UPDATE OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - COST ESTIMATE

••

; UPDATE OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - COST ESTIMATE VARIABLES

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

Prepared for: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

Prepared by: Tindale-Oiiver & Associates, Inc.

Tampa, Florida May 2004

03211.03

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ................... · ............................................................................................... 1

REVIEW AND CALCULATION OF UNIT COST COMPONENT .......................................... 3

2025 Cost Feasible Plan Improvements Not Yet Constructed ......................................... 3

Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs ........................................................................................ 4

Construction Costs ............................................................................................................ 6

Design Costs .................................................................................................................... 8

Total Cost Estimates for 2025 Cost Feasible Plan Improvements ................................... 9

REVIEW AND CALCULATION OF CREDIT COMPONENT .............................................. 11

Gasoline Tax Credit (Equivalent) ................................................................................... 11

Facility Life ..................................................................................................................... 12

Interest Rate ................................................................................................................... 12

Fuel Efficiency ................................................................................................................ 13

Effective Days per Year .................................................................................................. 14

Across-the-Board Adjustment ........................................................................................ 14

CAPACITY DETERMINATION ........................................................................................... 15

PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE .......................................................................................... 16

List of Figures

Figure 1. Land Use by Project.. ............................................................................................ 5

List of Tables

Table 1. Status of 2025 Cost Feasible Plan Projects ......................................................... 3

Table 2. Total ROW Costs ................................................................................................. 6

Table 3. Construction Costs by Project.. ............................................................................ 7

Table 4. Design Costs by Project ....................................................................................... 8

Table 5. Total Project Costs ............................................................................................... 9

Table 6. Weighted Average Cost per Mile ........................................................................ 10

Table 7. Equivalent Pennies of Gas Tax Revenue ........................................................... 12

Table 8. Average Daily Capacity Added ........................................................................... 15

Table 9. Comparison of Current & Proposed Impact Fees .............................................. 17

Tindale-0/iver and Associates, Inc. May 2004

Indian River County Impact Fee Cost Component Update

List of Appendices

Appendix A: ROW Cost Estimates

Appendix 8: Total Updated Costs

Appendix C: Credit Component Calculations

Appendix D: Capacity Calculations

Appendix E: Proposed Impact Fee Schedule

Appendix F: Single Family Residential Tiering Analysis


II


INTRODUCTION

The Indian River County traffic impact fee program was established in 1986 and has become a major source of funding for projects included in the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the County's adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP). In 1997, the MPO completed a major update of the traffic impact fee program and associated ordinance. That update included the implementation of a revised traffic impact fee (TIF) formula, updated cost and credit components, local trip characteristic studies, an updated list of land uses and fees charged, and an updated Administrative Procedures Manual.

Since adoption of the revised traffic impact fee ordinance, costs of roadway projects have increased dramatically in Indian River County. This cost increase can be attributed to increased construction and right-of-way (ROW) acquisition costs. In addition, it is expected that changes have occurred to various inputs to the credit component, as well.

As a result, the focus of this Transportation Impact Fee Update is to review, recalculate, and update the Transportation Impact Fee cost and credit components, as well as the associated Impact Fee Rate Schedule. More specifically, the cost component update is based on a reassessment of average construction costs, ROW acquisition costs, and other costs associated with providing additional roadway capacity. The resulting revised cost-per-lane-mile is then used to update the impact fee formula cost component and resulting impact fee rate schedule. The credit component update is based on an analysis to determine the portion of gasoline taxes that government agencies use to construct new and expanded roads. This is determined by estimating the number of pennies per gallon of gas that return to the community for non-Interstate, capital improvements for State, County, and collector road improvements.

The work activities accomplished as part of this work effort are summarized below:

• Reviewed Cost Feasible Plan of the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan, the five-year Transportation Improvement Program, and the FOOT 2004-2008 Work Program to determine the status of which projects have been completed or are under construction.

• Reviewed and updated data used for computing the cost of ROW acquisition and roadway construction costs.

Tindale-0/iver and Associates, Inc. May2004


• Developed updated total cost estimates for the 2025 Cost Feasible Plan improvements that have not been constructed yet (broken out by design and CEI, right of way, and construction).

• Calculated an updated average cost-per-lane-mile and vehicle mile of capacity added to the transportation network.

• Identified and reviewed revenue sources used for transportation purposes; determined the appropriate present value factor to use based on current trends in the value of money; assessed credit components of the current impact fee formula; and determined the credit amount to be applied in the impact fee formula.

• Prepared an alternative impact fee schedule for Indian River County, based on the updated cost and credit components.

The remainder of this Technical Memorandum reviews and summarizes the results of the work activities identified in this Introduction.


