a detailed schedule of the Water System CIP Schedule 5 provides a detailed schedule of the Water System CIP Schedule 6 provides a list of the calculated Water& Sewer Impact Fees by meter size for determining Impact Fee amounts for all customers Schedule 7 contains the combined Water& Sewer Impact Fee survey BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 30 Draft Report >- < < (5 t . 0 C I X 0 0 0 t49 0) CO 93 40 49 49 .... 4 :1 r_ cr. z 8 . 49 49 00 49 , ...1 ce ..• 0- u) L.; 4444 LLI < 0 I 0 LL a) ii. 4" 6.) V rs u) o I a, w ■ CL in l' E a) E 7j CI 2 — 413 _ LL a) o_ Lc2 -o- 11") I-- ur.) 1.5 if t ,, CD ° a Eg_t C„ 02 10 0 ,,, 0. . 0 g. = = ,--------,---r 0 E L a -0 E L a 2 Csil *a. ,.., e- a, g - S.ra g 73' L 0 (13 ,g ,0 . 0 -6 ,_ 00. • - LLI 02 toe,Is 02 0 N' < CO 0 CO -.11 u) co •IF c', 10 rs 6,r-- Z 'I. 0.0- g.L.• . CI " I I, CO N N 0) CO CO 4— ...,14.' 3 1:21 ..a ,-;cc> 1 ' 0 449 494 ¢ t 1 Z 99 69 49 ___44 O.' u LI4 ac 1 1, _1 0 d2 .444 IL, U. , e'd .1. ti •-• , L. i o p. >.. r., I (JO E A' .J — (!) CU ' 0 4.1 12, Ti 0 cf, u. 1 V 1 1-1 IE 8 IT i; co cr) § a - ,._ .- ,-, -,1 i ■......4.. OP 13 - ., u 0 1 0 = 8ses88a (I) 25 -r o •.2 9 a. 0 c a, 2 ›.. 1." 0 a.) * w 6 3 al 2 a.)" ct g IT"?' °•.- l't cl f, 3 C ( ,5` 1,32si 2318 1-8 3 8 ,4 ,2 a) F2 3 cT I- 037012 3 e in 0 l.. 0— 0 C- 4-4 C 4000W cv 49 CV 49 g ,r) < 0) 0 0) 0 0 I (1) ., 0 •t- (1) LI_ -1-, vs ms 49 49. , 0 as a) , in. a) E 4-, 8 © o _..., o X E c . ... (/) a) 8 CI 44 0 44 an W U.I uj 2 < LL C.) C co V., i IT-• 2 2 74- ._ . 5 0 , 0. co E 1-1 .___. ti2f, u CD f 18, = c`i (9• 3 al ii if) C2 CL Z ° •Z to' Z ° i 12 g S' 3 17, z 8 t 3 e)? a) 123E g (."3 cSz8F2 8 g , cr A c...) = z--- cn co 5 FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 2 - Water Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX A City of Opa-Locka, FL FY 2014/15 Impact Fee Study Water Impact Fee Calculation 1 Functional Component: Transmission Distribution Total 2 Water Project Costs: $8,702,466 $5,235,859 $13,938,326 3 Less: Grant Funding 0.00%, $0 $0 $0 4 Bond Financed Projects 100.00% $8,702,466 $5,235,859 $13,938,326 5 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 $0 $0 6 Financing Analysis: 7 Projects Financed With Revenue Bonds: 8 Sources of Funds: 9 Estimated Par Amount 1.97% Int for 20 Years $8,880,068 $5,342,714 $14,222,781 10 Estimated Int Earnings on Const Fund 0.00% Int for 0 Months $0 $0 $0 11 Total Sources of Funds $8,880,068 $5,342,714 $14,222,781 12 Uses of Funds: 13 Project Costs Financed $8,702,466 $5,235,859 $13,938,326 14 Cost of Issuance 2.00% of Par Amount $177,601 $106,854 $284,456 15 Debt Service Reserve 0 Years of D.S. $0 $0 $0 16 Capitalized Interest 0 Years Interest $0 $0 $0 17 Underwriters Discount 0 of Par Amount $0 $0 $0 18 Debt Service Surety 0.00% of Annual Debt Service $0 $0 $0 19 Cost of Bond Insurance 0.00% of Total D.S. $0 $0 $0 20 Total Uses of Funds $8,880,068 $5,342,714 $14,222,781 21 Annual Debt Service $541,296 $325,672 $866,967 22 Total Principal&Interest Payments over Term of Loan $10,825,911 $6,513,435 $17,339,346 23 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 $0 $0 24 Total Project Costs $10,825,911 $6,513,435 $17,339,346 25 Water Impact Fee Calculation: 26 Capacity 27 Million Gallons Per Day(MGD) 2.14 2.14 2.14 28 Equivalent Residential Connections(ERGS)@ 220 Gallons Per Day 9,736 7,304 9,736 29 Cost per ERC $1,112 $892 $2,004 30 Credit for NPV of Debt Service Included in Usage Rates -$313 -$251 -$565 31 Water Impact Fee per ERC $799 $641 $1,439 32 Reduction for Contingency 0% $799 $641 $1,439 33 Percentage of Full Cost Recovery 100% 34 Proposed Water Impact Fee per ERC $799 $641 $1,439 35 Current Water Impact Fee per ERC I$ - I$ - I$ - 36 Change $799 $641 $1,439 37 Percent Change 0% 0% 0% Source:Burton&Associates,Inc. 03/16/2015 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 32 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 3 - Sewer Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX A City of Opa-Locka, FL FY 2014/15 