Loading...
09-27-2004 - Workshop '. (.) o CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER WORKSHOP SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY CENTER MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Schmidt called the Workshop to order at 6:01 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Mayor Donald Schmidt Councilman James Brown Councilman Dennis Vincenzi Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes Councilwoman Judith Lichter City Manager Kenneth Hooper City Clerk Susan Wadsworth Paralegal Robin Matusick Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present MEE TING PURPOSE The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Transportation Impact Fee Study. (Attached). City Manager Hooper presented the background information which warranted the Traffic Impact Study and Analysis. Jim Schira, B & H Consultants, made a Powerpoint Presentation regarding the Traffic Impact Fee Study. (Attached) Councilwoman Lichter feels this is a miraculous report and complimented Mr. Schira. She questioned if this was ever thrown out of court. Mr. Schira wasn't aware of any cases where an impact fee was thrown out. People have challenged an impact fee, which has gone to court, and as long as the information is reasonable the courts have repeatedly found that they are valid. City Manager Hooper commented on the Volusia impact fee being challenged by the Home Builders Association and some cities challenged whether it would be applicable to put within the cities. ,'" -:. () 6 Councilwoman Lichter commented on the taxpayers paying 1/3 of the cost for several projects within the City which she feels has been a source of conflict. New developments are paying for their own. Councilwoman Rhodes questioned the $1.68 million to do one mile of road. Mr. Schira explained that is not just the cost of building the road. That factors in the right-of-way acquisition, survey, design, permitting, 7construction work itself and someone to monitor the construction work. City Manager Hooper commented on it costing $1.6 million for the City to construct the roads in ParkTowne. Councilwoman Rhodes questioned the difference in the impact fees between the other cities and Edgewater. Mr. Schira elaborated on why there may be differences. City Manager Hooper commented on there being a competitive issue and some cities being sensitive to it. Councilman Vincenzi stated he liked the study and feels the more impact fees the better. He then questioned when they were proposing this a couple of months ago and the Home Builders Association had their complaint, what was the dollar amount we were thinking of imposing. City Manager Hooper stated they proposed $500 for an interim until the study was done. Councilman Vincenzi asked where the differential comes between the County and the City. He noticed most of the County fees were a couple hundred dollars more. Mr. Schira explained part of the difference is in the distribution factor. He also commented on trip lengths. Councilman Brown feels if the City is going to have growth they need to pay their way and not put the burden on the existing taxpayers. Councilwoman Lichter commented the amount of development being done on u.s. #1 and this being a state road. She questioned if these have been factored in. Mr. Schira stated if they are building a home in Edgewater, regardless of which road they use to get access to that home, if the study is adopted, the City will charge them a transportation impact fee. Councilwoman Lichter questioned if the roads within the new developments will be turned over to the City or maintained by the developer. Page -2- Council Workshop September 27, 2004 ~ 'J <J City Manager Hooper explained they can be either way. Most of the roads, if they are built to City standards, are turned over to the City. The City's cost long term is maintenance if they are given to the City. City Manager Hooper asked Council for an okay to put this in ordinance format and bring back at the second meeting in October. They will send it to the Planning and Zoning Board for their meeting in October and at the Council's second meeting they will see the first reading, with the second reading being done the first meeting in November. It was the consensus of Council to move ahead with the ordinance. Mayor Schmidt asked City Manager Hooper if he had any idea if they would have put the $500 into effect, what we lost to this point. City Manager Hooper estimated about $50,000. City Manager Hooper made a presentation regarding what the City has spent for Hurricane Charley and a portion of Hurricane Frances. He further commented on the reimbursement the City will receive from FEMA. He spoke of the storms lowering the amount the City has in reserves. He spoke of FEMA paying for additional help in City Hall. He also commented on the ad in the newspaper describing what citizen should and shouldn't do and who would be responsible for hauling away trees that are being taken down. He further commented on the Public Information Officer. Councilwoman Lichter questioned if Hurricane Jeanne is comparable to the other two hurricanes. Finance Director Williams feels those figures will be less than what the previous two storms generated. Councilwoman Lichter spoke of tree services taking down trees. She wasn't sure if it was the homeowner's responsibility to have who they hired take away the trees or if they were being picked up by the City. City Manager Hooper stated if you hire somebody that is in their charge to take it away. Councilwoman Lichter spoke of this not happening. City Manager Hooper spoke of the power company trimming trees and leaving the limbs. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 6:33 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lisa Bloomer Page -3- Council Workshop September 27, 2004 I J D ID !C D D D D D D D D D ~ ~ ~ D D D o City of Edgewater Transportation Impact Fee Study Prepared by: B&H Consultants, Inc. August 2004 ~ I iI i D ~ ~ I ~ I ~ D i ~ ~ ~ ~ I I TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF EDGEWATER Transportation Impact Fee Study Section Page I. INTRODUCTION.. ... ... ............ ................. ......... ........................... ....... ................... ... ... .......... ....... ... ...... I 2. IMPACT FEES - BACKGROUND INFORMATION ...........................................................................1 3. PURPOSE AND INTENT OF IMPACT FEES......................................................................................3 4. NATURE OF IMPACT FEES ................................................................................................................3 5. SUPPORT FOR IMPACT FEES ............................................................................................................4 6. LEVEL OF SERVICE ............................................................................................................................7 7. REVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES IN VOLUSIA COUNTY AND AREA MUNICIPALITIES......................:................................................................................................. .........9 8. VOLUSIA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM ..........................................18 9. PROPOSED EDGEWATER LAND USE CATEGORIES ..................................................................19 10. TRIP GENERATION RATE ................................................................................................................22 II. PERCENT NEW TRlPS.......................................................................................................................22 12. DISTRIBUTION FACTOR.. ...... ............... ........................................... ...... ........ ..... ................ ........ ..... 23 13. AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH .................................................................................................................24 14. CONSTRUCTION COST...... ... ............. ...... ............................................ ................... ................ ... .......24 15. PROPOSED EDGEWATER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES..................................................26 16. ESCALATION FACTOR .................................. ............... ...................... ............. ............ .............. ....... 30 17. EXEMPTIONS ................................................................. ............... ....... ...... .............. .......................... 30 18. CRED ITS........................................................................................................................................ ......30 19. DRAFT ORDINANCE ...................,......................................................................................................31 APPENDIX I VALIDATION REPORT....................................................................................................... I APPENDIX II DRAFT ORD INANCE ...... ................................................................. ... ................... ... ........ II I ~ I ~ I Table I TABLE 6.1 i TABLE 7.1 TABLE 7.2 TABLE 7.3 i TABLE 7.4 TABLE 7.5 I TABLE 7.6 TABLE 7.7 I TABLE 7.8 TABLE 9.1 I TABLE 15.1 I I ~ U I I I I LIST OF TABLES CITY OF EDGEWATER Transportation Impact Fee Study Page CLASSIFICA TION OF MAJOR THOROUGHFARES ........................................................ 8 CITY OF ORMOND BEACH TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES................................ 10 CITY OF DELTONA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES .............................................11 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES............................... 12 CITY OF APOPKA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES................................................ 13 CITY OF MELBOURNE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES .......................................14 CITY OF OCOEE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES................................................... 15 CITY OF WINTER GARDEN TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES............................... 16 COMPARISON OF SELECTED FEES................................................................................ 17 LAND USE TYPE AND UNITS OF MEASURE ...............................................................20 PROPOSED CITY OF EDGEWATER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES................. 26 ~ I I i I I ~ ~ ~ I ~ I i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 1. INTRODUCTION On February 9, 2004, B&H Consultants, Inc. (B&H) was retained by the City of Edgewater to prepare a Transportation Impact Fee Study (the Study) for the City of Edgewater. The purpose of the Study was to establish a proposed schedule of land uses, transportation impact fees applicable to those land uses, maps and exhibits indicating near and long-term transportation improvements planned and anticipated for the City of Edgewater. B&H has also been retained by the cities of Port Orange and New Smyrna Beach to prepare Transportation Impact Fee Studies for each of those cities. Combined, these three studies will result in a regional transportation plan. B&H, in cooperation with Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. (Leftwich), developed several traffic models for current and future conditions, using the transportation model developed for the Florida Department of Transportation known as the Florida Standardized Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS). This model is accepted by Volusia County and other municipal, county and state agencies throughout Florida as a tool to approximate the traffic impacts of development on the roadway transportation network. Data sets were developed for the base year of 2000 and for future year conditions in 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025. Validation of the base year data was performed by Leftwich and a copy of the validation report is attached as Appendix I. 2. IMPACT FEES - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Impact fees are a unique product of local government's home rule powers, and the development of such fees has occurred in Florida via home rule ordinance rather than by direct statutory authorization or mandate. Therefore, the characteristics and limitations of impact fees are found in Florida case law rather than statute. Impact fees have been found to be a valid exercise of a municipality's home rule powers as established under Article VIII of the Florida Constitution. In addition, the Florida I I I i ~ ~ U i i ~ I ~ i D ~ i i I i Growth Policy Act, in Chapter 163.3202(3) Florida Statutes provides that: "This section shall be construed to encourage the use of innovative land development regulations which include provisions such as transfer of development rights, incentive and inclusionary zoning, planned-unit development, impact fees, and performance zoning n. Further, Chapter 166.201 Florida Statutes provides that: "A municipality may raise, by taxation and licenses authorized by the constitution or general law, or by user charges or fees authorized by ordinance, amounts of money which are necessary for the conduct of municipal government... " The following section provides a discussion of the basis for determining impact fees including the various fee criteria, certain legal requirements and a brief discussion of. court decisions related to the issue of impact fees. 2 ~ D I iI I ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ tJ ~ i II ~ ~ i i 3. PURPOSE AND INTENT OF IMPACT FEES The purpose and intent of impact fees is to require that new development pay for its fair share of public capital facilities. Impact fees are used by local governments to finance, defray or reimburse all or a portion of the costs of public capital facilities which serve such new development. The amount of each impact fee must be calculated in a manner which ensures that the fee is reasonably proportional to the impacts of new development on public facilities. The City assumes responsibility for, and will fund utilizing general city revenues, all public facility needs for existing development. Impact fees can not be used to fund improvements necessary to correct existing deficiencies. The Edgewater City Council has authorized this Transportation Impact Fee Study because it has the responsibility for, and is committed to providing, transportation facilities necessary to support new residential and non-residential development. As new development projects are built, additional demands on the transportation system are created. The new development projects must meet these demands by appropriate contributions of funds, land or facilities in reasonable proportion to the demand each project creates. The purpose of the transportation impact fees recommended by this Study is to provide a funding source for the necessary planning, design and construction of needed transportation system improvement and expansion projects due to the demands of new growth. 