2


REVIEW AND CALCULATION OF UNIT COST COMPONENT

2025 Cost Feasible Plan Improvements Not Yet Constructed

The first step in this effort involved the review of the County's 2025 Cost Feasible Plan to identify those projects that have not been constructed yet. This review and assessment was completed with assistance from and information provided by the County's Public Works Department. Table 1 presents a summary of the status of each project based on the results of this review.

Table 1. Status of 2025 Cost Feasible Plan Projects Project Project Limits Status Number On From To Jurisdiction

10 26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave Not Constructed County 20 27th Ave Oslo Rd Aviation Blvd Not Constructed County 30 43rd Ave 8th St 26th St Not Constructed County 50 53rd St 66th Ave Old Dixie Hwv Not Constructed County 55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy us 1 Not Constructed County 60 58th Ave Oslo Rd 16th St Constructed County 70 66th Ave 4th St SR60 Not Constructed County 80 66th Ave SR60 CR 510 Not Constructed County 90 82nd Ave 26th St CR 510 Not Constructed County 100 Aviation Blvd us 1 27th Ave Not Constructed County 110 Barber St us 1 Schumann Dr Not Constructed County 120 CR 510 CR 512 us 1 Not Constructed County 140 CR 512 1-95 Roseland Rd Not Constructed County 150 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave Not Constructed County

155(l) 16th St 90th Ave 66th Ave 0.5 miles Constructed County 160 1-95 N County Line S County Line Not Considered County 170 Indian River Blvd 4th St@ US 1 37th St Not Constructed County 190(~) Oslo Rd 1-95 27th Ave Under Construction County 195(~) Oslo Rd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy Under Construction County 210 SR60 W County Line CR 512 Not Constructed FOOT

220{2 ) SR60 CR 512 98th Ave Under Construction FOOT 230(~) SR60 98th Ave 1-95 Under Construction FOOT 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave Not Constructed FOOT 235 Fleming St us 1 Easy St Not Constructed County 240 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave Barber St Not Constructed County 250 us 1 S County Line 4th St@ IR Blvd Not Constructed FOOT

2308721 16th/17th Street 500 'W of 14th. Ave US1 Not Constructed FOOT

Notes: (1) Although Project 155 on 161

h Street has already had a small portion (0.5 miles) of its planned improvement constructed, for purposes of this analysis, the entire project segment has been used in the estimation of costs.

(2) Similarly, Projects 190 and 195 on Oslo Road, and 220 and 230 on SR 60, already have commenced some construction activities, but the projects have been analyzed in their entirety for costing purposes.

Tin dale-Oliver and Associates, Inc. May2004

3


Right-of-Way Acquisition Costs

ROW acquisition costs were updated utilizing two methods. First, for those projects for which expected or actual ROW cost was available, these costs were used as is from the source document (i.e., without any further adjustment). This was the case for some of the projects involving state roadways for which FOOT had already purchased or programmed ROW costs. The second method involved a more detailed procedure that relied on a Geographical Information System (GIS) based examination of the future land use plan along the roadway projects planned for future construction. The detailed ROW cost estimation is presented in Appendix A. The basic steps of this procedure are summarized in the following bullets.

1. An analysis was performed of the area-based land requirements for each project (based on segment length- and the additional cross-sectional width of ROW that would be required by the planned expansion) and the distribution of land uses along the lengths of each proposed project. This task was accomplished by utilizing GIS to overlay a County land use map with the LRTP 2025 Cost Feasible project map, and calculate distributed lengths and area differentials. Figure 1 illustrates the overlay of the County's land uses by project.

2. Typical unit costs for each land use along a future project roadway were developed based on cost information provided by the County.

3. The area-based land requirements for each project developed in the first step and the land use unit costs developed in the second step were used to calculate estimated land purchase costs for each project.

4. The land purchase costs developed in# 3 above reflect the cost of only land and are exclusive of any additional costs typically related to the acquisition of ROW. Typically, ROW acquisition, especially in urbanized areas, includes other costs besides land purchase, such as costs related to takings, condemnations, relocations, cures, damages, court costs, etc. As a result, the County reviewed recent and anticipated land purchases to generally estimate the additional costs associated with actual acquisition of land needed for roadway projects.

5. The ROW cost information obtained from FOOT for Indian River County projects included both land cost and other costs associated with the acquisition of needed ROW for road projects.

Tindale-Oiiver and Associates, Inc. May2004

4


6. The final result of this process is the tabulation of the total ROW costs for each of the unconstructed projects included in the 2025 Cost Feasible Plan. Table 2 presents the resulting total ROW cost for each project separated between County projects and FOOT projects. This table indicates that the total ROW cost for all of the projects is estimated at $115,715,830.