Impact Fee Study Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation 1 Fixed Asset/CIP Allocation: Transmission Collection Total 2 Wastewater Project Costs: $9,458,068 $5,516,512 $14,974,580 3 Less: Grant Funding 0.00% $0 $0 $0 4 Bond Financed Projects 100.00% $9,458,068 $5,516,512 $14,974,580 5 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 $0 $0 6 Financina Analysis: 7 Projects Financed With Revenue Bonds: 8 Sources of Funds: 9 Estimated Par Amount 1.97% Int for 20 Yrs $9,651,090 $5,629,094 $15,280,184 10 Estimated Int Earnings on Const Fund 0.00% Int for 0 Months $0 $0 $0 11 Total Sources of Funds $9,651,090 $5,629,094 $15,280,184 12 Uses of Funds: 13 Project Costs Financed $9,458,068 $5,516,512 $14,974,580 14 Cost of Issuance 2.00%of Par Amount $193,022 $112,582 $305,604 15 Debt Service Reserve 0 Years of D.S. $0 $0 $0 16 Capitalized Interest 0 Years Interest $0 $0 $0 17 Underwriters Discount 0 of Par Amount $0 $0 $0 18 Debt Service Surety 0.00%of Annual Debt Service $0 $0 $0 19 Cost of Bond Insurance 0.00%of Total D.S. $0 $0 $0 20 Total Uses of Funds $9,651,090 $5,629,094 $15,280,184 21 Annual Debt Service $588,294 $343,128 $931,423 22 Total Principal&Interest Payments over Term of Loan $11,765,883 $6,862,569 $18,628,451 23 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 $0 $0 24 Total Project Costs $11,765,883 $6,862,569 $18,628,451 25 Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation: 26 Capacity 27 Million Gallons Per Day(MGD) 2.33 2.33 2.33 28 Equivalent Residential Connections(ERCs)C 220 Gallons Per Day 10,595 7,436 10,595 29 Cost per ERC $1,110 $923 $2,033 30 Credit for NPV of Debt Service Included in Usage Rates -$414 -$344 -$757 31 Wastewater Impact Fee per ERC $696 $579 $1,276 32 Reduction for Contingency 0% $696 $579 $1,276 33 Percentage of Full Cost Recovery 100% 34 Proposed Wastewater Impact Fee per ERC $696 $579 $1,276 35 Current Wastewater Impact Fee-per ERC I$ - I$ - I$ - 36 Change $696 $579 $1,276 37 Percent Change 0% 0% 0% Source:Burton&Associates,Inc. 03/16/2015 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 33 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 4 - Water System CIP APPENDIX A Water CIP-Engineer's Estimates of Costs for Alternative No.3-Phase 1 Description of Item Unit Unit Price Quantity Costs Transmission/Distributio Furnish and Install 2"Polyethylene Pipe Including all Installation Components LF $20 518 $10,350 DIST Furnish and Install 3"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstall ati on Components LF $24 54 $1,296 DIST Furnish and Install 4"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstallation Components LF $32 189 $5,977 DIST Furnish and Install 6"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstallation Components LF $37 11,061 $403,727 DIST Furnish and Install 8"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstallation Components LF $44 61,461 $2,688,919 DIST Furnish and Install 10"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstallation Components LF $54 950 $50,798 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"Ductile Iron Pipe(DIP)Including alllnstallation Components LF $71 28,859 $2,048,954 TRANS Furnish and Install 6"x6"M1 Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $2,520 5 $12,600 DIST Furnish and Install 8'00"MI Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $3,240 16 $51,840 DIST Furnish and Install 10'08"M1 Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $3,750 3 $11,250 TRANS Furnish and Install 12'012"M1Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $6,840 27 $184,680 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"08"M1 Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $5,040 46 $231,840 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"06"M1 Wet Tap Including All Installation Components including Couplings,Sleeves and Valves EA $5,041 11 $55,453 TRANS Furnish and Install 2"tine Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $2,000 9 $18,000 DIST Furnish and