4. NATURE OF IMPACT FEES In Florida, municipal transportation impact fees have been an acceptable means of funding capital expenses associated with new growth for many years. 3 I I Ii ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ I I i i ~ ~ i I ij Impact fees are sometimes erroneously thought of as a type of special assessment or a tax on property. Neither of these comparisons is correct for the reasons discussed below. A special assessment is a charge imposed on a property based on the predicted increase in the value of the property due to a planned improvement being constructed on, adjacent to, or in the vicinity of the property. The amount of a special assessment must be based directly on the benefit received by each property due to the improvement(s) constructed. In contrast, an impact fee is not based on the benefit received by a property, but rather is based on the burden the property places on existing and proposed facilities. An undeveloped parcel of land, adjacent to a new road construction project could be subject to a special assessment for a proportionate share of the road construction cost. The benefit received by the property is an increase in value due to the adjacent new road project. That same undeveloped property however, would not be subject to a transportation impact fee until development occurs on the property, because until development occurs, there is no burden placed on the transportation system by the undeveloped land. A property tax is hased on property values and criteria that are not dependant on a property's demand on,. or consumption of public services. Property taxes may be collected on vacant land as well as on developed land. The funds received from property taxes, as a general rule, can be used for any legal public purpose. Impact fees are based on specific demands or burdens placed on public capital facilities, and are generally collected only as those burdens occur due to development of the property. The funds received from impact fees are generally used only for recovery of costs related to new growth demands. 5. SUPPORT FOR IMPACT FEES In the Florida Supreme Court decision, Contractors and Builders Association of Pinellas County vs. City of Dunedin, Florida, regarding the validity of impact fees, certain conditions were identified as necessary in order to have a valid impact fee. 4 ~ I I i I i i i ~ i I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ il In addition to the Dunedin decision, there have been several other landmark cases concerning impact fees in Florida. In the Hollywood, Inc. vs. Broward Countv case, a challenge was made regarding the applicability of levying a system of fees for parks and recreation. The County was collecting an impact fee for each residential unit constructed, and after review of the challenge, the court upheld the imposition of the fee. The major question associated with this case concerned whether the impact fee properly and adequately correlated to the benefit received. This is what is referred to as the "Dual Rational Nexus of Benefit Test". As stated in the court's decision, a local government must show a reasonable connection or correlation between the anticipated need for additional capital facilities and the growth in population generated by the new development and the government must show a reasonable connection between the expenditure of the funds collected and the benefits accruing to the new development from those expenditures. As developed under case law, in order to meet the "dual rational nexus test" and be able to withstand legal challenge, the four characteristics of legally sufficient impact fees levied by a local government are as follows: 1. The fee is levied on new development or expansion of existing development. 2. The fee is a one-time charge, although collectiortmay be spread out over time. 3. The fee is earmarked for capital outlay only; operating costs are excluded. 4. The fee represents a proportional share of the cost of the facilities needed to serve the new development. As noted above, impact fees are charges imposed by local governments against new or expanded development. Such charges represent a total or partial paYment for the cost of additional facilities or services made necessary as the result of that new development. Rather than imposing the cost of these new facilities or services upon the general public, 5 i I I ~ I I ~ I ~ ~ i ~ i ~ D ~ IJ i i the purpose of impact fees is to shift the capital expense burden of growth from the general public to the developer and new residents or businesses. The City of Edgewater currently levies several different impact fees on new development to offset the capital demands placed on various municipal systems by new development. The City has enacted' impact fees for police, fire, water, wastewater and recreation services. The City also collects school and County roadway impact fees. The County roadway impact fees are used to improve the County roadway network and no local roadway improvements are made using County roadway impact fee funds. Over the past few years, the demands on the city's transportation network have increased, and those demands will continue to increase with additional development. The City has determined that a transportation impact fee charged to new development projects is necessary and is an appropriate mechanism by which the demands on the local transportation system caused by those new development projects can be offset. The findings of this Study and the experience of other similarly situated cities support the imposition of transportation impact fees to finance the creation or expansion of local public transportation facilities, the demand for which is created by new development. This Study finds that imposition of such fees is in the best interests of the general welfare of the City of Edgewater and its residents, is equitable, and does not impose an unfair burden on new development. It is important to emphasize that any existing deficiencies in transportation facilities are to be funded by revenues other than impact fees. Therefore, the revenue derived from the transportation impact fee shall be used only for transportation studies, capital improvements and other additions to the transportation network, the need for which are reasonably determined to be caused by the impacts of new development. 6 I I i ~. .i ~ ~ i U I 11 I ~ ~ D i I i I 6. LEVEL OF SERVICE It is the intent of the City that the City's transportation network be designed and operated in a manner that will allow the various segments of the network to function at acceptable levels of service. The term "level-of-service" (LOS) is used to define the service standard associated with the different operating conditions that occur on a roadway. It defines qualitative and quantitative characteristics for factors such as trip counts, travel speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driver comfort and convenience and vehicle operating costs. The LOS standards used for evaluating acceptable levels of congestion on streets and roads in the Edgewater area are the same as those used by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). In this Study, when the term "roadway capacity" is used, the reference is to the generalized maximum trip volumes that can be accommodated on a given roadway based on the desired LOS. The average number of vehicles per day that can be accommodated at a given LOS on a particular roadway is shown in generalized tables in FDOT's Quality/Level of Service Handbook. The Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan establishes LOS C as the minimum level of service for Limited Access roads (1-95), and LOS D as the minimum level of service for arterials and collectors. LOS D is therefore the minimum level of service for all City roads classified as arterials or collectors. A list of arterial and collector roads is provided in the Comprehensive Plan and is reproduced in this report as Table 6.1. It is important to note that capital planning is an evolving process and the level of service standards for the public facilities constitutes a projection of anticipated need for public facilities, based upon present knowledge and judgment. Therefore, in recognition of changing growth patterns and the dynamic nature of population growth, it is the intent of this report that the level of service standards for the transportation facilities and the impact fee imposed should be reviewed and adjusted periodically, to ensure that the 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ I I i I i ~ I I I I ~ i ~ I I impact fees continue to be imposed equitably and lawfully, based upon actual and anticipated growth at the time of their imposition .or adjustment. TABLE 6.1 City of Ed{!ewater Classification of Maior Thorou{!hfares 8 ~ I I I I ~ U U I I I I I ~ ~ I I I ~ 7. REVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES IN VOLUSIA COUNTY AND AREA MUNICIPALITIES At the time of this study, the City of Ormond Beach and the City of Deltona were the only municipalities in Volusia County with an adopted municipal traffic impact fee program. The City of Ormond Beach describes local road impact fees in Article IV, Section 1-27 of the Land Development Code. The amount of the local road impact fee is established by ordinance annually, and the fee for any particular land use is calculated on the basis of an equivalent living unit and gross floor area. The land use categories and associated factors and impact fees for Ormond Beach are shown in Table 7.1. The City ofDeltona's current transportation impact fee schedule is the result of a study in 2003 performed by Ghyabi & Associates, Inc. The City of DeItona's land use categories and associated impact fees are included in this report for reference, and are listed in Table 7.2. Because there are few municipalities in V olusia Country with existing traffic impact fees, B&H gathered information on transportation impact fees charged by other central Florida municipalities to establish a baseline against which to compare the proposed Edgewater transportation impact fees. Impact fees from several cities were reviewed, and the fee schedules for Winter Springs, Apopka, Melbourne, Ocoee and Winter Garden are provided for reference as Tables 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6 and 7.7. 9 I ~ I ~ i i i ~ I ij I I D I ~ I i I i TABLE 7.1 City of Ormond Beach Transportation Impact Fees land Use Type Impact Fee Factor Impact Fee * Sinole Family 1.0 $120.00 Multi-Family 1.0 120.00 Mobil I Manufactured Home 1.0 120.00 Hotel I Motel 0.7 84.00 Office I Professional General I Government Office 1.4 169.00 Medical Office 6.2 747.00 Banks with Drive- Thru 8.3 997.00 Banks with no Drive- Thru 5.4 649.00 Warehouse Warehouse 0.6 74.00 Mini-Warehouse 0.6 74.00 Industrial 0.6 74.00 Retail 0- 99,000 sq. ft. 5.1 615.00 100,000 - 199,000 sq. ft. 4.9 , 591.00 200,000 - 299,999 sq. Ft. 3.7 446.00 CBD Sandwich Shop Type B 3.8 456.00 Restaurant Type AlC/D 5.4 649.00 Convenience Store 8.3 997.00 Institutional Hospital'" 1.3 155.00 Nursing Home'" 0.4 49.00 Churches I Education 0.9 110.00 Day Care 2.25 270.00 Recreation General Recreation"'* 0.35 43.00 Local Park 0.35 43.00 * fee shown is per unit for residential and hotel/motel, per 1 ,000 sq. ft. for all others except as noted. ... per bed *** per parking space 10 ~ i I ~ i I i D ~ Ii ~. I I i ~ I i i i TABLE 7.2 City of Deltona Transportation Impact Fees ITE Land Use Units Impact Fee * Code 210 Single Family DU $502.33 220 Apartment DU 489.04 230 Residential Condo I Townhouse DU 256.33 240 Mobile Home Park DU 177.40 310 Hotel Rooms 292.50 320 Motel Rooms 159.05 620 Nursing Home Beds 51.80 610 Hospital Sq.Ft. 0.57 710 Office under 10,000 sf Sq.Ft. 0.98 710 Office over 10,000 sf Sq.Ft. 0.52 714 Corporate headquarters building Sq.Ft. 0.33 720 Medical Office Sq.Ft. 1.28 911 Bank w/out Drive-through Sq. Ft. 1.03 912 Bank w/Drive-through Sq. Ft. 2.48 110 Light Industry Sq. Ft. 0.28 140 Manufacturing .Sq.Ft. 0.16 150 Warehouse Sq.Ft. 0.20 151 Mini-Warehouse Sq. Ft. 0.10 820 Retail, less than 10,000 sf Sq.Ft. 1.21 820 Retail, 10,000 - 99,999 sf Sq. Ft. 0.79 820 Retail, 100,000 - 1,000,000 sf Sq. Ft. 0.70 820 Retail, Greater than 1,000,000 sf Sq.Ft. 0.84 831 Quality Restaurant Sq. Ft. 1.83 832 High- Turnover Restaurant Sq. Ft. 2.40 834 Fast Food Restaurant Sq. Ft. 5.22 CBD Sandwich Shop Sq.Ft. 1.06 837 Quick lube Bays 871.89 840 Auto Carel Detailing Sq.Ft. 0.84 841 New and Used Car Sales Sq. Ft. 1.18 849 Tire Store / Auto Repair Bays 626.15 850 Supermarket Sq.Ft. 1.54 851 Convenience Store Sq. Ft. 3.89 853 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps Sq.Ft. 3.31 Conv. Store w/Gas and Fast Food Sq. Ft. 6.24 862 Home Improvement Store Sq.Ft. 0.82 881 Pharmacy/Drugstore w/Drive Thru Sq.Ft. 0.66 890 Furniture Store Sq. Ft. 0.14 General Recreation Parking Space 174.15 411 City Park Parking Space 79.77 412 Major Park Parking Space 118.54 Major Sports Facility Parking Space 105.73 444 Movie Theater Screens 2,130.20 560 Church Sq. Ft. 0.27 565 Day Care Sq.Ft. 1.00 11 ~ I I ~ I I i i i i i i I ~ ~ i ~ I I TABLE 7.3 City of Winter Springs Transportation Impact Fees ITE Land Use Units Impact Fee * Code 110 General light industrial 1,000 SF $914.75 130 Industrial park 1,000 SF 762.75 150 Warehousing 1,000 SF 1,154.29 151 Mini-warehouse 1 SU 26.44 210 Single-family detached 1 CU 890.95 220 Low-rise apartment 1 CU 539.13 230 Low-rise residential condo 1 CU 504.53 240 Mobile home park 1 CU 505.56 252 Congregate Care 1 CU 155.31 320 Motel 1 RM 592.07 430 Golf course 1 AC 324.06 444 Movie theatre 1 SCR 15,610.92 492 Racquet club 1,000 SF 1,505.82 494 Bowling alley 1,000 SF 2,900.82 560 Church 1,000 SF 573.93 566 Day care center 1,000 SF 981.72 610 Hospital 1 BED 591.54 620 Nursing home 1 BED 121.76 630 Clinic 1,000 SF 2,219.69 710 General office building 1,000 SF 2,093.45 720 Medical/dental office building 1,000 SF 3,614.34 750 Office park 1,000 SF 1361.06 770 Business park 1,000 SF 1,346.85 812 Building materials/lumber store 1,000 SF 1,448.58 814 Specialty retail center 1,000 SF 1,689.68 815 Discount store 1,000 SF 963.66 816 Hardware/paint store 1,000 SF 1,125.20 817 Nursery/garden store 1,000 SF 1,048.88 820 Retail (C) 0--25,000 sq. ft. 1,000 SF 1,552.63 25,000--50,000 sq. ft. 1,000 SF 1,438.95 50,000--99,999 sq. ft. 1,000 SF 1,707.67 100,000--199,999 sq. ft. 1,000 SF 1,767.10 200,000--299,999 sq. ft. 1,000 SF 1,767.10 831 Quality restaurant 1,000 SF 5,178.58 832 High turnover sit-down restaurant 1,000 SF 3,954.79 833 Fast food restaurant w/o'drive-thru 1,000 SF 10,348.83 834 Fast food restaurant w/drive-thru 1,000 SF 8,894.02 840 Auto care center 1,000 SF 963.64 845/846 Service station w/convenience 1,000 SF 1,7 45.37 847 Self-service car wash 1 STL 1,677.78 848 Tire Store 1,000 SF 888.38 851 Conv. store (open 24 hrs.) (w/o gasoline pumps) 1,000 SF 1,522.43 853 Convenience store w/gasoline pumps 1,000 SF 1,970.52 890 Furniture store . 