Table 2. Total ROW Costs

I Project Limits I Project On From To Cost

County Projects 10 26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave $2,832,897 20 27th Ave Oslo Rd Aviation Blvd $5,002,985 30 43rd Ave 8th St 26th St $3,066,285 50 53rd St 66th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $2,661,533 55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy us 1 $611,660 70 66th Ave 4th St SR60 $1,803,997 80 66th Ave SR60 CR 510 $6,161,319 90 82nd Ave 26th St CR 510 $3,071,096 100 Aviation Blvd us 1 27th Ave $428,908 110 Barber St us 1 Schumann Dr $805,948 120 CR 510 CR512 us 1 $9,196,290 140 CR 512 1-95 Roseland Rd $6,182,601 150 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave $1,375,738 155 16th St 90th Ave 66th Ave $2,362,057 170 Indian River Blvd 4th St@ US 1 37th St $4,802,626 190 Oslo Rd 1-95 27th Ave $7,555,093 195 Oslo Rd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $7,809,789 235 FlemingSt us 1 Easy St $2,789,494 240 Schumann Dr CR 510 @ 66th Ave Barber St $1,178,831

FOOT Projects 210 SR60 W County Line . CR 512 $4,531,000 220 SR60 CR 512 98th Ave $2,010,968 230 SR60 98th Ave 1-95 $367,032 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave $26,216,683 250 us 1 S County Line 4th St @ IR Blvd $12,080,000

2308721 16th/17th Street 500' W of 14th Ave US1 $811,000 Total . $115,715,830

Construction Costs

This work effort involved the update of the construction costs for the unconstructed 2025 Cost Feasible Plan projects. These costs were updated utilizing two methods. The first


6


method involved projects for which expected or actual construction costs were available, such as projects under construction or projects for which current cost estimates are included in a Five Year Capital Improvement Program or Work Program .

In the cases where specific construction cost information was not available, typical highway-cost-per-centerline-mile figures were utilized from FOOT's 2002 Transportation Costs document1 to estimate costs for these particular projects. County staff indicated that this source was reasonable for use on County projects, as well as on FOOT projects. The FOOT unit costs, which are based on general statewide averages, were selected for each project based on the planned configuration change (e.g., 2 to 4 lanes, 4 to 6 lanes, etc.) and the nature of the project segment's location (i.e., rural vs. urban). Table 3 presents the construction costs that were identified or estimated for each project. Appendix B contains the detailed construction cost calculations.

Table 3. Construction Costs by Project Project I Project Limits I Construction Number I On From To J Costs Source

County Projects 10 26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave $8,579,345 2002 Transportation Costs 20 27th Ave OsloRd Aviation Blvd $13,501,920 2002 Transportation Costs 30 43rd Ave 8thSt 26th St $8,790,920 County Estimate 50 53rd St 66th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $11,923,336 2002 Transportation Costs 55 53rd St Old Dixie H_~ us 1 $168,774 2002 Tran~rtation Costs 70 66th Ave 4th St SR60 $4,834,648 2002 Transportation Costs 80 66th Ave SR60 CR 510 $18,160,786 2002 Transportation Costs 90 82nd Ave 26th St CR 510 $15,314,715 2002 Transportation Costs 100 Aviation Blvd us 1 27th Ave $2,559,739 2002 Transportation Costs 110 Barber St us 1 Schumann Dr $3,825,544 2002 Transportation Costs 120 CR510 CR 512 us 1 $16,146,046 2002 Tr(!nsportation Costs 140 CR 512 1-95 Roseland Rd $11,954,825 2002 Tran~rtation Costs 150 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave $4,366,323 2002 Transportation Costs 155 16th St 90th Ave 66th Ave $8,465,023 2002 Transportation Costs 170 Indian River Blvd 4th St@US 1 37th St $11,348,952 2002 Transportation Costs 190 OsloRd 1-95 27th Ave $10,512,024 2002 Transportation Costs 195 OsloRd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $7,030,750 2002 Transportation Costs 235 Flemi~St us 1 Easy St $3,499,032 2002 Transportation Costs 240 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave Barber St $2,306,086 2002 Transportation Costs

FOOT Projects 210 SR60 W County Line CR512 $75,474,000 FOOT Work Programs 220 SR60 CR 512 98th Ave $19,683,466 FOOT Work Programs 230 SR 60 98th Ave 1-95 $6,870,508 · FOOT Work Programs 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave $11,018,400 2002 Transportation Costs 250 us 1 S County Line 4th St@ IR Blvd $14,701,000 FOOT Work Programs