Install 3"Une Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $2,750 1 $2,750 DIST Furnish and Install 4"Line Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $3,500 2 $7,000 DIST Furnish and Install 6"Line Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $4,000 9 $36,000 DIST Furnish and Install 8"Une Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $4,250 S $21,250 DIST Furnish and Install 10"line Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $5,250 1 $5,250 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"Line Stop/Insertion Valve Including all Installation Components EA $6,500 23 $149,500 TRANS Furnish and Install 13"04"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $722 2 $1,443 TRANS Furnish and Install 8'06"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $800 170 $135,915 TRANS Furnish and Install 8'06"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $917 54 $49,491 TRANS Furnish and Install 10"x6"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $1,112 1 $1,112 TRANS Furnish and Install 12'06"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $1,404 AS $91,260 TRANS Furnish and Install 12'08"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $1,326 45 $59,670 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"010"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $1,794 1 $1,794 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"012"DIP Tees Including all Installation Components EA $1,931 13 $25,097 TRANS Furnish and Install 6"Ductile Iron Elbow(restr(Including all Installation Components. EA $332 18 $5,967 DIST Furnish and Install 8"Ductile Iron Elbow(restr(Including all Installation Components. EA $488 73 $35,588 DIST Furnish and Install 12"Ductile Iron Elbow(restr(Including all Installation Components. EA $995 45 $44,753 TRANS Furnish and Install 24"Ductile Iron Elbow(restr)Including all Installation Components. EA $1,500 1 $1,500 TRANS Furnish and Install 4"Gate Valve,Including All Installation Components EA $1,155 1 $1,155 DIST Furnish and Install 6"Gate Valve,Including All Installation Components EA $1,406 201 $282,656 DIST Furnish and Install 8"Gate Valve,Including All Installation Components EA $1,856 180 $334,125 DIST Furnish and Install 10"Gate Valve,Including All Installation Components EA $2,063 4 $8,250 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"Gate Valve,Including All Installation Components EA $2,519 56 $141,050 TRANS Furnish and Install 4"03"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $117 1 $117 DIST Furnish and Install 8"06"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $351 16 $5,616 DIST Furnish and Install 12"x6"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $585 8 $4,680 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"x8"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $644 19 $12,227 TRANS Furnish and Install 12'010"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $741 1 $741 TRANS Furnish and Install 24'012"DIP Reducers Including All Installation Components EA $2,000- 1 $2,000 TRANS Furnish and Install Fire Hydrant Assembly(with,Including All Installation Components EA $3,875 212 $819,457 TRANS Relocate Existing Fire Hydrant Assembly,Including All Installation Components EA $900 20 $18,000 TRANS Furnish and Install 2"Corporation Stop Including all Installation Components EA $1,938 10 $19,375 TRANS Remove and Dispose Existing Pipeline(All Materials)(Sizes 2"-161 LF $8 72,275 $578,196 TRANS Furnish and Place Asphalt Concrete Pavement TN $108 7,560 $816,477 TRANS Furnish and Place 8-inch Umerock Base Material SY $11 53,127 $584,394 TRANS Furnish and Place 12-inch Umerock Base Material SY $11 21,648 $238,128 TRANS Compaction/Stabilization of 12-inch Subgrade SY $2 74,775 $130,856 TRANS SUB TOTAL 333,853 $10,448,520 Vertical Alignment Adjustment % 1.5% $156,728 WEIGHTED Pavement Markings(incl.Temporary and Thermoplastic) % 1.0% $104,465 WEIGHTED Construction Maintenance of Traffic/Traffic Control % 1.3% $130,607 WEIGHTED