1,000 SF 140.37 911 Walk-in bank 1,000 SF 1,452.32 912 Drive-in bank 1,000 SF 3,660.4 7 12 D D II I i I ~ ~ D i I I ~ ~ I I II ~ i TABLE 7.4 City of Apopka Transportation Impact Fees Land Use Units Il1:lpact Fee * Single-family residential Unit $1,103.35 Condominium Unit 642.25 Planned unit development Unit 815.73 Multifamily residential Unit 669.23 Retirement community Unit 361.86 Mobile home Unit 527.88 Hotel/motel Unit 997.11 Office <100,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,201.36 Office 100,000--200,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 1,672.78 Office >>200,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 1,556.59 Hardware store 1,000 sq. ft. 2,948.30 Retail <50,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 4,533.42 Retail 50,000--99,999 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 3,023.28 Retail 100,000--199,999 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 3,014.45 Retail 200,000--299,999 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,980.74 Retail 300,000--399,999 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,567.78 Retail 400,000--499,999 sq: ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,338.36 Retail 500,000--999,999 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,207.98 Retail 1 ,000,000--1 ,250,000 sq. 1,000 sq. ft. 2,032.16 ft. Retail >>1,250,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. 1,997.02 Hospital 1,000 sq. ft. 2,251.83 Industrial 1,000 sq. ft. 940.16 Manufacturing 1,000 sq. ft. 519.00 Warehousing 1,000 sq. ft. 658.80 Restaurant 1,000 sq. ft. 8,006.81 Bank 1,000 sq. ft. 6,693.64 Golf course Acre 912.88 Bowling alley 1,000 sq. ft. 745.66 Service station Pump 4,281.42 Assembly 1,000 sq. ft. 1,038.94 Mini warehouse 1,000 sq. ft. 351.67 Day care 1,000 sq. ft. 2,516.27 New car sales 1,000 sq. ft. 1,784.79 13 ~ I i ~ ~ i ~ i D ~ I I ~ .~ i ~ I ~ I TABLE 7.5 City of Melbourne Transportation Impact Fees Land Use Units Impact Fee * Single-family residential Unit $ 864.00 Apartment, multi-family Unit 585.00 Automobile service station Pump 9,601.00 Bank 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 10,769.00 Clinic 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 1,932.00 Day care center 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 3,218.00 Fast food restaurant w/ drive- 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 20,534.00 through window House of worship 1,000 s.f. (GFA) . 756.00 General industrial 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 566.00 General office: Up to 100,000 s.f. 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 1,547.00 100,001--200,000 s.f. 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 998.00 Over 200,000 s.f. 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 872.00 Hospital 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 1,362.00 Hotel Room 787.00 Manufacturing 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 312.00 Medical/dental office building 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 2,774.00 Mini-warehouse 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 211.00 Mobile home Unit 435.00 Motel Room 912.00 Nursing home Bed 234.00 Private junior college Student 108.00 Private school (K--12) Student 62.00 Private university/college Student 192.00 Sit-down restaurant 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 5,486.00 Specialty retail center 1,000 s.f. (GFA) 1,482.00 14 u ~ i ~ ~ I D ~ ~ ~ I i I ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ TABLE 7.6 City of Ocoee Transportation Impact Fees Land Use Units Impact Fee * RESIDENTIAL Single Family Dwelling Unit $1,865.97 Apartment Dwelling Unit $1,292.73 Condominiumffownhouse Dwelling Unit $1,142.59 Mobile Home Dwelling Unit $937.86 LODGING Hotel-Motel Occupied Room $1,618.93 OFFICE Less than 100,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $2,977.60 100,000 to 200,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $2,307.67 Greater than 200,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $2,049.77 Medical-Dental Office Building 1,000 SF GLA $6,151.89 RETAIL Less than 50,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $4,359.57 50,000 to 100,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $2,885.07 100,000 to 199,999 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,031.10 200,000 to 299,999 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,404.55 300,000 to 399,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,4 72.09 400,000 to 499,999 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,450.15 500,000 to 999,999 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,776.35 100,000,000 to 1,250,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,920.93 Greater than 1,250,000,000 SF 1,000 SF GLA $3,776.19 Convenience Market with Gas Fueling Position $8,851.12 Pumps Gasoline/Service Station Fueling Position $3,299.55 Restaurant, Fast Food 1,000 SF GLA $12,922.02 Restaurant, High Turnover (Sit 1,000 SF GLA $12,174.65 Down) Restaurant, Quality 1,000 SF GLA $13,249.23 New Car Sales 1,000 SF GLA $4,991.75 Pharmacy/Drugstore 1,000 SF GLA $4,286.31 Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop Servicing Positions $783.00 Wholesale Tire Store Service Bays $1,016.62 SERVICES Drive-In Bank 1,000 SF GLA $4,886.08 Walk-In Bank 1,000 SF GLA $2,882.90 INSTITUTIONAL Day Care Center 1,000 SF GLA $4,170.82 MEDICAL Hospital 1,000 SF GLA $2,943.32 Nursing Home 1,000 SF GLA $279.42 INDUSTRIAL Light Industrial 1,000 SF GLA $1,565.01 Manufacturing 1,000 SF GLA $857.73 Mini-Warehousing 1,000 SF GLA $387.54 Warehousing 1,000 SF GLA $1,113.70 PORT AND TERMINAL. Truck Terminal 1,000 SF GLA $2,211.68 15 I ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ i i i ~. ~ i i I i i TABLE 7.7 City of Winter Garden Transportation Impact Fees Land Use Units Impact Fee * South of Turnpike North of Turnpike Single-family residential Dwelling $2,183.00 $1,681.00 Multi Family Dwelling 1,512.00 1,164.00 Mobil Home Dwelling 1,097.00 845.00 Office 0-100,000 1,000 s.f. 3,921.00 3,019.00 Office 100,001--200,000 1,000 s.f. 2,922.00 2,250.00 Office 200,000 > 1,000 s.f. 2,420.00 1,863.00 Retail 0-50,000 1,000 s.f. 10,898.00 8,390.00 Retail 50,001 - 100,000 1,000 s.f. 7,060.00 5,435.00 Retail 100,001 - 200,000 1,000 s.f. 7,087.00 5,456.00 Retail 200,001 - 300,000 1,000 s.f. 7,157.00 5,510.00 Retail 300,001 - 400,000 1,000 s.f. 6,350.00 4,889.00 Retail 400,001 - 500,000 1,000 s.f. 5,809.00 4,472.00 Retail 500,001 - 1,000,000 1,000 s.f. 5,350.00 4,119.00 Retail 1 ,000,001 - 1,200,000 1,000 s.f. 4,774.00 3,675.00 Retail >1,200,000 1,000 s.f. 4,307.00 3,316.00 Hospital 1,000 s.f. 4,069.00 3,133.00 Industrial (Park) 1,000 s.f. 1,690.00 1,301.00 Manufacturing 1,000 s.f. 926.00 713.00 Warehousing 1,000 s.f. 1,203.00 926.00 Hotel/motel Room 1,806.00 1,390.00 Restaurant (Hi turnover / sit- 1,000 s.f. 13,382.00 10,302.00 down) Bank 1,000 s.f. 15,721.00 12,102.00 Mini warehouse 1,000 s.f. 606.00 467.00 Day care 1,000 s.f. 5,382.00 4,143.00 Raquet Club 1,000 s.t. 2,037.00 1,568.00 Library 1,000 s.f. 13,095.00 10,081.00 New Car Sales 1,000 s.f. 3,631.00 2,795.00 Post Office 1,000 s.f. 10,479.00 8,064.00 School 1,000 s.f. 2,891.00 2,225.00 Drug Store 1,000 s.f. 8,739.00 6,728.00 Fast Food w/Drive Thru 1,000 s.f. 39,212.00 30,186.00 Medical/Dental Office 1,000 s.f. 8,761.00 6,745.00 Auto Care Center 1,000 s.f. 1,598.00 1,230.00 Quick Lube Center Bay(s) 4,031.00 3,103.00 Gas station w/Convenience Mart Pump 9,006.00 6,933.00 Gas station w/out Convenience Pump 9,326.00 7,179.00 Mart Convenience Store w/gas pumps 1,000 s.f. 30,020.00 23,110.00 Convenience Store w/out gas 1,000 s.f. 40,830.00 31,432.00 pumps Car wash and detailing Stall 583.00 449.00 Bowling Alley 1,000 s.f. 3,227.00 2,484.00 Movie Theater 1,000 s.f. 15,424.00 11,874.00 Business Park (to be used for all 1,000 s.f. 3,094.00 2,382.00 speculative heavy commercial or industrial incubators) 16 i ~ I D ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ I I i I I i D I The table below provides a comparison of selected land uses and the associated fees imposed by each of these cities. TABLE 7.8 Comparison of Selected Fees Land Use Ormond Deltona Winter Apopka Melbourne Ocoee Winter Edgewater Beach Springs Garden I (Proposed) Single $120.00 $502.33 $890.95 $1,103.35 $864.00 $1,865.97 $2,183.00 $1,370.00 Family Apartment $120.00 $489.04 $539.13 $669.23 $585.00 $1,292.73 $1,512.00 $1,012.46 Hotel $84.00 $292.50 $592.07 $997.11 $787.00 $1,618.93 $1,806.00 $994.75 Industrial $74.00 $280.00 $914.75 $940.16 $566.00 $1,565.01 $1,690.00 $998.83 Mini- $74.00 $100.00 $26.44 $351.67 $211.00 $387.54 $606.00 $230.57 warehouse Bank $997.00 $248.00 $3,660.47 $6,693.64 $10,769.00 $4,886.08 $15,721.00 $8,995.93 wi drive thru Medical $747.00 $128.00 $3,614.34 $2,201.36 $2,774.00 $6,151.89 $8,761.00 $3,907.73 Office (office< 1 0 ksfi Retail $615.00 $790.00 $1,707.67 $3,023.28 $1,482.00 $2,885.07 $7,060.00 $2,149.20 (0-99 ksf) (\ 0-\ 00 (50-\ 00 ksf) (50-\ 00 ksf) (no size limit) (50-100 ksf) (50-\00 ksf) (to-1OOksf) ksf) 1 South ofTumpike 2 ksf= 1,000 sq. ft. This table illustrates the wide variation in transportation impact fees among the different municipalities. Because of this variation, it is difficult to draw any conclusions regarding any "average" impact fees, and therefore, this Study uses these other impact fees more as reference points than as guidelines. Because the City of Edgewater is contained within . Volusia County, this Study made use of the Volusia County data, and the resulting proposed transportation impact fees were compared to those charged by other municipalities as a reasonableness check. 17 ~ i i i I I i i U I I I I ~ I ~ i ~ i 8. VOLUSIA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM In September of 2003, Volusia County's Roadway Impact Fee program was reviewed and updated by TEl Engineers & Planners and Tindale-Oliver & Associates, Inc. The County's Roadway Impact Fee program is based on information derived from local, regional and national information resources, and provides a very good foundation upon which to build the City of Edgewater's Transportation Impact Fee program. This Study for the City of Edgewater makes use of certain data common to the Volusia County Roadway Impact Fee program to provide, to the greatest extent feasible, conformity between the County's existing transportation impact fee system and the City's proposed transportation impact fee system. This conformity will reduce the potential for confusion in the development community, and will minimize the likelihood for project location decisions to be based primarily on transportation impact fee issues. Volusia County has established a formula to calculate traffic impact fees to be charged by the County for a variety of different types of development. This formula includes a number of different factors, some of which vary by development type, and some of which are fixed. The formula developed for and used by Volusia County is: Impact Fee = {(TGR+2) X (%NT) X (DF) X (ATL) X (CC+LM)}+WCL In this formula, the various factors are defined as: trip generation rate (this rate varies by land use) percent of all trips that are new trips generated by a land use distribution factor of trips using the thoroughfare network average trip length on the thoroughfare system average road construction cost per lane mile weighted capacity per lane mile TGR = %NT = DF = ATL = CC+ LM = WCL 18 I I i ~ I ~ U i ~ I ~ ~ I I U ~ ~ ~ I 9. PROPOSED EDGEW ATER LAND USE CATEGORIES For the City of Edgewater, this Study developed a list of land use types that fonn the basis of the schedule of City of Edgewater transportation impact fees. The recommended list of land use types for the City of Edgewater's transportation impact fee program is based on similar land uses adopted by Volusia County. In discussions with City staff, it was noted that additional land use types that were not addressed by the County were needed in Edgewater and these have been included in the recommended list. The list of land uses is intended to address the most common types of development anticipated to occur in the City, but is not intended to be all-inclusive. The recommended list ofland use types is shown in Table 9.1. There may be instances when a proposed land use type does not fit neatly into any of the types on the list. Also, some developers may feel that the prescribed impact fee associated with their development type is higher than it should be. In its enacting ordinance and/or policies and procedures, the City will prescribe the methods to be used to calculate an alternate impact fee for land uses that are not specifically listed. Usually, this is done by applying the fee for the land use that most closely matches the one in question. In addition, proVisions will be made for ~he developer of any particular property to produce site and condition-specific data and analysis in support of a revise i'mpact fee. This data will be reviewed by the City, and if it is found to be acceptable, may be used as the basis for a revised site-specific impact fee. 19 ~ ~ I I i ~ i i i I ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I I TABLE 9.1 Land Use Type and Units of Measure ITE Code Use Unit Residential 210 Single Family DU 220 Apartment DU 230 Residential Condominium/ Townhouse DU 240 Mobile Home Park DU 310 Hotel Rooms 320 Motel Rooms 620 Nursing Home Beds Office and Financial 610 Hospital 1,000 sf 710 Office under 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 710 Office over 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 714 Corporate headquarters building 1,000 sf 720 Medical Office 1,000 sf 750 Office Park 1,000 sf 760 Research Center 1,000 sf 770 Business Park 1,000 sf 911 Bank w/out Drive-through 1,000 sf 912 Bank w/Drive-through 1,000 sf Industrial 110 Light Industry 1,000 sf 130 Industrial Park 1,000 sf . 140 Manufacturing 1,000 sf 150 Warehouse 1,000 sf 151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf Retail 812 Building Materials and Lumber Store 1,000 sf 816 Hardware/Paint Store 1,000 sf 820 Retail, less than 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 820 Retail, 10,000 - 99,999 sf 1,000 sf 820 Retail, 100,000 - 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf 820 Retail, Greater than 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf 831 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sf 832 High-Turnover Restaurant. 