2308721 16th/17th Street 500' Wof 14th Ave US1 $6,480,000 FOOT Work Programs

Total $297,516,162

1 Office of Policy Planning, Policy Analysis and Project Evaluation, Florida Department of Transportation, March 2003.


7


Design Costs

Design costs were updated based on the revised construction costs discussed previously. Design costs include preliminary and final design, as well as, engineering inspection during construction. In the 2025 LRTP, the methodology that was used to determine these costs for a specific project was to assume that these costs represented a particular percentage of the total construction cost of that project. To maintain consistency with the LRTP calculations, the same methodology was utilized for purposes of this study. The percentage used for each project was developed by the Indian River County staff. The resulting percentages as well as design costs are shown in Table 4. However, the design costs for projects included in the FOOT Five Year Work Program were included in Table 4, as opposed to calculating an estimated design cost as described above.

Table 4. Design Costs by Project Project I Project Limits Number I On From

County Projects 10 26th St 66th Ave 20 27th Ave Oslo Rd 30 43rd Ave 8th St 50 53rd St 66th Ave 55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy 70 66th Ave 4th St 80 66th Ave SR60 90 82nd Ave 26th St 100 Aviation Blvd us 1 110 Barber St us 1 120 CR510 CR512 140 CR512 1-95 150 8th St 82nd Ave 155 16th St 90th Ave 170 Indian River Blvd 4th St@ US 1 190 OsloRd 1-95 195 Oslo Rd 27th Ave 235 Fleming St us 1 240 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave

FOOT Projects 210 SR60 W County Line 220 SR60 CR512 230 SR60 98th Ave 232 SR60 1-95 250 us 1 S County Line

2308721 16th/17th Street 500' W of 14th Ave

Total


I To

27th Ave Aviation Blvd 26th St Old Dixie Hwy us 1 SR60 CR 510 CR510 27th Ave Schumann Dr us 1 Roseland Rd 66th Ave 66th Ave 37th St 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy Easy St Barber St

CR512 98th Ave 1-95 66th Ave 4th St @ IR Blvd US1

8

Percentage of the Construction Cost Design Cost

20% $1,716,775 20% $2,699,705 20% $1,755,353 20% $2,384,667 20% $33,981 15% $725,197 20% $3,631,895 20% $3,061,985 20% $511,948 20% $765,562 20% $3,228,530 20% $2,390,512 10% $436,632 10% $846,502 20% $2,271,405 20% $2,103,663 20% $1,406,150 20% $699,806 20% $460,764

from FOOT Work Program $7,456,685 from FOOT Work Program $2,839,611 from FOOT Work Program $1,173,867

34% $3,746,625 from FOOT Work Program $1,740,196 from FOOT Work Program $1,476,000

$49,564,017


Total Cost Estimates for 2025 Cost Feasible Plan Improvements

Table 5 presents the total updated cost for each project, which was obtained by summing the corresponding updated total ROW, construction, and design costs presented previously. The project costs illustrated in Table 5 represent the updated cost of implementing all of the as-yet unconstructed 2025 Cost Feasible Plan roadway capacity improvements.

Table 5. Total Project Costs Project I Project Limits I Added Project Length Lane-Miles Number I On I From I To I Total Cost Lanes [miles] by Project

County Projects 10 26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave $13,129,017 2 3.05 6.10 20 27th Ave Oslo Rd Aviation Blvd $21,204,610 2 4.80 9.60 30 43rdAve 8th St 26th St $13,612,558 2 2.00 4.00 50 53rd St 66th Ave Old Dixie Hy.ty $16,969,536 4 3.04 12.16 55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy us 1 $814,415 2 0.06 0.12 70 66th Ave 4th St SR60 $7,363,842 2 2.03 4.06 80 66th Ave SR60 CR510 $27,954,000 2 7.53 15.06 90 82nd Ave 26th St CR 510 $21,447,796 2 7.05 14.10 100 Aviation Blvd us 1 27th Ave $3,500,595 2 0.91 1.82 110 Barber St us 1 Schumann Dr $5,397,054 2 1.36 2.72 120 CR 510 CR 512 us 1 $28,570,866 2 5.74 11.48 140 CR 512 1-95 Roseland Rd $20,527,938 2 4.25 8.50 150 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave $6,178,693 2 2.01 4.02 155 16th St 90th Ave 66th Ave $11,673,582 2 3.01 6.02 170 Indian River Blvd 4th St@ US 1 37th St $18,422,983 2 4.12 8.24 190 Oslo Rd 1-95 27th Ave $20,170,779 2 4.23 8.46 195 OsloRd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $16,246,689 2 2.50 5.00 235 Fleming St us 1 EasySt $6,988,333 2 1.24 2.48 240 Schumann Dr CR 510 @ 66th Ave Barber St $3,945,682 2 0.82 1.64