Construction General Conditions % 2.5% $261,213 WEIGHTED Construction Contingency % 10.0% $1,044,852 WEIGHTED Design Costs % 5.0% $522,426 WEIGHTED DCP Costs % 2.8% $287,334 WEIGHTED CEI Costs % 53% $548,547 WEIGHTED PM()Costs % 1.8% $182,849 WEIGHTED Permits % 0.4% $41,794 WEIGHTED Allowance for Service Reconnection % 2.0% $208,970 WEIGHTED TOTAL $13,938,326 Transmission Costs: $ 6,523,588 62% Distribution Costs: $ 3,924,932 38% Subtotal: $ 10,448,520 Weighted Costs: $ 3,489,806 Total with Allocated Weighted Costs Transmission Costs: $ 8,702,466 Distribution Costs: $ 5,235,859 Total Costs Included in Fee: $ 13,938,326 Source:EAC Consulting Potable Water Infrastructure Improvements Planning Document for Drinking Water SRF Fund,June 2014 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 34 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 5 - Sewer System CIP APPENDIX A Sewer CIP-Engineer's Estimates of Costs for Alternative No.3 Description of Item Unit Unit Price Quantity Costs Include? Furnish and Install 8"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-900.(Gravity Sewer)Includes all Installation Components. IF $40.00 103,150 $4,126,000 COLL Furnish and Install 10"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-900.(Gravity Sewer)Includes all Installation Components. IF $50.00 35,560 $1,778,000 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-900.(Gravity Sewer)Includes all Installation Components. LF $60.00 23,165 $1,389,900 TRANS Furnish and Install 16"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-900.(Gravity Sewer)Includes all Installation Components. LF $70.00 2,735 $191,450 TRANS Furnish and Install 8"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-909.(Force Main)Includes all Installation Components. IF $50.00 1,475 $73,750 TRANS Furnish and Install 12"Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)-C-909.(Force Main)Includes all Installation Components. LF $70.00 90 $6,300 TRANS Furnish and Install 8-inch X8-inch Tapping Sleeve and Tapping Valve.Includes all Installation Components Including Couplings, EA $8,000.00 1 $8,000 COLL Sleeves and Valves. Furnish and Install 8-inch 116-inch Tapping Sleeve and Tapping Valve.Includes all Installation Components Including EA $12,000.00 1 $12,000 COLL Couplings,Sleeves and Valves. Furnish and Install 12-inch X16-inch Tapping Sleeve and Tapping Valve.Includes all Installation Components Including EA $15,000.00 1 $15,000 TRANS Couplings,Sleeves and Valves. Furnish and Install 8-inch Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)Fitting.Includes All Installation Components. EA $1,500.00 45 $67,500 COLL Furnish and Install 12-inch Polyvinyl Chloride(PVC)Fitting.Includes All Installation Components. EA $2,000.00 4 $8,000 TRANS Furnish and Install 8-inch Gate Valve.Includes all Installation Components. EA $1,750.00 3 $5,250 COLL Abandon and Grout fill 6-inch Pipe LF $20.00 4,275 $85,500 COLL Furnish and Install Duplex Lift Station(Includes all Installation Components Including Wet Well Structure,Submersible Pumps, EA $500,000.00 1 $500,000 N/A Valve Vault Structure,Valves,Fittings,Telemetry System,Floats,Electrical Panels,Wiring,Wireless Communication Equipment, Power Supply and all Equipment Required to have the lift Station Fully Operational. Rehabilitation of lift Station#16-Includes replacing the existing wet well including submersible pumps,internal piping,valve EA $400,000.00 1 $400,000 N/A vault structure,valves,fittings,updating telemetry system,floats,electrical panels,wiring,installing wireless communication equipment,power supply,back-up power generator,fencing,landscaping,water service line,backflow preventer and all equipment required to bring Lift Station up to current jurisdictional requirements. New SCADA System for 16 Pump Stations within the City LS $250,000.00 1 $250,000 TRANS Furnish and Install Automatic Air Release Valve.Includes All Installation Components Including Structure,Saddle,Valves And EA $4,000.00 5 $20,000 TRANS