1,000 sf 834 Fast Food Restaurant 1,000 sf CBD Sandwich Shop 1,000 sf 836 Bar / Lounge / Drinking Place 1,000 sf 837 Quick lube Bays 840 Auto Carel Detailing 1,000 sf 841 New and Used Car Sales 1,000 sf 20 I U i i I ~ ~ ~ i i I ~ I ~ U i i ~ I TABLE 9.1 (cont'd) Land Use Type and Units of Measure ITE Code Use Unit Retail 847 Car Wash 1,000 sf 849 Tire Store / Auto Repair Bays 850 Supermarket 1,000 sf 851 Convenience Store 1,000 sf 853 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps 1,000 sf Convenience Store w/Gas and Fast 1,000 sf Food 862 Home Improvement Store 1,000 sf 881 Pharmacy/Drugstore w/Drive Through 1,000 sf 890 Furniture Store 1,000 sf Recreational General Recreation Parking Space 411 City Park Parking Space 412 Major Park Parking Space 416 Campground / RV park space 420 Marina slip Major Sports Facility Parking Space Miscellaneous 444 Movie Theater Screens 560 Church 1,000 sf 565 Day Care 1,000 sf Airport Hanger 1,000 sf Veterinary Clinic 1,000 sf 21 ~ ~ I ~ i iJ I D i i I i I ~ i I D I I 10. TRIP GENERATION RATE A "trip" is one of the factors used in the calculation of a transportation impact fee. Every trip has an origin and a destination, defined as the "trip-ends". Using this logic, a round trip from home to work and back results in four trip-ends. That is, in the morning there is an origin at home and a destination at the workplace, and at the end of the day, there is an origin at the workplace and a destination at home. To avoid overcounting, trip-ends are divided by two to generate the number of "trips" associated with a specific land use. In this case, the four trip-ends are associated with two trips... one from home to work, and one from work to home. In this Study, trip generation rates are based on information contained in the sixth edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manuals and on local studies related to specific municipalities and counties. The Trip Generation manuals provide trip generation rate characteristics for a number of different land use types. This information, along with generation rate characteristics identified in other professional reference literature and studies of communities throughout the United States provides information that is representative of the trip generation characteristics of various land uses in the City of Edgewater. 11. PERCENT NEW TRIPS There is very little data available through ITE with regard to the percent of new trips generated by a particular land use. For this Study, the percent-new-trips data was reviewed from traffic impact fee ordinances for other central Florida counties and municipalities, and was found to be generally consistent with the information presented in the Volusia County study. For this reason, and to maintain conformity with the Volusia County model, this Study is based on the new trip percentages used in the Volusia County study. The Volusia County data was developed using information from national and local traffic studies. As noted above, this information tends to be relatively uniform, and for that reason, the calculation 22 ~ ~ ~ ~ i D D ~ ~ ~ ~ I I i i I ~ ~ I of Edgewater-specific new trip percentages would not be a cost effective task. The percent new trips factors used to calculate the proposed transportation impact fees for various land use categories are shown in Table 15.1. 12. DISTRIBUTION FACTOR In the development of a transportation impact fee, the distribution of trips on city, county and state roads must be accounted for. In the case of the City of Edgewater, the traffic impact fee that is to be collected will be used, in most cases, for improvements to the city's transportation network. City traffic impact fee funds will not, as a general rule, be used to fund improvements to county or state transportation facilities. The City may elect however, to use its traffic impact fee funds as matching funds to combine with state or county funds. This could be done to accelerate state or county roadway projects to make improvements that affect the ability of the City to manage growth within the municipal limits. To determine the distribution of trips made on the city's street network as opposed to county and state roads with precision, a local travel study would need to be performed. As part of the local traffic study, drivers would be stopped at several locations in the City and would be asked to answer a questionnaire regarding their origin and destination as well as the route they plan to take for their trip. This is a very time and labor intensive project, and is outside the scope of this Study. The V olusia County study determined that 29.7 % of all vehicle miles traveled in V olusia County take place on the interstate system. This leaves 70.3% of the total traveled miles in the County distributed over all other local roads. For the purpose of this Study, it was estimated that approximately 40% of all traveled miles in the Edgewaterarea take place on City of Edgewater local roads and this was factored into the calculation of transportation impact fees for Edgewater. 23 I ~ i ~ i D ~ D ~ iJ I U I ~ i ~ I ~ i 13. AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH As with the percent new trips, there is very little data available through ITE with regard to the average trip length associated with a particular land use. Again, to maintain conformity with the Volusia County model, this Study makes use of the trip length data identified in the Volusia County study, but with certain adjustments. Typically, trip lengths within a municipality are somewhat shorter than corresponding trip lengths found in the unincorporated county. This is due primarily to the more compact and urban nature of a city. The trip-making characteristics found through several origin/destination studies indicates that the trip lengths used in the Volusia County study should be adjusted downward to more accurately reflect actual conditions in a municipal area. This adjustment generally ranges from 55% to 70% of the county-wide trip length data, and although the Volusia County data is used as a basis, it is recommended that a conservative adjustment factor of 75% be applied to the county trip length data. This 25% reduction has been applied to the trip lengths used to develop the proposed City of Edgewater transportation impact fees. The adjusted trip lengths used to calculate the proposed transportation impact fees for various land use categories are shown in Table 15.1. 14. CONSTRUCTION COST For any given type of new development, the associated traffic impact fee should be based on the costs of all aspects of road construction (right-of-way, design/permitting, construction/inspection) necessary to support the anticipated increase in traffic due to that new development. The construction cost factor used in the impact fee equation should reflect the total cost of construction of roadway projects in the area in the recent past, and should also reflect anticipated costs for planned roadway projects. 24 ~ ~ iI ~ ~ I 11 i i i ~ U ~ i ~ ~ I I o Discussions with City of Edgewater staff revealed that the City of Edgewater has not constructed any major roadway projects in the last five years and has not yet budgeted for any new, major transportation facilities in the next five years. . The V olusia County Traffic Engineering department was contacted to determine the availability of detailed information regarding recent and planned County roadway projects. In addition, the cost information compiled for the September 2003 Volusia County Roadway Impact Fee Update study was examined. Since the City has no cost data upon which to base an estimate of future construction costs, this Study relied on cost data from the Volusia County study as well as cost information from the City of Deltona and other central Florida counties and . municipalities. The cost information available from the V olusia County study is the most pertinent to the City of Edgewater since it is based on historic (as far back as 1997) and proposed (as far forward as 2020) road construction project costs in the immediate area. The Volusia County construction cost information indicates that the average cost per lane mile for county road projects is approximately $1,268,000, and the average cost per lane mile for state road projects is approximately $2,351,000. Of the total lane miles represented, approximately 62% were county roads, and approximately 38% were state roads. When these percentages are applied to the total lane miles of county and state roads to derive a weighted cost for each, the weighted cost per lane mile for county roads is found to be approximately $786,200 and the weighted cost per lane mile for state roads is found to be approximately $893,400. Combined, these result in a weighted average cost per lane mile for all roads of approximately $1,680,000. For comparison, in Lake County the weighted average cost per lane mile for all roads is approximately $1,703,000. 25 I I i ~ i ~ I ~ D ~ i ~ I D II ~ ~ i I These weighted average costs are within 2% of each other, and this close correlation reinforces the applicability of the V olusia County cost figures as a basis for development of the City of Edgewater's transportation impact fee. 15. PROPOSED EDGEWATER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES For several reasons, it would be prudent for the City of Edgewater to adopt an impact fee schedule based on the weighted average construction cost of $1 ,680,000 per lane mile. First, the weighted average cost of building roads in V olusia County should be used in the impact fee equation without regard for whether the road being built is a municipal, county or state road. Basing the City's transportation impact fee on construction costs that do not include county and state roads does not accurately account for the significant amount of existing and future traffic impact on those roads. In this manner, the transportation impact fee will be based on historical data that includes municipal, county and state roads, and accurately reflects the average cost of new road construction without regard to the ownership of the road. Second, by usmg the weighted average cost of all road construction, the City acknowledges that funds generated by transportation impact fees are insufficient to completely address the costs of new facilities made necessary by growth, and recognizes that other additional sources of funds will be required in order to fully finance necessary transportation network improvements. Last, by usmg the weighted average construction cost to calculate the City of Edgewater's Transportation impact fee, the City will have a clearer ability to use its . impact fee funds to assist with the construction of county or state roads as the City deems appropriate. If state and county road costs are not included in the impact fee construction cost component, the City would be susceptible to a court challenge if it wanted to use transportation impact fee funds on county or state road projects that benefit the City. 26 u ~ I I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I I i ~ ~ i D ~ Improvements to state and county roads will become an increasingly higher priority for the City as growth continues to impact area roads. For these reasons, it is recommended that the City of Edgewater transportation impact fee be calculated based on the weighted average construction cost of $1,680,000 per lane mile. All of the above factors are taken into account in the calculation of the Proposed City of Edgewater Transportation Impact Fees as shown in Table 15.1. 27 i I ~ I D I ~ ~ ~ i U ~ I i ~ ~. ~ U ~ Table 15.1 PROPOSED CITY OF EDGEWATER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES (Fee based on weighted average construction cost of$1,680,000 per lane mile) ITE Use Unit Trip Trip % New FEE PER Code Rate Length. Trips unit (or) 1,000 s.f. Residential 210 Single Family DU 9.21 4.53 100.00 $1,370.00 220 Apartment DU 6.46 4.77 100.00 $1,012.46 230 Residential Condominium/ Townhouse DU 5.94 3.45 100.00 $673.83 240 Mobile Home Park DU 4.86 3.32 100.00 $530.21 310 Hotel Rooms 8.72 4.78 72.65 $994.75 320 Motel Rooms 6.28 3.47 77.63 $554.74 620 Nursing Home Beds 2.65 2.00 88.50 $153.86 Office and Financial 610 Hospital 1,000 sf 15.78 3.92 81.60 $1,659.64 710 Office under 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 19.45 4.18 93.62 $2,499.54 710 Office over 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 12.72 4.04 94.35 $1,593.15 714 Corporate headquarters building 1,000 sf 7.72 3.37 93.00 $793.94 720 Medical Office 1,000 -sf 36.48 3.72 87.70 $3,907.73 750 Office Park 1,000 sf 15.01 5.63 82.00 $2,274.51 760 Research Center 1,000 sf 7.11 4.77 87.00 $967.4 7 770 Business Park 1,000 sf 16.87 4.69 81.80 $2,125.24 911 Bank w/out Drive-through 1,000 sf 153.98 1.71 35.80 $3,092.80 912 Bank w/Drive-through 1 ,000 sf 291.04 1.83 51.52 $8,995.93 Industrial 110 Light Industry 1,000 sf 6.98 4.68 93.20 $998.83 130 Industrial Park 1,000 sf 8.26 4.99 92.00 $1,244.10 140 Manufacturing 1,000 sf 3.82 4.68 93.60 $548.57 150 Warehouse 1 ,000 sf 4.95 4.59 92.00 $686.00 151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf 2.52 2.99 93.20 $230.57 Retail 812 Building Materials and Lumber Store 1,000 sf 32.88 4.16 69.80 $3,134.68 816 Hardware/Paint Store 1,000 sf 51.29 6.56 74.00 $8,169.88 820 Retail, less than 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 144.40 1.39 51.25 $3,367.33 820 Retail, 10,000 - 99,999 sf 1,000 sf 73.50 1.47 60.50 $2,149.20 820 Retail, 100,000 - 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf 27.67 2.17 84.00 $1,654.35 820 Retail, Greater than 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf , 29.18 2.81 86.00 $2,312.90 831 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sf 95.63 2.22 77.80 $5,419.87 832 High- Turnover Restaurant 1,000 sf 148.84 2.11 75.35 $7,770.62 834 Fast Food Restaurant 1,000 sf 552.12 1.43 58.04 $15,089.85 CBD Sandwich Shop 1,000 sf 19.30 4.05 100.00 $2,569.17 836 Bar / Lounge / Drinking Place 1,000 sf 130.34 3.17 72.00 $9,776.66 28 ~ I I ~ ~ I i D I I II I I I ~ D ~ a ~ Table 15.1 (cont'd) PROPOSED CITY OF EDGEWATER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES (Fee based on weighted average construction cost of$1,680,000 per lane mile) ITE Use Unit Trip Trip % New FEE PER Code Rate Length Trips unit (or) 1,000 s.f. Retail 837 Quick lube Bays 41.69 2.56 71.13 $2,490.77 840 Auto Carel Detailing 1,000 sf 35.76 2.39 74.32 $2,084.09 841 New and Used Car Sales 1,000 sf 37.20 3.21 78.80 $3,088.52 847 Car Wash 1,000 sf 129.60 1.66 69.00 $4,867.28 849 Tire Store I Auto Repair Bays 30.55 2.09 70.70 $1,484.14 850 Supermarket 1,000 sf 112.18 1.67 53.00 $3,267.69 851 Convenience Store 1,000 sf 755.56 1.02 40.66 $10,305.17 853 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps 1,000 sf 793.28 1.18 28.63 $8,808.25 Convenience Store w/Gas and Fast Food 1,000 sf 940.20 1.91 32.67 $19,238.37 862 Home Improvement Store 1,000 sf 38.13 3.09 50.00 $1,934.52 881 Pharmacy/DruQstore wiD rive ThrouQh 1 ,000 sf 89.89 1.74 41.33 $2,116.93 890 Furniture Store 1,000 sf 4.81 4.06 59.12 $379.44 Recreational Parking General Recreation Space 3.02 4.43 95.00 $417.07 Parking 411 City Park Space 14.23 2.84 96.67 $1,282.03 Parking 412 Major Park Space 2.11 4.05 100.00 $280.88 416 Campground I RV park Space 3.90 4.55 77.00 $448.20 420 Marina Slip 2.97 5.77 94.67 $533.33 Parking Major Sports Facility Space 2.10 3.63 100.00 $250.58 Miscellaneous 444 Movie Theater Screens 124.48 1.89 82.12 $6,334.22 560 Church 1,000 sf 9.11 2.97 90.00 $799.42 565 Day Care 1,000 sf 75.13 1.55 73.32 $2,800.18 Airport Hanger 1,000 sf 4.96 8.36 92:00 $1,251.97 Veterinary Clinic 1,000 sf 32.80 1.77 70.00 $1,334.52 29 I I I D D i II I ~ II I I I D ~ D D D I 16. ESCALATION FACTOR As right-of-way, construction and other associated costs change over time, the transportation impact fees established by the City of Edgewater should be examined to determine whether adjustments to the fees are necessary to keep pace with the overall cost of road building. Often, cities address this issue only once every few years, and this can lead to significant changes in the fee from one year to another. A more uniform approach is to adjust the fee by a small amount each year, thereby reducing the probability of "sticker shock" in any given year. This annual adjustment can be included as part of the implementing ordinance or a separate resolution, and the transportation impact fees would then be automatically adjusted by a certain amount each year. If at any time, the City decides to change the adjustment rate, the change can be made via an ordinance revision or a new resolution. Based on recent trends in construction costs and right-of-way costs, it would be appropriate to set the initial annual adjustment factor at 5%, and then review the adjustment factor periodically against then-current land costs as recorded by the V olusia County Property Appraiser, and Construction Cost Index figures published by the Engineering News Record. 