FOOT Projects 210 SR60 W County Line CR 512 $87,461,685 2 14.00 28.00 220 SR60 CR 512 98th Ave $24,534,044 2 6.52 13.04 230 SR60 98th Ave 1-95 $8,411,408 4 1.19 4.76 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave $40,981,709 2 4.00 8.00 250 us 1 S County Line 4th St@ IR Blvd $28,521 '196 2 3.86 7.72

2308721 16th/17th Street 500' Wof 14th Ave US1 $8,767,000 1 0.75 0.75

Total $462,796,009 187.85

The determination of the overall total cost allows for the calculation of the average costper-lane-mile that is used in the impact fee formula. This average unit cost reflects the relationship between the total project costs and the total number of lane-miles that is to be constructed. The results of this computation are presented in Table 6.


9


Table 6. Weighted Average Cost per Mile

Source

Indian River County Projects FDOT Projects

Total

Weighted Average Cost per Mile


10

I Lane Miles I Added Total Cost

I I

I

125.58 I 264,118,967 62.271 198,677,042

187.85 J $462,796,009

I $2,463,647


REVIEW AND CALCULATION OF CREDIT COMPONENT

Gasoline Tax Credit (Equivalent)

Credits against the total cost of the Transportation Impact Fee are provided for the new revenues that development generates that the County then uses for roadway capacity expansion projects. To calculate this credit, a review was made of Indian River County historical expenditures and future appropriations for roadway projects that expand the capacity of the road system. Results of this review indicate that two sources are used to fund roadway expansion projects. These sources are the Local Optional Sales Tax and Gas Tax.

Since the total cost per unit of land use is developed using vehicle miles of travel, the credit calculation is also developed using vehicle miles of travel. To make this calculation, it is necessary to convert the average annual sales tax into an equivalent number of pennies of gas tax. This is accomplished by determining how much revenue is generated on the average from one cent of gas tax. Table C-1 in Appendix C provides this calculation. The gas tax credit is then calculated based on the gallons of gasoline consumed on an annual basis by each land use, using an average estimate of miles per gallon provided from national statistics. The present value of the equivalent gasoline taxes generated by a new development on an annual basis over a 25-year period is then credited against the cost of the system consumed by travel associated with the new development.

Appendix C provides a detailed discussion of the County and State allocation of gas tax revenues toward transportation capacity expansion capital projects. Also discussed is the County's use of sales taxes revenues for these projects. As shown in that appendix, an average of 7.88 pennies of the County's gas tax and sales taxes revenues is allocated to capital projects (Table C-4). This is based on the historical expenditures from the last five years and the future appropriations during the next five years.

The equivalent number of pennies allocated to fund state projects was determined for the period from 1999 to 2025. Two sources were used to develop this information. First, information from the 1 0-year period of the FOOT Work Program for District 4 (i.e., 1999 through 2008) was reviewed. Second, state projects included in the County's 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan were reviewed. The longer period was used in this analysis to smooth the effect of the one time special funding of State Road 60 project during 2000


11


to 2004. The review (which is detailed in Appendix C, Table C-5) indicates that the 27-year window of the combined FOOT Work Program and LRTP projects generates an average of 12.02 pennies of gas tax revenue. Table 7 provides a summary of the results of the overall equivalency analysis.

T bl 7 E . I t P a e :qUiva en enmes o fG T R as ax evenue Equivalent Pennies

Gas Tax Revenue Source (distribution) Total County Revenues $0.0788 State Revenues ~0.1202 Total Pennies Per Gallon $0.1990

In summary, 7.88 pennies of gas tax comes from the County-managed revenues and the State is estimated to spend an equivalent of 12.02 pennies on the state road program. Therefore, a total of 19.90 pennies is used in the impact fee equation as a credit to recognize the future capital revenue for roadway expansion that will be generated by new development.

Facility Life

The facility life relates to the time period over which gasoline tax revenues might be bonded to pay for an improvement. The life used in the current fee is 25 years, which is typical of impact fees in many other communities; therefore, no change is recommended for this variable.

Interest Rate

This is the discount rate at which gasoline tax revenues might be bonded. It Is used to compute the present value of the gasoline taxes generated by new development. A rate of 5 percent Is used in the current fee which still reflects the cost to borrow money (i.e., retire a bond). Therefore, it is recommended that the interest rate of five (5) percent continue to be utilized.


12


Fuel Efficiency

The fuel efficiency (i.e., the average miles traveled per gallon of fuel consumed) of the fleet of motor vehicles using the road system over the next 25 years is used to estimate the quantity of gasoline consumed by travel associated with a particular land use. The calculations outlined in the supporting documentation of the existing ordinance utilize a fuel efficiency rate of 16.91 miles per gallon.