Fittings. Furnish and Install Manhole Structure(HS-25 Traffic Rating) EA $4,000.00 14 $56,000 TRANS Furnish and Place Asphalt Concrete Pavement TN $108.00 15,653 $1,690,475 TRANS Furnish and Place 8"Limerock Base Material SV 011.00 78,270 $860,970 TRANS Furnish and Place 12"limerock Base Material SY $15.00 35,947 $539,200 TRANS Compact ion/Stabilization of 12"Subgra de ST $2.00 114,217 $228,433 TRANS Mill 1"Asphalt Concrete SY $2.50 95,666 $239,164 TRANS Furnish And Install Topsoil And Sod SV $5.00 6,600 $33,000 TRANS SUB TOTAL ___ _._,__ _ $12,583,892 Pavement Markings(incl.Temporary and Thermoplastic) % 1.00% $125,839 WEIGHTED Construction Maintenance of Traffic/Traffic Control % 1.25% $157,299 WEIGHTED Construction General Conditions % 2.50% $314,597 WEIGHTED Construction Contingency. % 10.00% $1,258,389 WEIGHTED Design Costs % 4.00% $503,356 WEIGHTED DCP Costs % 1.75% $220,218 WEIGHTED CEI Costs % 4.00% $503,356 WEIGHTED PM()Costs % 1.25% $157,299 WEIGHTED Permits % 0.40% $50,336 WEIGHTED TOTAL $15,1374,580 Transmission Costs: $ 7,379,642 63% Collection Costs: $ 4,304,250 37% Subtotal: $11,683,892 Weighted Costs: $ 3,290,688 Total with Allocated Weighted Costs Transmission Costs: $ 9,458,068 Collection Costs: $ 5,516,512 Total Casts Included in Fee: $14,974,580 Source:EAC Consulting Wastewater Infrastructure Improvements Planning Document for Clean Water SRF Fund,lune 2014 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 35 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 6 - Impact Fees by Meter Size APPENDIX A Calculated Water& Sewer Impact Fees by Meter Size Combined Water Water Impact Sewer Impact Water&Sewer Meter Size ERUs Fee Fee Impact Fee 3/ inch 1 $ 1,439 $ 1,276 $ 2,715 1 inch 2.5 $ 3,598 $ 3,190 $ 6,788 1-1/2 inch 5 $ 7,195 $ 6,380 $ 13,575 2 inch 8 $ 11,512 $ 10,208 $ 21,720 3 inch 16 $ 23,024 $ 20,416 $ 43,440 4 inch 25 $ 35,975 $ 31,900 $ 67,875 6 inch 50 $ 71,950 $ 63,800 $ 135,750 8 inch 80 $ 115,120 $ 102,080 $ 217,200 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 36 Draft Report >- Q 0 x H Z 8 J1 w o w LWL Q U a CL Y O G N i co } a 0 LL o > 0. U 6.N U. W 8 CD L.. N. Q. O Ea' CU = 8 0 �n a M o4 m as z 4a - a a L d o ci) A Q •N w O o Y = U E E 1 E ro N U U Ii g - "' p uca E Q 0a 0 z "7 v C ■ N N c co N L 73 • 0 iEn A u u + Q N m E ro cu '_ E v aci c a u " v E ( 2 ,e o o D m a, ro .3 o .- t = "� m o 2 _c r`o V m -a 2 Q U N- 3-, Z co E r-oo o ea 0 a v • E t c Z a) m (13 z V) U L O 0. FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY APPENDIX B Appendix B — Stormwater Impact Fee Supporting Schedules Schedule 1 contains the Stormwater Impact Fee Calculation Schedule 2 provides a detailed schedule of the Stormwater CIP BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 38 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 1 - Stormwater Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX B City of Opa-Locka, FL FY 2014/15 Impact Fee Study Stormwater Impact Fee Calculation 1 Functional Component: Stormwater 2 Stormwater Project Costs: 3 Existing Assets $0 4 Capital Improvement Plan $18,774,304 5 Total Project Costs $18,774,304 6 Less: Grant Funding 0.00% $0 7 Bond Financed Projects 100.00% $18,774,304 8 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 9 Financing Analysis: 10 Projects Financed With Revenue Bonds: 11 Sources of Funds: 12 Estimated Par Amount 1.88% Int for 20 Years $19,157,453 13 Estimated Int Earnings on Const Fund 0.00% Int for 0 Months $0 14 Total Sources of Funds $19,157,453 15 Uses of Funds: 16 Project Costs Financed $18,774,304 17 Cost of Issuance 2.00% of Par Amount $383,149 18 Debt Seance Reserve 0 Years of D.S. $0 19 Capitalized Interest 1 Years Interest $0 20 Underwriters Discount 0 of Par Amount $0 21 Debt Service Surety 0.00% of Annual Debt Service $0 22 Cost of Bond Insurance 0.00% of Total D.S. $0 23 Total Uses of Funds $19,157,453 24 Annual Debt Seance $1,157,634 25 Total Principal& Interest Payments over Term of Loan $23,152,679 26 Projects Paid From Other Sources $0 27 