17. EXEMPTIONS The City may elect to offer full or partial exemption from transportation impact fees to developments providing affordable housing, jobs, or other benefits determined appropriate by the City: This determination will be made on a case-by-case basis, and each such decision will be confirmed by the City Council. 18. CREDITS The City of Edgewater applies all available fuel tax sharing funds to road maintenance projects, and this policy is anticipated to continue for the foreseeable future. Because gas 30 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U Ii ~ D ~ U I i ~ i D ~ tax funds are not used by the City of Edgewater for capital transportation projects, this Study does not take into account any gas tax credit in the calculation of the impact fee. 19. DRAFT ORDINANCE To implement the proposed transportation impact fees, the City of Edgewater will need to enact a Transportation Impact Fee ordinance. This ordinance will establish the transportation impact fee fund and will contain language satisfying the other various legal requirements to allow the City to implement such an impact fee. The Transportation Impact Fee structure can be contained within the ordinance itself or it may be established by separate resolution of the City Council. The proposed Transportation Impact Fee ordinance contained in Appendix II establishes the fee structure within the body of the ordinance. If the City of Edgewater wishes to establish the fee structure by separate resolution instead, the ordinance will need to be modified accordingly. 31 ~ ~ APPENDIX I V ALIDATION REPORT I 0 i D i ~ D I D ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ I I I i ~ ~ ~ ~ il D U I i ~ ~ ~ D ~ U ~ U Validation for Port Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna Prepared for: B & H Consultants, Inc. 522 Whiskey Creek Ct. Ocoee, Florida 34761 Prepared by: Leftwich Consulting Engine'ers, Inc. 12151 Science Drive, Suite I 0 I Orlando, Florida 32826 August 2, 2004 i i I ~ i D ~ ~ I ~ U I I i I I i ~ ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES.................................... ................. ..................................................................... i i LIST OF FI GURES ........................................................................................................................ i i 1.0 INTRa D U CTI ON .........................................................................................;.................... I 2.0 TRANSPORT A nON MODELING PROCESS .............................:.................................. 3 3.0 TRIP D ISTRIB UTI ON MODEL............................................... ................ ......................... 5 4.0 MODE CHOICE MO DEL............. .......................................................... ...... ............ ......... 6 5.0 HIGHWAY ASSIGNMENT MODEL ...............................................................................8 6.0 MODEL REFINEMENT.. ........... ................ ....... ......:... ................ ... ............. .... ........ ........... 8 7.0 MODEL VALIDA TION SUMMARy............................................................................... 9 I I i D ~ ~ I D ~ ~ i Ii ~ I' U D Q ~ i LIST OF TABLES Trip Distribution Summary.....................................:.................................................................. 5 2 Auto Occupancy Rates............................................................................................................... 7 3 System-Wide Statistics for the Original CFRPM III ................................................................. 8 4 System-Wide Statistics for the Updated CFRPM III ................................................................. 9 5 Percent Root Mean Square Error for the Original CFRPM III ................................................ 10 6 Percent Root Mean Square Error for the Updated CFRPM IlL.............................................. 10 LIST OF FIGURES Geographic Area Covered by the CFRPM III ........................................................................... 2 2 CFRPM III Model Chain.................. .................................................. ....................................... 4 ii D U I ~ D D i ~ D ~ ~ I i ~ D D D o i 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report, entitled "Validation for Port Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna", documents the base year model development and the model validation results. The Central Florida Regional Planning Model Version 3 (CFRPM III) was used for this analysis. 1.1 Background of the CFRPM III The CFRPM III includes the geographic area covered by District Five (Orange, Osceola, Seminole, Volusia, Brevard, Flagler, Sumter, Lake, and the Northeastern portion of Polk County, See Figure I). Also in Figure I, are the municipalities New Smyrna, Port Orange, and Edgewater.Version III of the CFRPM includes the year 2000 highway and transit network. Transit networks are included for LYNX, VOTRAN, Space Coast, and Suntran transit systems. A truck model is also included for the district for heavy and light trucks. Validation for Pon Orange. Edgewater. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers. Inc. August 2004 ~ I I ~ \ \\~~""'I r ~ ~ i MMION o D i u ORANGE ~ ~ Legend o District 5 County Boundary o Port Orange o New Smyrna o Edgewater ~ u ~ ~ ~ Figure 1 Geographic Area Covered by the CFRPM III ~ Validation for Port Orange, Edgewaler, and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2 August 2004 ~ ~ i ~ D ~ ~ ~ II I ~ Ii I I I U ~ ~ ~ 2.0 TRANSPORTATION MODELING PROCESS The model chain is depicted in Figure 2. Validation for the model was performed using the Nested Logic Multi-Path Multi-Period Transit process. The modules are: . EXT - External Trip Model GEN - Trip Generation Model HNET - Highway Network Building HPATH - Build Highway Paths DISTRIB - Trip Distribution Model TNET - Transit Network Building TPA TH - Build Transit Paths MODE - Mode Choice Model T ASSIGN - Transit Assignment HASSIGN - Highway and Truck Assignment TEV AL - Evaluate Transit Systems HEV AL - Evaluate Highway Systems . . . . . . . . . . . Validation for PO" Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. 3 August 2004 ~ i i1 FINAL HIGHWAY & TRUCK ASSIGNMENT (HASSIGN) I ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ D ij i ~ ~ E Note: (I) Used to convert person trips into vehicle trips that are assigned to the highway network in the first highway assignment. (2) This step is used to estimate congested travel speeds needed by the mode choice model. ~ Figure 2 ~ CFRPM III Model Chain Validalion for Port Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna Leftwich Consul ling Engineers, Inc. 4 August 2004 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ U i i I I ~ i ~ D I ~ 3.0 TRIP DISTRIBUTION MODEL Trip lengths from each end of the urban areas were reviewed for their ability to interact with a larger district-wide network. Table 1 shows the trip lengths and the trip distribution summary results from the model. Table 1 Trip Distribution Summary Average Year Trip 2000 Length Trip Purpose Trips (Minutes) Home Based Work (HBW) 1,605,434 22.175 Home Based Shopping (HBSH) 1,451,084 21.394 Home Based Social/Recreation (HBSR) 1,018,235 17.181 Home Based Other (HBO) 2,873,377 17.513 Non-Home Based (NHB) 3,306,597 16.099 Light Truck Internal-Internal (L Tll) 310,627 15.656 Heavy Truck Internal-Internal (HTll) 135,804 14.828 Taxi (T AXJ) 805,914 16.775 External-Internal (EJ) 301,154 39.249 Airport Tourist (APT-T) 58,452 42.910 Airport Resident (APT-R) 16,873 59.586 Airport External-Internal (APT-EI) 9,634 71.940 Orange County Convention Center Tourist (OCCC-T) 10,121 31.224 Orange County Convention Center Resident (OCCC-R) 8,684 56.628 Orange County Convention Center External-Internal (OCCC-EJ) 10,345 65.618 Universal Orlando Tourist (UNI- T) 71,945 32.192 Universal Orlando Resident (UNI-R) 11,751 55.5 80 Universal Orlando External-Internal (UNI-EJ) 12,154 72.284 Sea World Tourist (SEW-T) 15837 30.903 Sea World Resident (SEW-R) 5,053 57.453 Sea World External-Internal (SEW-EJ) 4,530 69.857 Disney World Tourist (OIS- T) 205,071 36.691 Disney World Resident (DlS-R) 13,681 65.607 Disney World External-Internal (OIS-EJ) 10,764 67.066 Kennedv Soace Center Tourist (KSC- T) 11,487 88.694 Kennedv Soace Center Resident (KSC-R) 977 86.477 Kennedy Soace Center External-Internal (KSC-EI) 1,222 100.882 Port Canaveral Tourist (PC- T) 11,170 79.484 Port Canaveral Resident (PC-R) 3,639 83.857 Port Canaveral External-Internal (PC-EI) '3,765 93.982 Validalion for Pon Orange. Edgewater. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. 5 AugUSI 2004 ~ Q I U D D ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ a u ~ D ~ ~ ~ 4.0 MODE CHOICE MODEL The Mode Choice Model determines the modal splits for the trips in the model. Auto Occupancy rates determine the number of vehicles in the network. Trip production provides person trips that are split into auto and transit person trips. Auto person trips are multiplied by the inverse of the vehicle occupancy by purpose to obtain vehicle trips. The nested logic mode choice model is used for home-based work and non-work trips. The Auto Occupancy for the special attraction trips is applied using values derived from the non-residential surveys. These rates were updated and expanded from the survey data for District Five. The rates used for this model are shown in Table 2. Validation for Pon Orange, Edgewaler, and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. 6 August 2004 i ~ I ~ I i I ~ i I I I i I ~ ~ i I u Table 2 Auto Occupancy Rates Auto Vehicle Trip Purpose Occupancy Factor Occupancy Home Based Work .893 1.12 Home Based Shopping .666 1.50 Home Based Social Recreational .613 1.63 Home Based Other .589 1.70 Non-Home Based .747 1.34 Airport Tourist .483 2.07 Airport Resident .633 1.58 Airport External-Internal .571 1.75 Universal Orlando Tourist .569 3.72 Universal Orlando Resident JI8 3.15 Universal Orlando External-Internal .264 3.79 MOM Studios Tourist .248 4.04 MOM Studios Resident J04 3.29 MOM Studios External-Internal .29] 3.44 Animal Kinf!dom Tourist .257 3.89 Animal Kingdom Resident .308 3.25 Animal Kinf!dom External-Internal J26 3.07 EPCOT Tourist .248 4.04 EPCOT Resident .266 3.76 EPCOT External-Internal .230 4J5 Magic Kinf!dom Tourist .254 3.94 Maf!ic Kingdom Resident .258 3.87 Magic Kingdom External-Internal JI3 3.]9 Orange County Convention Center Tourist J92 2.55 Oranf!e County Convention Center Resident .465 2.]5 Orange County Convention Center External-Internal .4] 7 2.40 Sea World Tourist .3 ]0 3.23 Sea World Resident J44 2.9] Sea World External-Internal .302 3Jl Typhoon Laf!oon Tourist .256 3.90 Typhoon Laf!oon Resident .352 2.84 Typhoon Lagoon External-Internal .266 3.76 Pleasure IslandlDowntown Disnev Tourist .334 2.99 Pleasure IslandlDowntown Disnev Resident .392 2.55 Pleasure Island/Downtown Disnev External-Internal .322 3.11 Blizzard Beach Tourist .218 4.58 Blizzard Beach Resident .258 3.87 Blizzard Beach External-Internal .203 4.92 Kennedy Space Center Tourist .263 3.74 Kennedy Space Center Resident .325 2.89 Kennedy Space Center External-Internal .250 3.77 Port Canaveral Tourist .283 2.75 Port Canaveral Resident .353 2.55 Port Canaveral External-Internal .337 3.14 Disnev Tourist .2]9 4.57 Disney Resident .256 3.91 Disney External-Internal .232 4.3] Validation for PO" Orange, Edgewaler. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulling Engineers. Inc. 7 August 2004 I U ~ I I U i ~ I I ~ i ~ ~ I i ~ D I The output from the nested logit mode choice program is a series of highway and transit trip table files which are subsequently used in the highway and transit assignment models. 5.0 HIGHWAY ASSIGNMENT MODEL The highway assignment model for the CFRPM III assigns four (4) trip purposes onto the highway network. These purposes are as follows: . Low Occupancy Vehicles (LOV) High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) Light Trucks Heavy Trucks . . . 6.0 MODEL REFINEMENT The CFRPM III was reviewed for Port Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna to help match 2000 year model values to 2000 link count functional class, number of lanes, area type, and centroid locations were reviewed and changed if needed to better reflect the existing network. Tables 3 and 4 show the system-wide statistics for the Original and Updated Models. Table 3 System-Wide Statistics for the Original CFRPM III Original CFRPM III Statistic Study Area Edgewater Port Orange New Smyrna Number of Links 18,620 264 207 226 System Miles 6,602.45 139.72 86.29 87.38 Lane Miles 16,076.79 330.87 217.29 203.16 Directional Miles 11,819.76 245.05 156.93 161.46 VMT Using Miles 30,507,044 278,425 352,973 242,585 VMT Using Counts 30,107,736 284,772 380,042 236,705 VMT V IC 1.01 0.98 0.93 1.02 VHT Using Voluines 971,375 5,711 9,218 5,182 VHT Using Counts 948,888 6,141 10,383 5,270 VHT V IC 1.02 0.93 0.89 0.98 Volumes All Links 246,851,248 2,108,160 2,538,845 1,956,442 A verage Volume 13,257.32 7,985.45 12,264.95 8,656.82 VMT all Links 84,290,936 1,223,107 1,121,976 819,563 VHT All Links 2,671,728 24,795 26,110 17,919 OriginaISpeed(~H) 35.52 40.43 36.87 36.28 Congest Speed (~H) 32.3 8 40.20 36.03 36.01 Validalion for Port Orange, Edgewater. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers. Inc. 8 August 2004 ~ D ~ i i D I I ~ I I I I I I D i I I Table 4 System-Wide Statistics for the Updated CFRPM III Updated CFRPM III Statistic Study Area Edgewater Port Orange New Smyrna Number of Links 18,620 264 207 226 System Miles 6,602.45 139.72 86.29 87.38 Lane Miles 16,076.79 330.87 217.29 203.16 Directional Miles 11,819.76 245.05 156.93 161.46 VMT Using Miles 30,566,230 281,932 359,96 I 246,237 VMT Using Counts 30, I 04,464 284,772 380,042 235,608 VMT V IC 1.02' 0.99 0.95 1.05 VHT Using Volumes 974,245 5,768 9,505 5,245 VHT Using Counts 950,601 6,112 10,353 5,206 VHT V IC 1.02 0.94 0.92 1.01 Volumes All Links 247,527,872 2,114,973 2,536,388 1,945,410 A verage Volume 13,293.66 8,011.26 12,253.08 8,608.0 I VMT all Links 84,365,336 1,228,428 1,124,633 824,520 VHT All Links 2,682,514 24,832 26,219 17,944 Original Speed (MPH) 35.53 40.49 37.12 36.36 Congest Speed (MPH) 32.33 40.26 36.24 36.08 The facility types and area types have been updated and reviewed. Centroid-connectors have been moved to appropriate locations. Counts and loads have been reviewed. Adjustments made on the overall Percent Root Mean Square Error (% RMSE) on areas were statistically better. Therefore, this model is ready for future model runs. 7.0 MODEL VALIDATION SUMMARY One key factor used in determining whether a model is validated or not is how close the model volume replicates the actual count. The % RMSE is a statistical analysis that is utilized to determine the accuracy of the model volume to the actual count. The lower the error percentage the better the model. Tables 5 and 6 show the Original and Updated model runs for the Port Orange, Edgewater, and New Smyrna areas. Validation for Pon Orange. Edgewater. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consuiling Engineers. Inc. 9 August 2004 I I i II i ~ ~ U D D U i ~ ~ I Ii ~ i i Table 5 Percent Root Mean Square Error for the Original CFRPM III Minimum New Acceptable Count Range Study Area Edgewater Port Orange Smyrna Rangel 0- 5000 53.265 49.973 40.687 48.482 45 - 55 5000 - 10000 38.551 18.645 34.794 18.583 35 - 45 10000 - 20000 24.830 13.413 26.513 12.414 27 - 35 20000- 30000 19.736 0.000 24.295 0.000 24 - 27 30000 - 40000 15.118 0.000 0.000 0.000 22 - 24 40000 - 50000 21.334 0.000 0.000 0.000 20 - 22 50000 - 60000 13.106 0.000 0.000 0.000 18 - 20 60000 - 70000 12.858 0.000 0.000 0.000 17 - 18 70000 - 80000 10.197 0.000 0.000 0.000 16 - 17 80000 - 90000 9.113 0.000 0.000 0.000 15 - 16 90000 - 100000 II. 790 0.000 0.000 0.000 14 - 15 100000 - 400000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o - 14 o - 400000 30.832 23.291 33.416 24.913 32 - 39 (I) This is the minimum acceptable range for the % RMSE values. Values less than this for a given range indicate an even better validation result. Table 6 Percent Root Mean Square Error for the Updated CFRPM III Minimum New Acceptable Count Range Study Area Edgewater Port Orange Smyrna Rangel 0- 5000 53.346 46.761 38.526 48.439 45 - 55 5000 - 10000 38.140 15.3 80 27.052 14.056 35 - 45 10000 - 20000 24.956 14.730 22.837 13.616 27 - 35 20000 - 30000 20.207 0.000 25.157 0.000 24 - 27 30000 - 40000 15.818 0.000 0.000 0.000 22 - 24 40000 - 50000 21.382 0.000 0.000 0.000 20 - 22 50000 - 60000 12.997 0.000 0.000 0.000 18 - 20 60000 - 70000 11.427 0.000 0.000 0.000 17 - 18 70000 - 80000 8.254 0.000 0.000 0.000 16 - 17 80000 - 90000 7.155 0.000 0.000 0.000 15 - 16 90000 - 100000 16.120 0.000 0.000 0.000 14 - 15 100000 - 400000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0- 14 0-400000 30.861 22.425 28.264 24.387 32 - 39 (2) This is the minimum acceptable range for the % RMSE values. Values less than this for a given range indicate an even better validation result. Validation for Pon Orange. Edgewater. and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers. Inc. 10 August 2004 i ~ ~ I ~ I I I I ~ I i ~ I i ~ ~ I i As can be seen from Table 6, the % RMSE is better each of the urban areas. The % RMSE in the original CFRPM III for Edgewater, Port Orange, and New Smyrna was 23.291,33.416,24.913, respectively. In the updated CFRPM III in Edgewater, Port Orange, and New Smyrna, the % RMSE was 22.425, 28.264, 24.387, respectively. Therefore, the change made to the highway system helped the model results. This model is ready to provide future projection in the urban areas. Validalion for Port Orange, Edgewaler, and New Smyrna Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. II August 2004 ~ I APPENDIX II i DRAFT ORDINANCE ~ I ~ D ~ i I I ~ ~ ~ i I D I i II ~ ~ D i ~ ~ i ~ ~ I ~ I i ~ I ~. i D i ARTICLE 1. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE Sec. 1-80. Short title; statutory authority; applicability of article (a) This article shall be known and may be cited as the City of Edgewater Road Impact Fee Ordinance. (b) The planning for new and expanded roads needed to serve new growth and development that generate additional traffic and the implementation of these needs through the comprehensive planning process are the responsibility of the city under F.S. 9 163.3161 et seq., F.S. ch. 166, and various special acts relating to the power of the city undertaking zoning, planning and development activities, and is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city. This article is adopted pursuant to F.S. ch. 166, and the City Charter. (c) Applicability. This article shall apply throughout the City of Edgewater. Sec. 1-90. Purpose and intent (1) The purpose of this article is to enable the city to allow growth and development to proceed in compliance with the adopted comprehensive plan and to regulate growth and development so as to require it to share in the burdens of growth by paying its pro rata share for the reasonably anticipated costs of needed roadway improvements. (2) This article is intended to implement and be consistent with the city's Comprehensive Plan. (3) It is not the purpose of this article to collect fees from growth and development in excess of the cost of the reasonably anticipated improvements to the road network needed to serve the new growth and development. It is specifically acknowledged that this article has approached the problem of determining the road impact fee in a conservative and reasonable manner. This article will only partially recoup the governmental expenditures associated with growth. Existing development will still be required to pay a fair share of the cost of needed improvements to the road network. Sec. 1-100. Definitions and rules of construction (a) For the purposes of administration and enforcement of this article, unless otherwise stated in this article, the following rules of construction shall apply to the text of this article: (1) In case of any difference of meaning or implication between the text of this article 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 in the singular number shall include the plural, and the plural the singular, unless the context clearly indicates the contrary. ~ I ~ I I ~ ~ II Q i I ~ I ~ I i I I ~ (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, a governmental entity or agency; an incorporated association or any other similar entity. (6) 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 a like kind or character. (7) Any road right-of-way used to define transportation impact fee zone boundaries may be considered to be within any zone it bounds for purposes of using these funds. (8) The land use types listed shall have the same meaning as under the Zoning Ordinance "'-~-'~':'I:'I" ",.-, "\'-~""r', :-- .....-;::1 of the city, Ordinance No.lli.s.~Ba::~;E.J3;, Edgewater, Florida, Code of Ordinances. (b) The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. Accessory use means any use or attached or detached structure clearly incidental, subordinate and related to the principal use or structure and located on the same lot with such principal use or structure. Apartment means a rental dwelling unit that is located within the same building with at least two other dwelling units. Sites included in this land use are triplexes and all types of apartment buildings. The apartments in this land use include both low-rise or "walk-up" dwellings and high-rise. Applicant means any person applying for or who has been granted a permit to proceed with a project. Average trip length means the average length in miles of external trips. Building means any structure with an impervious roof built for the support, shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels or property of any kind, which has enclosing walls for 50 percent or more of its perimeter. The term "building" shall be construed as if followed by the words "or part thereof." Building area means the area included within surrounding exterior walls, or exterior walls and fire walls. Building permit means the documentation required by the municipal building code authorizing construction or alteration of any building. Capacity means the maximum number of vehicles for a given time period which a road can safely and efficiently carry; usually expressed in terms of vehicles per day. Capital improvement includes transportation planning, preliminary engineering, engineering studies, design and construction plan preparation, land surveys, right-of-way acquisition, engineering, permitting and construction of all the necessary features for any road construction project including, but not limited to: (l) Construction of new through lanes. (2) Construction of new turn lanes. (3) Construction of new bridges. I ~ D I I D i i M I ~ I I ~ I i I I i (4) Construction of new drainage facilities and utilities in conjunction with new roadway construction. (5) Purchase and installation of traffic signalization (including new signalization and upgrading signalization). (6) Construction of curbs, medians, shoulders, sidewalks and bike paths. (7) Relocating utilities to accommodate new roadway construction. Certificate of occupancy means the official document or permit issued by the city evidencing the completion of construction of a building in accordance with all applicable codes and its legal entitlement to permanent occupancy and use. Collecting agency means the local governmental authority having jurisdiction to authorize the making of any material change of any structure, including the construction, enlargement, alteration or repair of buildings, or the local governmental authority having jurisdiction to authorize rezoning or special exceptions that make material changes in the use or appearance of land without making material changes of any structures on the land. Dwelling means one or more rooms in a building forming a separate and independent housekeeping establishment, arranged, designed or intended to be used or occupied by one family, and having no enclosed space or cooking or sanitary facilities in common with any other dwelling unit with no ingress or egress through any other dwelling unit, and containing permanent provisions for sleeping facilities, sanitary facilities and not more than one kitchen facility. Dwelling, manufactured means a dwelling fabricated in a manufacturing facility and bearing a seal certifying it is constructed to standards as adopted under the authority of F.S. 9 553.35 et seq. and rules adopted by the Florida Department of Community Affairs under Chapter 9B-1 et seq., Florida Administrative Code. Dwelling, mobile home means a single-family dwelling fabricated in a manufacturing facility, having a width of more than 8 1/2 feet and a length of more than 40 feet, and bearing a seal certifying it is constructed either to the Federal Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Code or to obsolete ANSI 119.1 Mobile Home Design and Construction Standards. Dwelling, single-family means a building containing only one dwelling. This term includes a manufactured or mobile home dwelling. Expansion. Expansion of the capacity of a road applies to all road and intersection capacity enhancements and includes extensions, widening, intersection improvements, upgrading signalization and improving pavement conditions. External trip means and refers to any trip that has either its origin or destination at the development site and that impacts the major road network. Fee payer means any person or entity who pays a transportation impact fee or hislher successor in interest with the right or entitlement to any refund of previously paid development impact fees which is required by this article and which has been expressly transferred or assigned to the successor in interest. In the absence of an express transfer or assignment or entitlement to any refund or previously paid development impact fees, the right or entitlement shall be deemed "not to run with the land." ~ I D ~ U i jJ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i ~ ~ I ~ ~ Frontage road and marginal-access road mean a minor street which parallels and is adjacent to an arterial, thoroughfare or state road, and which provides access to abutting properties and protection from through traffic. Hotel means a place of lodging that provides sleeping accommodations, restaurants, cocktail lounges, meeting and banquet rooms or convention facilities, and other retail and service shops. Some of the sites included in this land use category are actually large motels providing the facilities of a hotel. Land development activity generating traffic means the carrying out of any building activity or the making of any material change in the use or appearance of any structure or land that attracts or produces vehicular trips over and above that produced by the existing use of the land. Lot means an area of land which abuts a street and which either complies with or is exempt from the City Subdivision Regulations and is sufficient in size to meet the minimum area and width requirements for its classification. Major sports facility means a stadium or racetrack for major sports events with a permanent seating capacity of at least 5,000 spectators. Further, a major sports facility is characterized by infrequent use such that there are no more than 30 days of use per year where the facility is at, or above, ten percent occupancy. Actual fee for this land use category, provided it meets the definition, is based on the rate of frequency of use (greater than ten percent occupancy) on an annual basis. Mobile home park means an area of land under one ownership where designated spaces for mobile home dwellings are rented. The overall operation is managed on a full- or part-time basis and provides various services and facilities for common use. Motel means a place of lodging that provides sleeping accommodations and often a restaurant. Motels generally offer free on-site parking and provide little or no meeting space. Multiple-family dwelling means a building containing three or more dwellings intended to be occupied primarily by permanent residents. Off-site improvements means road improvements, other than those referenced in the definition of site-related improvements, located outside of the boundaries of the parcel proposed for development, which are required to serve the development's external trips. Percent of new trips means the number of new trips generated by the land development activity. Site-related improvements means capital improvements and right-of-way dedications for direct access improvements to the development in question. Direct access improvements includes, but not limited to, the following: (1) Site driveways and roads; (2) Right- and left-turn lanes leading to those driveways and roads; (3) Traffic control measures for those driveways and roads; (4) Acceleration/deceleration lanes; (5) Frontage roads; I ~ II I ~ U ~ U I ~ i I U I I i U ~ ~ (6) Median openings/closings; and (7) Roads necessary to provide direct access to the development. Square foot, for the purpose of the fee schedule, subsection 1-1 04( f)(1), means total square footage of a building area, excluding overhangs. Thoroughfare system means any roadway that has been designated as either ~n arterial or collector in the Transportation Element of the city's Comprehensive Plan. Thoroughfare system plan means the thoroughfare plan as set out and included in the Comprehensive Plan. Traffic generation statement means a documentation of proposed trip generation rates submitted prior to and as a part of a traffic impact analysis. This documentation shall include actual traffic generation information from a representative sampling of existing similar