Several options were considered in computing the fuel efficiency to be used in the updated impact fee equation. Concerns that the fuel efficiency of large trucks should be in the calculation were considered, as well. Appendix C documents the calculation for the new fuel efficiency value (Table C-8), based on the following equation, where ''VMT" is vehicle miles of travel and "MPG" is fuel efficiency in terms of miles per gallon.

F l '(fi . ""' ""' ( VMTVehic/e Type J ue E;Jzczency = L..VMTRoadwayType + L..

MPG Vehicle Type Roadway Type

Basically, because of the particular data that were available, the methodology utilizes local roads and interstate VMT and average fuel efficiency data for passenger vehicles (i.e., passenger cars and other 2-axle, 4-tire vehicles, such as vans, pickups, and SUVs) and large trucks (i.e., single-unit, 2-axle, 6-tire or more trucks and combination trucks) to calculate the total gallons of fuel utilized by each of these vehicle types. The combined total VMT for the vehicle types is then divided by the combined total gallons of fuel consumed to calculate, in effect, a "weighted" fuel efficiency value that appropriately accounts for the existing fleet mix of traffic on interstate and non-interstate roadways. The VMT and average fuel efficiency data were obtained from the Federal Highway Administration's Highway Statistics 2002.2 Based on the calculation completed in Table C-8 of Appendix C, the new fuel efficiency rate to be used in the updated impact fee equation is 17.01 miles per gallon.

2 The data used in Table C-8 in Appendix C were compiled from Table VM-1 (Section V) of the document, Highway Statistics 2002, Office of Highway Policy Information, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. The document can be accessed on-line at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohim/hs02/.


13


Effective Days per Year

An effeCtive 365 days per year of operation was assumed for all land uses in the current fee. However, this will not be the case for all land uses since some uses operate only on weekdays (e.g., office buildings) and/or only seasonally (e.g., schools). The use of 365 days per year, therefore, provides a "conservative" element, ensuring that gasoline taxes are adequately credited against the fee. As a result, no changes to the effective days per year are proposed in this fee update.

Across-the-Board Adjustment

This factor simply allows the impact fee rates to be adjusted on an "across-the-board" basis. In the current transportation impact fee program, Indian River County elected not to assess the full impact fee. Specifically, the County adopted a fee schedule that discounts all land uses by a uniform percentage of 15 percent. Unless it is the desire of the County to adjust this factor, it is recommended that the updated fee schedule adopt a similar across-the-board factor.

Tinda/e-0/iver and Associates, Inc. May2004

14


CAPACITY DETERMINATION

An additional component of the impact fee equation is the average daily capacity added

per lane mile of roadway constructed. Appendix D provides the listing of projects and

methodology used to calculate the daily capacity added per lane mile. The County's

current impact fee schedule is based on a study that applies 8,000 vehicle miles of

capacity added for each lane mile of roadway constructed. Based on the analysis of the unconstructed 2025 Cost Feasible Plan projects, an average of 8,499 vehicle miles of daily capacity is added for each lane mile of roadway constructed. In addition, the cost to

add one vehicle mile of capacity was calculated to be $290. Table 8 provides a summary of this analysis.

Table 8. Average Daily Capacity Added

Vehicle Miles of Capacity

Source Lane Miles Added Added Total Cost

Indian River County Projects I 125.58 I 1 ,023,133 $264,118,967 FOOT Projects 62.27 573,483 $198,677,042

Total 187.85 1,596,616 $462,796,009

Weighted Average Capacity Added and Cost per VMC I 8,499 $290


15


PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE

The detailed impact fee calculations for each land use are included in Appendix E. This

appendix includes the major land use categories and the impact fees for the individual

land uses contained in each of the major categories. For each land use, the appendix

illustrates the impact fee demand component variables (trip rate, trip length, and percent

new trips), the total impact fee cost, the annual gas tax credit and present value of the gas

tax credit, the net impact fee, the current Indian River County impact fee, and the percent

difference between the potential impact fee and the current fee. It should be noted that

the Net Impact Fee illustrated in this appendix includes an across-the-board adjustment

factor equal to 15 percent, which is the same factor that is included in the current Impact

Fee Schedule. Table 9 summarizes the comparison of the proposed fees with the current fees by land use.