Total Project Costs $23,152,679 28 Stormwater Impact Fee Calculation: 29 Capacity 14,855 30 31 Equivalent Residential Connections(ERCs)@ 1,5481sq ft 32 Cost per ERC $1,559 33 Credit for NPV of Debt Service Included in Usage Rates -$730 34 Stormwater Impact Fee per ERC $829 35 Reduction for Contingency 0% $829 36 Percentage of Full Cost Recovery 100% 37 Proposed Stormwater Impact Fee per ERC $829 38 Current Stormwater Impact Fee per ERC I$ 582 39 Change $247 a0 Percent Change 42% Source: Burton&Associates, Inc. BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 39 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 2 - Stormwater CIP APPENDIX B Stormwater CIP: Engineer's Estimates of Costs for Alternative No. 3 Description of Item Unit Unit Price Quantity Costs Concrete Class I-Endwalls with Manatee Protection&Rip Rap Protection CY $750 $56 $42,000 Hydrodynamic Separator Unit EA $25,000 $7 $175,000 Drainage Control Structures EA $5,000 $7 $35,000 Drainage Structures Type C w/baffles EA $3,100 $310 $961,000 36-inch Solid Pipe LF $70 $350 $24,500 24-inch Solid Pipe LF $60 $18,900 $1,134,000 18-inch Solid Pipe LF $50 $7,750 $387,500 French Drain 24-inches(6'-7'Width,-15.00 ft deep) LF $112 $47,105 $5,275,808 Furnish and Place Asphalt Concrete Pavement TN $100 $27,842 $2,784,186 Furnish and Place 8-i nch Limerock Base Material SY $11 $7,067 $77,733 Furnish and Place 10-inch Limerock Base Material SY $13 $125,327 $1,629,247 Furnish and Place 12-inch Umerock Base Material SY $15 $26,600 $399,000 Compaction/Stabilization of 12-inch Subgrade SY $2 $170,096 $255,143 Mill 1-inch Asphalt Concrete SY $2 $179,794 $314,640 Furinsh and Install Type D Curb LF $15 $11,900 $178,500 Furinsh and Install Valley Gutter(3') LFY $18 $35,900 $628,250 Furinsh and Install Type F Curb and Gutter LF $17 $5,600 $95,200 Concrete Sidewalk 4-inch SY $30 $8,400 $252,000 Sodding(includes top soil,watering) SY $3 $25,875 $77,625 SUBTOTAL $14,726,333 Pavement Markings(incl.Temporary and Thermoplastic) 1% $166,457 $147,263 Construction Maintenance of Traffic/Traffic Control 1.% $208,071 $184,079 Construction General Conditions 3.% $416,142 $368,158 Construction Contingency 10% $1,664,568 $1,472,633 Design Costs 4% $665,827 $589,053 DCP Costs 2. $291,299 $257,711 CEI Costs 4% $665,827 $589,053 PM0 Costs 1. $208,071 $184,079 Permits 0.4% $66,583 $58,905 Engineers Cost $197,035 $197,035 TOTAL $18,774,304 Source:EAC Consulting Stormwater Infrastructure Improvements Planning Document for Clean Water SRF Fund,June 2014 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 40 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY APPENDIX C Appendix C — Public Safety Impact Fee Supporting Schedules Schedule 1 contains the existing Level of Service Standards and Cost Basis for the Public Safety Impact Fee calculation Schedule 2 contains the projected cost basis for the Public Safety Impact Fee calculation Schedule 3 contains the calculations for projected developed Square Footage for the Public Safety Impact Fee calculation Schedule 4 contains the Public Safety Impact Fee Calculation Schedule 5 contains the Public Safety Impact Fee Survey BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 41 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 1 - Existing Level of Service Standard & Cost Basis APPENDIX C Existing Level of Service Standard & Cost Basis 2014 Population: 16,205 2014 Sworn Officers: 57 Existing LOS (Officers per 1,000 persons): 3.5 Existing Assets Costs Vehicles $ 718,269 Vehicle Equipment $ 49,816 Officer Equipment Set $ 427,373 Furniture And Equipment $ 440,074 Total Existing Asset Costs $ 1,635,533 Existing Asset Costs Per Sworn Officer Vehicles $ 12,601 Vehicle Equipment $ 874 Officer Equipment Set $ 7,498 Furniture And Equipment $ 7,721 Total Existing Asset Costs Per Sworn Officer $ 28,694 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 42 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 2 - Projected Cost Basis for Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX C Projected Cost Basis 2024 Population: 19,204 LOS (Officers per 1,000 persons): 3.5 2014 Sworn Officers 57 2024 Projected Sworn Officers 68 Total Existing Asset Costs per Sworn Officer: $ 28,694 New Sworn Officers Required to meet 2024 LOS x 11 Total Asset Costs to Serve Projected new Sworn Officers $ 302,682 Total Costs for new Public Safety Facility $ 4,000,000 Less: Grant Funding $(2,000,000) Subtotal Pubic Safety Facility Costs $ 2,000,000 New Population Share of Costs(15.6%) $ 312,331 Total Asset Costs to Sene Projected new Sworn Officers $ 302,682 Additional Costs for new Public Safety Facility $ 312,331 Total Costs in Impact Fee Calculation: $ 615,013 BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 43 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 3 - Projected Developed Square Footage APPENDIX C Projected Developed Square Footage 10-Year Population Growth: 2,999 Residents per Household (1): 2.94 Total 10-Year Household growth 1,020 Average Sq Ft per Single Family Home (1): 1,281 Total 10-Year Residential Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 Existing Ratio of Non-Residential to Res. Sq Ft (1): 1.55 Total 10-Year Non-Residential Sq Ft Growth 2,019,832 Total 10-Year Developed Sq Ft Growth 3,326,865 (1): Based upon data provided bythe Miami-Dade PropertyAppraiser BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 44 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 4 - Public Safety Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX C Public Safety Impact Fee Calculation Total 10-Year Sq Ft Growth 3,326,865 Total Police Costs for Growth: $ 615,013 Calculated Cost per Square Feet: $ 0.185 Less: Debt Service Credit: $ (0.019) Impact Fee per Sq Ft: $ 0.166 Existing Fee per Square Feet: $ 0.116 $ Change $ 0.05 Change 43% BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 45 Draft Report } U I— Z .._. ----. _- _. T g w a Q a _ —____--------------_-___ . 8 Y o co o. N 00 L 8 ! o 1 U a) O `^ 2 L - — -- emu OJ (co I (0 +, dA v ( •a- . VI 8 _u •V A.__.____._.._.__. N O Q u il •_ x-0 fi a a) L 8 a) 0 0 W _W LJ- E N Q h +. to u V N U - f T T T -T T IIi1l 7- T t%? 3 N ( Z y- E � 0 t Co ._ 0 E c u U ,n cu u ( 0 ca fD C C N C Co a) L) (0 N (0 (0 'C .Y LJ o o a (� o L m m = a `° ! Ca Z U v a Q N sr, V (co uti m ca E '� o U cu u v 0_ ° (a _ u_ �e 2 a z v `° 8 u o .c c ! E o ,; o E . Q o � Cl).ro a a O z z m 0 r o i FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY APPENDIX D Appendix D — Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Supporting Schedules Schedule 1 contains the existing Level of Service Standards and Cost Basis for the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee calculation Schedule 2 contains the projected cost basis for the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee calculation Schedule 3 contains the calculations for projected developed Square Footage for the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee calculation Schedule 4 contains the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Calculation Schedule 5 contains the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Survey BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 47 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 1 - Existing Level of Service Standard &Cost Basis APPENDIX D Existing Level of Service Standard & Cost Basis 2014 Population: 16,205 Park Acreage data from Property Appraiser Segal Park 2.45 Sherbondy Park 3.72 Ingram Park 25.59 Washington Tot Lot 0.24 Total Existing Park Acres: 32.01 Existing LOS (Acres per 1,000 persons): 1.98 Existing Park Costs from Property Appraiser Segal Park $ 2,963,737 Sherbondy Park $ 3,565,025 Ingram Park $ 1,800,953 Washington Tot Lot $ 14,545 Subtotal Existing Park Costs $ 8,344,260 Less: Grant Funding $ (2,500,000) Total Existing Asset Costs $ 5,844,260 TOTAL EXISTING PARK COSTS PER ACRE $ 182,598 BURTON&ASSOCIATES 48 City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 2 - Projected Cost Basis for Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX D Projected Cost Basis 2024 Population: 19,204 LOS (Acres per 1,000 persons) 1.98 2014 Existing Park Acres 32.01 2024 Projected Park Acres 37.93 Total Existing Asset Costs per Park Acre $ 182,598 New Park Acres Required to meet 2024 LOS x 5.92 Total Asset Costs for Projected new Park Acres: $ 1,081,576 Total Costs for new Cultural Arts Facility: $ 3,000,000 Less: Grant Funding $(1,500,000) Subtotal Costs for new Cultural Arts Facility: $ 1,500,000 New Population Share of Costs (15.6%) $ 234,248 Total Asset Costs for Projected new Park Acres: $ 1,081,576 Additional Costs for new Cultural Arts Facility: $ 234,248 Total Costs in Impact Fee Calculation: $ 1,315,824 BURTON&ASSOCIATES 49 City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 3 - Projected Developed Square Footage APPENDIX D Projected Developed Square Footage 10-Year Population Growth: 2,999 Residents per Household (1): 2.94 Total 10-Year Household growth 1,020 Average Sq Ft per Single Family Home (1): 1,281 Total 10-Year Residential Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 (1): Based upon data provided bythe Miami-Dade PropertyAppraiser BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 50 Draft Report FY 2015 IMPACT FEE STUDY Schedule 4 - Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Calculation APPENDIX D Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Calculation Total 10-Year Sq Ft Growth 1,307,033 Total Parks Costs for Growth: $ 1,315,824 Calculated Cost per Square Feet: $ 1.007 Less: Debt Service Credit: $ (0.009) Impact Fee per Sq Ft: $ 0.998 Existing Fee per Square Feet: $ 0.722 $ Change $ 0.28 Change 38% BURTON&ASSOCIATES City of Opa-Locka Utility&Governmental Economics 51 Draft Report 0 1,7„; 0 8 W 0 w a VI- W Q LL U S Y O LO I ; 8 a ig L ! o ate, s = a, cu o 8 a, 2 o , LL. 0. m g co in C v O C '° a, ni VI o u_ cu — co I II .Q E i o g Y `O �' a,I (Atli c Cr p (/) W N F- ca +�* w• E in c Li o Q U I 1I,1FIhiI11 v ? oea m X j ._ _. , I 1 1 I , 1 T ;" -1- ; -r 'T - r 1' -1 ,j). :47-_, w re A" s j ca ro C C CU c@ v °n ` E U - a CO S 3 N i 0 a 0 O i aJ c = 0- ; ° v ° -a v a m m -a s V r`o in c`a CO_ E O .E U v `r' 2 • - cOO 2 Ti Z o o _v I = a ca Y O 0 CD ca = J O 0- v) U 2 a z o U) o w C/ x • z 1.11 p 1.p Lp pppp W l- _ C y ONO NCF G^1 t� 0 tD O C a ill 3 N ttoo M co N N � 0_ ate+ 7 en On 1: l0 V1 a in lA M M M' N N N N - V1 N I• F U C.) O Q v i„ I a tp pOpQ QQ O 0) ONO C71 O^1 t0 O Q tD ' N tNO ON1 CO N N LC) L LL t0 M t0 tl1 U1 M M M N N N .-1 M rn N J g C CD c ` S. CV c V o 0 C CIJ L . ' N 00 I , , I I , , 00 I , 1 , I I I U1 , , I U 6 co c y 2 I C4 VT t/} In- vT vT vT vT in- vT -vT V1. vT vt vT vT vT 40 .1 Oo * m v * * 01 0 0 Ut 0 m * to to to .-I U1 C 01 .-I * U1 00 * * N ,--I 00 Cr N r-1 * 00 N N 01 V O� 0 M CO L11 t0 N tD 0 M ri l0 cF 01 M M CO CTS N '9 00 tD' N r a-i N 1 (Ni 00 5 t al u O. 11 CC -(/T vT vT U1- AO vT vT -LO -UT i/T if). ill. "O I C> in v * m v * * m CO CO 0 m * LC) 01 1 U1 U1 CO �■i M t0 * r-I M * * r-1 N ct N 0 * U1 •t N M N Ct LO e--I N Ut N .-4 . cr i--I •t .-I N tD CO MI 01 LO •py •O ai ^I _a c o. co ,= -in- in vT vT i/T '✓T v)- V• vT v1• vT v1 I .- N 71 a O a Co) m * tD ,-I O * * tD O O O o t0 o co UNn * 01 01 * * N m ctN oo M r+ N v Y I 4l N re ci - - ri (4 M co co 0 J W O) rb !/01 ' Y 8 t/T ;/1. VT 1/1 VT t/- VT 'UT LT VT VT in in (C O d 73 c U1 * U1 01 N. * * 01 O N 01 N 0 N Ol O c U O ^ 414 N * N Ol W * * M O N N N UI U1 Q1 Ut c W L j Cli N O1 O Ct Tr L11 00 LO . 00 . m . 00 M Y Y O Q I� N N M 1 .-1' .-i .--1 ,-4 1--I M 7 C (N 5 E �+I CU >, U Q It O 0 3 L u) s a) v o a E 1/T in- vT -LO VT vT -LO vT N vT t/1 vT coo p c !at: 05 O L a, L = -o L ,� a, L 3 ° v z 0 a) E E co . c co 'a in f6 v c +r C ao ao O ea ca m a, E c ac a m t a, ro co J E 1- ti �_ ` v s o c a+ y H ar 'o co t y = `° " o:L _ 2 V N O R E a l7 u Q °' m 0. Q• o 'Fa 1E0 _ '_^ L LL f0 d cn N v E v z pf0 m_ CC co y v a "' t 4, C ' c u L C>. fo J 3 > - O c3 £ O 3 * < Zr a) C co J O to = fo * co Q z 0 hi -o 0 o O z N C 0 0