developments. Transportation impact fee and fee mean the fee required to be paid in accordance with this article. Trip means a one-way movement of vehicular travel from an origin (one trip end) to a destination (the other trip end). Sec. 1-101. Interpretation of article; enforcement; penalty (a) Interpretation. The provisions of this article shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purposes in the interest of public health, safety, welfare and convenience. (b) Methods of enforcement. The city shall withhold any certificate of occupancy or any final inspection approval for construction applicable to this article until the required fee has been paid. (c) Penalty. A violation of this article shall be punishable according to applicable municipal codes. (d) Building permits not to be issued to persons failing to pay fee. No building permit shall be issued by the municipality to any person who, while required by this article to pay a transportation impact fee, has failed to pay such fee. Sec. 1-102. Conflicting provisions (a) Effect on conflicting regulations. If any provision of this article is in conflict with a provision of any other municipal ordinance, resolution or regulation, then this article shall prevail to the extent of such conflict. (b) Repeal of conflicting regulations. All ordinances or parts of ordinances, and resolutions or parts of resolutions, in conflict with this article are hereby repealed, to the extent of said conflict. Sec. 1-103. Reserved D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D i D D ~ D ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ Sec. 1-104. Imposition of fee (a) Applicability of fee. (1) Any person who makes or causes the making of an improvement to land which will generate additional traffic and which requires the issuance of a building permit, or any person who changes the use of any building to one which will generate additional traffic, shall be required to pay a transportation impact fee in the manner and amount set forth in this section. (2) No person shall undertake construction of an improvement for which the fee imposed by this article is applicable without having paid the proper transportation impact fee imposed by this article. No person shall change the use or allow a change in use of any building where the fee imposed by this article is applicable without having paid the proper transportation impact fee imposed by this article. (b) Payment of fee required prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, occupational license or use permit. No county or municipal certificate of occupancy, occupational license or use permit for which a complete application is submitted after lli~Ji..~]Z[?AT;e, for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee pursuant to this article shall be issued unless and until the transportation impact fee required by this article has been paid. The obligation of a person to pay the fee imposed by this article shall not be extinguished by the inadvertent failure of the city to collect the fee at the time required. (c) Methods of determination. The transportation impact fee for any development activity generating traffic in the city shall be determined either by using the fee schedule set forth in subsection (f)(1) of this section, or by using the method set forth in section 1-104. (d) Presumption of maximum impact. Development is presumed to have the maximum impact on the road network. The proposed development activity for which an application for a building permit has been filed shall be presumed by the city engineer or his designee to generate the maximum number of average daily vehicle trips, vehicle miles of travel and lane miles of travel. (e) Transportation impact fee formula. The following formula shall be used to determine the impact fee per unit of development: Impact Fee = (ll2)*(TGR)*(%NT)*(DF)*(ATL)*(CC/LM)(WCL Where: TGR = trip generation rate assigned to each land use NT = new trips generated by the land use OF = distribution factor of trips utilizing the thoroughfare network ATL = average trip length utilizing the thoroughfare network CC = average road construction cost LM = lane miles WCL = weighted capacity per lane mile (f) Fee schedule. The following fee schedule has been prepared based upon the formula presented in subsection (e) of this section using in part the roadway impact fee update, i U ~ ~ i I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ I D D D i dated September 25,2003 prepared for Volusia County by TEl Engineers and Planners, and the Transportation Impact Fee Study dated August 2004 prepared for the City of Edgewater by B&H Consultants, Inc. (1) The transportation impact fee schedule is as follows: ITE Use Unit Trip Trip % New FEE PER Code Rate Length Trips unit (or) 1,000 s. f. Residential 210 SinQle Family DU 9.21 4.53 100.00 $1,370.00 220 Apartment DU 6.46 4.77 100.00 $1,012.46 230 Residential Condominium/ Townhouse DU 5.94 3.45 100.00 $673.83 240 Mobile Home Park DU 4.86 3.32 100.00 $530.21 310 Hotel Rooms 8.72 4.78 72.65 $994.75 320 Motel Rooms 6.28 3.47 77.63 $554.74 620 NursinQ Home Beds 2.65 2.00 88.50 $153.86 Office and Financial 610 Hospital 1,000 sf 15.78 3.92 81.60 $1,659.64 710 Office under 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 19.45 4.18 93.62 $2,499.54 710 Office over 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 12.72 4.04 94.35 $1,593.15 714 Corporate headquarters buildina 1,000 sf 7.72 3.37 93.00 $793.94 720 Medical Office 1,000 sf 36.48 3.72 87.70 $3,907.73 750 Office Park 1,000 sf 15.01 5.63 82.00 $2,274.51 760 Research Center 1,000 sf 7.11 4.77 87.00 $967.47 770 Business Park 1,000 sf 16.87 4.69 81.80 $2,125.24 911 Bank w/out Drive-throuQh 1,000 sf 153.98 1.71 35.80 $3,092.80 912 Bank w/Drive-throuQh . 1,000 sf 291.04 1.83 51.52 $8,995.93 Industrial 110 LiQht Industry 1,000 sf 6.98 4.68 93.20 $998.83 130 Industrial Park 1,000 sf 8.26 4.99 92.00 $1,244.10 140 Manufacturinq 1,000 sf 3.82 4.68 93.60 $548.57 150 Warehouse 1,000 sf 4.95 4.59 92.00 $686.00 151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf 2.52 2.99 93.20 $230.57 Retail 812 Buildinq Materials and Lumber Store 1,000 sf 32.88 4.16 69.80 $3,134.68 816 Hardware/Paint Store 1,000 sf 51.29 6.56 74.00 $8,169.88 820 Retail, less than 10,000 sf 1,000 sf 144.40 1.39 51.25 $3,367.33 820 Retail, 10,000 - 99,999 sf 1,000 sf 73.50 1.47 60.50 $2,149.20 820 Retail, 100,000 - 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf 27.67 2.17 84.00 $1,654.35 820 Retail, Greater than 1,000,000 sf 1,000 sf 29.18 2.81 86.00 $2,312.90 831 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sf 95.63 2.22 77.80 $5,419.87 832 Hiqh- Turnover Restaurant 1,000 sf 148.84 2.11 75.35 $7,770.62 834 Fast Food Restaurant 1,000 sf 552.12 1.43 58.04 $15,089.85 CBD Sandwich Shop 1,000 sf 19.30 4.05 100.00 $2,569.17 836 Bar / Lounqe / Drinkinq Place 1,000 sf 130.34 3.17 72.00 $9,776.66 837 Quick lube Bays 41.69 2.56 71.13 $2,490.77 D ~ I ~ I i i D ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ tJ ~ Ij D i 840 Auto Carel Detailinq 1,000 sf 35.76 2.39 74.32 $2,084.09 841 New and Used Car Sales 1,000 sf 37.20 3.21 78.80 $3,088.52 847 Car Wash 1,000 sf 129.60 1.66 69.00 $4,867.28 849 Tire Store / Auto Repair Bays 30.55 2.09 70.70 $1,484.14 850 Supermarket 1,000 sf 112.18 1.67 53.00 $3,267.69 851 Convenience Store 1,000 sf 755.56 1.02 40.66 $10,305.17 853 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps 1,000 sf 793.28 1.18 28.63 $8,808.25 Convenience Store w/Gas and Fast Food 1,000 sf 940.20 1.91 32.67 $19,238.37 862 Home Improvement Store 1,000 sf 38.13 3.09 50.00 $1,934.52 881 Pharmacy/Drugstore w/Drive Throuqh 1,000 sf 89.89 1.74 41.33 $2,116.93 890 Furniture Store 1,000 sf 4.81 4.06 59.12 $379.44 Recreational Parking General Recreation . Space 3.02 4.43 95.00 $417.07 Parking 411 City Park Space 14.23 2.84 96.67 $1,282.03 Parking 412 Maior Park Space 2.11 4.05 100.00 $280.88 416 Campqround / RV park space 3.90 4.55 77.00 $448.20 420 Marina slip 2.97 5.77 94.67 $533.33 Parking Maior Sports Facility Space 2.10 3.63 100.00 $250.58 Miscellaneous 444 Movie Theater Screens 124.48 1.89 82.12 $6,334.22 560 Church 1,000 sf 9.11 2.97 90.00 $799.42 565 Dav Care 1,000 sf 75.13 1.55 73.32 $2,800.18 Airoort Hanger 1,000 sf 4.96 8.36 92.00 $1,251.97 Veterinary Clinic 1,000 sf 32.80 1.77 70.00 $1,334.52 (2) Credits for completed and accepted non-site-related improvements shall be determined for each application, and shall be deducted from the transportation impact fees listed in the transportation road impact fee schedule, at the time transportation impact fees are to be paid. The value of non-site-related improvements for which credits may be allowed shall be determined by the director of development services. (3) Credits for the present value of future gas or motor fuel tax payments utilized to fund capacity expansion of the thoroughfare road systems are included in the calculations of the fee schedule set out in this section. (4) The fees charged for a building with more than one use shall be for that use having the highest traffic generation rate except for church buildings with mixed uses or buildings with residential and non-residential mixed uses. If the church building has more than one use, the separate uses are to be identified and appropriately charged according to the fee schedule. If a building has residential and non-residential uses, the square footage of the building identified as residential will be charged based on the number of dwelling units, and then, the square footage identified as non-residential shall be charged for that use having the highest traffic generation rate. ~ I I ~ ~ i ~ ~ I i! ~ D i i ~ i ~ ~ U (5) If the type of development activity for which a building permit is applied is not specified on the fee schedule set out in this section, the city shall use the fee applicable to the most nearly comparable type of land use on the fee schedule. The city shall be guided in the selection of a comparable type by the report titled "Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation: An Information Report" (sixth or any subsequent editions). If the city determines that there is no comparable type of land use on the fee schedule set out in this section, then the fee shall be determined by using traffic generation statistics contained in the report titled "Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation: An Information Report" (sixty-sixth or any subsequent edition), average trip length and percent of new trips based upon the best data available to the city and by applying the formula set forth in subsection (e) of this section. (6) In the case of an expansion of an existing use on the same lot or an adjoining lot (which may be intersected by an easement or right~of-way) requiring the issuance of a building permit, the impact fee shall be based upon the net increase in the impact fee for the new as compared to the previous use. Provided, however, the impact fee shall be reduced by 50 percent from the amount of the fee that would otherwise be due and payable for an expansion to an existing use. The city shall be guided in this determination by the report titled "Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation: An Information Report" (sixth or any subsequent edition). (7) In the event the impact fee rate for a particular land use is changed subsequent to the issuance of a building permit and before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the impact fee shall be the amount in effect on the date payment is received. Provided further, that an initial application for a site plan development order has been filed with the relevant local government on or before tli~-g~r-;l!~!!1g and provided that the project .,---.----~...~rT:-......... developer has applied for a building permit on or before lNS:gB1'1J?':'~'Pij, a project shall not be subject to the transportation impact fee. In the event the actions of other agencies ...............-.........."'.... "f- '............... preclude applying for a building permit by JNS:&Rt~:Q.AE~, the developer may present evidence to the city commission that the building permit application has been delayed through no fault of its own. (8) The transportation impact fee on a shopping center shall be computed using one retail-commercial rate for all stores except the out-parcels, which shall be calculated using the rate for that land use from the transportation impact fee schedule. (9) If an affidavit is filed by.the owner of real property with the county or municipality certifying that a farm building on a farm is exempt from issuance of a building permit under Florida law, then the building shall also be exempt from impact fee charges. (10) Road construction and right-of-way credits issued by the city can be transferred between lots with identical land uses. Sec. 1-104.1 Independent calculation (1). Any person may determine their transportation impact fee by providing independent traffic documentation that their impact on the thoroughfare system is less than the transportation impact fee as determined under subsection (1)(1) of section 1-104. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the transportation impact fee has been calculated, which shall conform to the following factors: I D I ~ ~ if IJ ~ D ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i. The trip generation rate, trip length and the percent of new trips shall be documented together. In no event shall they be documented separately. All other variables in the transportation impact fee formula cannot be altered, but shall be based upon data current at the time this fee shall be due. Petitioners requesting to undertake an independent calculation may substitute the trip generation rate and the percent of new trips and trip length in the transportation impact fee formula with data obtained from approved traffic surveys and actual traffic counts generated by approved traffic study sites. ii. The unit of measure used for trip generation in the independent calculation must be identical to the one used in the transportation impact fee formula, in order to measure accurately the project's impact on the thoroughfare system. iii. If a single business or shopping center is studied, at least two sites within the City of Edgewater must be tested. The results of each site must be added together and averaged to obtain an alternative trip generation rate, trip length and percentofnew trips. The results can be substituted in the transportation impact fee formula. If the study results indicate a lower fee, the charges will be adjusted accordingly. iv. If no suitable alternative site is available as determined by the city staff, the applicant may pay the transportation impact fee, and employ a licensed engineer to conduct a traffic study on the project site within six months after the enterprise is open for business. The traffic study time frame and monitoring points must be approved by the city staff. Only the trip generation rate, trip length and the percent of new trips can be used in the analysis. Once the results of each sampling point are added together and averaged they may be substituted in the transportation impact fee formula. The results will be used to determine an appropriate impact fee. If the traffic study results indicate a lower fee and accepted by the city staff, the difference will be refunded to the applicant. All refunds are subject to section 1-107. This documentation shall be prepared and presented by licensed engineers. Specific actions such as the number of manual or automated counts, number of personal surveys, location of the sampling stations and the layout of the study sites will be negotiated by the applicant and city staff. Sec. 1-105. Payment (a) Time of payment; lien. (1) The person applying for the issuance ofa building permit shall pay the transportation impact fee prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or the occupancy of the building. The city shall issue an impact fee statement to the applicant for a building permit. Such impact fee statement shall set forth the amount of the impact fee due. The obligation for payment of the impact fee shall run with the land. However, this section shall not be construed to relieve an applicant of responsibility or liability for payment of the impact fees imposed by this article. In the event the impact fee is not paid prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the affected impact construction, the city may collect the impact fee, together with interest, as provided in section 1-1 05( d). II ~ ~ D ~ D i Q ~ D I ~ I ~ I ~ U ~ ~ If no building permit is required upon a change of use of a building, the fee imposed by this article shall be payable at such time as the person making such change shall be required to apply for an occupational license. (2) All fees due under this article shall become a lien at the time of the issuance of the building permit or in the case of a change of use on the issuance of an occupational license, as the case may be, such fees shall be due, and shall remain a lien, coequal with the lien of all state, district, county and municipal taxes, superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. Such lien shall be upon the land on which an improvement is made requiring the payment of fees and shall be for the amount of the fee required, as well as for all penalties and interest due under the provisions of this article. (b) Method of payment. Payment of transportation impact fees shall be made to the City of Edgewater. (c) Disposition of funds. All funds collected shall be promptly transferred for deposit into a transportation impact fee trust fund and used solely for the purposes specified in this article. (d) Interest and administrative; penalty. (1) Interest at the rate set by law for judgments shall be due on all fees due under this article from the time such fee was due according to the terms of subsection (a) of this section. The inclusion in this article of provisions concerning interest due shall be deemed to be cumulative of the city's rights already existing as a matter oflaw to prejudgment interest upon sums which are certain and due and payable at a specific time. Accordingly, the requirement for the payment of interest shall be deemed to apply retroactively to all fees which have previously become due under the terms of this article; and nothing in this article shall be construed in derogation of such right otherwise existing at law. (2) There shall be due and payable to the city an administrative penalty of five percent per month to a maximum of 25 percent of all fees unpaid at the time they were due according to the terms of this article. Such administrative penalty shall accrue monthly on the anniversary of the date when such fee should have been paid. In the case of fees previously due under the terms of this article, such penalty shall accrue at the rate of five percent per month to a maximum of25 percent with the first monthly penalty accruing one month following the effective date of the ordinance from which this subsection (e) is derived. The city attorney or a duly authorized representative may execute, serve upon the owner by certified mail and record a notice of nonpayment in the official records of the county, which shall contain the legal description of the property and the amount of the impact fee liability. Said notice shall thereupon operate as a lien against such property for the amount of the impact fee, together with interest, penalties, and the costs and fees for collection, coequal with the lien of all state, county, district and municipal taxes. Sec. 1-106. Trust funds; use of funds (a) Trust funds. There are hereby established a separate transportation impact fee trust fund. Subsequent to the adoption of the ordinance from which this article is derived, i1 i D I ~ il ~ D D D D D D D o D D U o should any parcel or area of land located within a zone be annexed into the city, the boundaries shall be deemed amended as of the 'date of annexation so as to include the land annexed within the zone of such municipality. Such amendment of zones shall be for the purposes of this article only and shall not affect any prior payment of fees or expenditure of funds attributable to the annexed property. (b) Use of funds; administrative fee. (1) Funds collected from transportation impact fees shall be used for the purpose of capita1.improvements to and expansion of transportation facilities associated with the thoroughfare system plan. Such improvements shall be of the type made necessary by new development. Final determination of projects to be funded using transportation impact fee revenues shall be made by the city council. . (2) No funds shall be used for periodic or routine maintenance as defined in F.S. S 334.03. (3) Except as provided in subsection (5) of this subsection, funds shall be used exclusively for capital improvements or expansion within the municipal boundaries. Funds shall be deemed expended in the order in which they are collected. (4) The city shall, each fiscal year, prepare a preliminary capital improvement road program to be funded from each transportation impact fee trust fund. (5) The city shall be entitled to retain an amount not to exceed five percent of all impact fee funds it collects as an administrative fee to offset the actual administrative costs associated with the collection of the funds and administering this article. Sec. 1-107. Refunds If it is determined by the city that fee assessments collected pursuant to this article have not been spent or encumbered or expended by the end of the calendar quarter immediately following ten years from the date the fee was received, or if the development for which the fees were paid was never begun, then such funds shall be eligible for refund to the then-present owner in accordance with the following procedures: (I) The then-present owner must petition the city council for the refund within one year following the end of the calendar quarter immediately following nine years from the date on which the fee was received by the city. (2) The petition must be submitted to the city and must contain: a. A notarized sworn statement that the petitioner is the current owner of the property; b. A copy of the dated receipt issued for payment of the fee; c. A certified copy of the latest recorded deed; d. A copy of the most recent ad valorem tax bill; and e. Such other information which may be reasonably necessary to ascertain current ownership of the property. (3) Within 60 days from the date of receipt of a petition for refund, the city shall advise the petitioner of the status of the fee requested for refund. For the purpose of determining D ~ D ~ ~ D D ~ D i ti ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ D D whether fees have been spent or encumbered, the first money placed in a trust fund account shall be deemed to be the first money taken out of that account when withdrawals have been made. (4) When the money requested is still in the trust fund account and has not been spent or encumbered by the end of the calendar quarter immediately following ten years from the date the fees were paid, the money shall be returned. Sec. 1-108. Exemptions and credits (a) Exemptions. The following activities shall be exempted from payment of the transportation impact fee: (1) All land development activities which have received a building permit prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this article is derived, except as provided for in other sections of this article. (2) Alterations or expansions of an existing building where no additional units are created, and where no additional vehicular trips will be produced over and above that produced by the existing use. (3) The construction of an accessory building which will not produce additional vehicular trips over and above that which is produced by the principal building or use of the land. (4) The replacement of a building with a new building, provided that no additional trips will be produced over and above those produced by the original use of the land. (5) City-owned and city-operated buildings, structures or uses used solely for general governmental purposes. (b) Credits. (1) No credit shall be given for site-related improvements, except as provided for in subsection (2) of this subsection (b). (2) All roadway improvements and/or right-of-way dedications required under a city development order or approval which are included within the roads contemplated in section 1-106(b)(1), except for those improvements deemed site-related, shall be credited against transportation road impact fees. In addition, any person who constructs or contributes land, money or services for any road improvements (whether site-related or not) contemplated in section 1-106(b)(1) which are included within the most recently adopted five-year work program shall be entitled to credits against transportation impact fees imposed pursuant to this article in accordance with subsection (3) of this subsection (b). (3) Credits shall apply to the person making the contribution. Such person shall have the right to transfer all or a portion of the available credits. Any transfers of this type which occur shall be filed with growth management services group at the time of or prior to the approval of a development order on a form provided by the city. The costs utilized in computing credits shall be reasonable, but not to exceed the actual, costs of the improvements constructed or contributed. The person seeking determination of the credit shall present cost estimates and property appraisals prepared by qualified professionals to be utilized by the public works department and development services department in o D a u D D ~ D i i I D Ii ~ D ~ D D D determining the amount of credits. The city retains the right to prepare its own cost estimate for its use in determining the credit allowed by this subsection. Sec. 1-109. Periodic review (a) This article shall be reviewed by the city council no less than once every four years. (b) The components of the transportation road impact fee formula shall be reviewed by the city commission no less than once every four years. (c) Failure of the city to undertake such a review shall result in the continued use and application of the existing fee schedule and other data. Sec. 1-110. Administrative review; procedures (a) A fee payer shall have the right of administrative review of any decision relating to: (1) A determination that a development activity is required to pay an impact fee under this article; (2) A determination of the amount of the impact fee; or (3) A determination regarding the amount or application of a credit to be applied against the impact fee. The administrative review shall be in the form of an administrative review de novo of the decision. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this article, the administrative review must be requested by the fee payer within 45 calendar days (including Sundays and legal holidays) from the date of issuance of the impact fee statement or the date of the decision sought to be reviewed, whichever shall last occur. Failure to request administrative review within the time provided in this subsection will be deemed a waiver of that right. (c) A written request for administrative review must be filed with City Manager. The request shall contain the following: (1) The name and address of the fee payer; (2) The telephone number at which the fee payer may be reached during daytime hours; (3) The legal description of the property in question; (4) If issued, the date the building permit/impact fee statement was issued and the building permit/impact fee statement number; (5) Ifpaid, the impact fee receipt number and date of payment; (6) A brief description of the nature of the land development activity to be undertaken pursuant to the building permit/impact fee statement; and (7) A statement of the reasons why the fee payer is requesting the administrative review, including any supporting information and site or construction plan, if appropriate. (d) Within 15 calendar days of receipt ofa request for administrative review, the decision of the City Manager shall be final and shall be binding upon the fee payer and the city. o o o D D ~ D D ~ D I ~ D i ~ D a D D (e) The detennination of the City Manager may be reviewed by the city commission in accordance with section 1-111. ' Sec. 1-111. Final administrative review; hearings (a) A fee payer who is aggrieved by a detennination of the City Manager shall have the right to request a review hearing before the city commission. (b) A review hearing shall be limited to a detennination of whether the City Manager correctly applied this article to the facts and circumstances of the fee payer's case. (c) A review hearing shall be requested by the fee payer by filing a written request for same with the City Manager, within 30 calendar days after the detennination is made by the director. Failure to request a hearing within the time provided shall be deemed a waiver of such right. (d) The written request for review hearing to be filed with the City Manager shall contain the following: (1) The name of the party seeking review, and the address if a fee payer; (2) The legal description of the property in question; (3) If issued, the date the building pennitlimpact fee statement was issued and the building pennitlimpact fee statement number; (4) Ifpaid, the impact fee receipt number and date of payment; and (5) A brief description of the nature of the land development activity being undertaken pursuant to the building pennitlimpact fee statement. (e) Upon receipt of a request for review hearing, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing before the council at a regular meeting or special meeting called for the purpose of conducting the hearing. The city shall provide the fee payer with reasonable written notice of the time and place of the hearing. A review hearing shall be held within 45 days of the date the request for hearing was filed. (1) The review hearing shall be held by the Council and shall be conducted in a manner designed to obtain all infonnation and evidence relevant to the requested hearing. Fonnal rules of civil procedure and evidence shall not be applicable; however, the hearing shall be conducted in a fair and impartial manner with each party having an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.