16


Table 9. Comparison of Current & Proposed Impact Fees

Tindale-Oiiver and Associates, Inc. May 2004

17


Appendix A

ROW Cost Estimation

Land Use Unit Cost by Project

A-1

ROW Costs by Project (*)

Project 10

Row Adjustment Factor: 1.50

Area (W.;.S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost

Sinale Familv 203,971 369,430 573,401 $1.00 $573,401 $860,101 Multi-Family 165,460 0 165,460 $1.00 $165,460 $248,190 Commercial 0 0 0 $8.00 $0 $0 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Aariculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate (1) 179,666 179,666 359,331 $1.00 $359,331 $538,997 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Houses (number) 8 $130,000.00 $1,040,000 $1,040,000 Retention Ponds 97,072 $1.00 $97,072 $145,609 Total 1,195,264 $2,235,264 $2,832,897 (1) Assumed as Residential.

Project 20


Area (W-5) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost

Single Family 424,403 424,403 . 848,806 $1.00 $848,806 $2,122,014 Multi-Family 41,894 41,894 83,788 $1.00 $83,788 $209,471 Commercial 57,414 57,414 114,829 $8.00 $918,629 $2,296,573 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate _(1) 9,056 9,056 18,111 $1.00 $18,111 $45,278 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 131,860 $1.00 $131,860 $329,650 Total - .I 1,197,394 ---~2,001,194 __ $5,002,985 ----- --- ---- --- -- --------- ---

(1) Assumed as Residential.

(*) In all Projects, the ROW costs represent only the Land Purchase costs and not costs associated with takings, condemnations, relocations, litigations, etc. These costs are accounted for through the use of the ROW Adjustment Factor. These factors were provided by Indian River County staff for County Projects, and by FOOT District IV staff for FOOT Projects.

A-2

Project 30 Row Adjustment Factor: 2.00

Area (W-S) Area (E·N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW I Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost 1

Sinale FamilY 91,932 37,050 128,983 $1.00 $128,983 $257,965 Multi-Familv 0 28,534 28,534 $1.00 $28,534 $57,068 Commercial 14,181 14,181 28,362 $10.00 $283,620 $567,240 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $01 AQriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate (1) 0 26,348 26,348 $1.00 $26,348 $52,697, Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0- N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 65,658 $1.00 $65,658 $131,315 2 Commercial Parcels (2) $2,000,000 ,Total___ _ _____ _______

---- ---- --_L --- 277,8841 L $533,143 $3;066,285

(1) Assumed as Residential. (2) Additional cost for acquisition of two commercial parcels, including land cost and all additional acquisition costs.

Project 50


Area (W-S) Area (E·N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost

Single Family 700,056 883,082 1,583,138 $0.75 $1,187,353 $1,781,030 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 159,113 159,113 318,226 $1.25 $397,782 $596,674 Industrial 0 0 0· N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 183,027 0 183,027 $0.50 $91,513 $137,270 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 195,412 $0.50 $97,706 $146,559 Total I 2,279,802 $1,774,355 $2,661,533

A-3

Project 55 Row Adjustment Factor:

1.50 ---

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost Single Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 32,731 32,731 65,462 $6.00 $392,772 $589,157 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0

Retention Ponds 2,500 $6.00 $15,002 $22,503 Total 67,962 $407,773 $611,660 -

Project 60 Constructed - No ROW Requirements

Project 70

Row Adjustment Factor: 1.82 (1)

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost

Single Family 0 154,788 154,788 $1.00 $154,788 $282,251 Multi-Family 129,381 129,381 258,761 $1.00 $258,761 $471,844 Commercial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 444,038 289,251 733,289 $0.75 $549,967 $1 ,002,849i Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0' Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $01 Retention Ponds 34,405 $0.75 $25,804 $47,0531 Total I ~_11~,243

--$989,320 __ $1.~()3,997] --------- ---- ---

(1) ROW Adjustment Factor reflects the County average.

A-4

Project so Row Adjustment Factor: 1.82 (1)


Sinale Family 108,923 907,878 1,016,801 $1.00 $1,016,801 $1,854,109 Multi-Familv 114,512 114,512 229,024 $1.00 $417,619 $761,517 Commercial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0! Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 1,473,203 674,248 2,147,451 $0.75 $1,610,588 $2,936,863 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 244,138 $0.75 $333,885 $608,829 Total I 3,637,414

--$3,378,~- $6,161,319

(1) ROW Adjustment Factor reflects the County average.

Project 90

Row Adjustment Fact()r: 1.82 (1)


Single Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 2,043,934 2,043,934 4,087,869 $0.40 $1,635,148 $2,981,647 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 122,636 ' $0.40 $49,054 $89,449 Total 4,210,505 $1,684,202 $3,071,096 (1) ROW Adjustment Factor reflects the County average.

A-5

Project 100

Row Adjustment Factor: 1.82 <1> ----~

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost Sinale Family (2) 0 41,978 41,978 $1.00 $41,978 $76,546 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 6,244 6,244 12,488 $3.00 $37,465 $68,316

Industrial 41,978 0 41,978 $3.00 $125,935 $229,639 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0i Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0i Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 29,838 $1.00 $29,838 $54,408 Total I - 126,2_1!2 $235,215 $428,9081 (1) ROW Adjustment Factor reflects the County average. (2) No Residential Land Use cost per square foot was provided for this project. Therefore, the Residential cost corresponding to the closest project (Project 20: 27th Avenue) was used.

Project 110



Single Family 31,822 31,822 63,645 $1.00 $63,645 $95,467 Multi-Family 28,603 28,603 57,207 $1.00 $57,207 $85,810 Commercial (1) 10,317 10,317 20,635 $17.00 $350,789 $526,183 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 43,772 $1.00 $65,658 $98,488 Total I 185,258 $537,299 $805,948 (1) No Commercial Land Use cost per square foot was provided for this project, and the land use on Barber Street corresponds to the area located at the intersection with SR5/US1. Therefore, the commercial cost corresponding to Project 120 (CR510) was used.

A-6

Project 120

Row Adjustment Factor: 1.82 {1)

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost

SinQie Family 387,183 269,464 656,648 $0.75 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A Commercial1 (1) 29,479 29,479 58,958 $17.00 Commercial2 (2) 198,848 152,775 351,623 $7.00 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A Agriculture 642,871 163,793 806,664 $0.75 Estate (3) 0 642,871 642,871 $0.75 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A Retention Ponds 0 N/A Total 2,516,764 (1) Commercial Land Use cost adopted for intersections of CR510 with SR5/US1 and CR512. (2) Commercial Land Use cost adopted for the Commercial areas not located at the intersections of CR510 with SR5/US1 or CR512. (3) Assumed as Residential.

Project 140


Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost

Single Family 477,496 354,160 831,656 $1.00 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A Commercial1 (1) 27,567 27,567 55,134 $17.00 Commercial2 (2) 85,331 208,667 293,998 $6.00 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A Estate 0 0 0 N/A Preserve 0 0 0 N/A Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A Retention Ponds 0 N/A Tota_L_ __ T 1,180,787 (1) Commercial Land Use cost adopted for the intersection of CR512 with CR51 0. (2) Commercial Land Use cost adopted for the Commercial areas not located at the intersection of CR512 with CR510.

A-7

Total Adjusted ROW 1

Cost Cost $492,486 $898,034

$0 $0 $1,002,286 $1,827,641 $2,461,361 $4,488,224

$0 $0 $604,998 $1,103,197 $482,153 $879,194

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$5,043,284 $9,196,290

Total Adjusted ROW Cost Cost

$831,656 $1,455,398 $0 $0

$937,273 $1,640,228 $1,763,986 $3,086,975

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0! $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$3,532,915 $6,182,601!

Project 150


Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost Single Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Multi-Family 0 0 01 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 295,519 295,519 591,038 $0.75 $443,279 $775,738

Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Houses (number) 2 $300,000.00 $600,000 $600,000 Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0 Oak Trees at West End 12 $10,000 $120,000 $120,000 Total I 591,038 $1,043,279 $1,375,738

Project 155



Single Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Multi-Family 108,977 234,313 343,290 $1.00 $343,290 $514,935 Commercial 0 29,350 29,350 $4.00 $117,400 $176,100 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 154,686 0 154,686 $0.75 $116,014 $174,021 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Culvert Canal (from 74th Ave to 82"d Ave) 264,000 0 264,000 $0.75 $198,000 $297,000: Culvert Canal (from 82"d Ave to 90th Ave) 0 800,000 800,000 $1.00 $800,000 $1,200,000] Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0! Total 1,591,326 $1,574,705 $2,362,0571

A-8

Project 160 No ROW Requirements

Project 170

Row Adjustment Factor: 2.50 -

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost Single Family 88,742 88,742 177,484 $1.50 $266,226 $665,566 Multi-Family 285,450 266,151 551,602 $1.50 $827,403 $2,068,507 Commercial 11,502 30,801 42,303 $12.00 $507,638 $1,269,095 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate (1) 106,594 106,594 213,189 $1.50 $319,783 $799,458

Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0 Total I ~84,57~._ $1,921,050 $4,802,626 (1) Assumed as Residential.

Project 190



Single Family 234,197 257,929 492,126 $1.00 $492,126 $861,221 Multi-Family 224,418 .200,687 425,105 $1.00 $425,105 $743,934 Commercial 135,808 135,808 271,617 $10.00 $2,716,166 $4,753,290 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 370,567 370,567 741,135 $0.75 $555,851 $972,739 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $OJ Retention Ponds 170,597 $0.75 $127,948 $223,9081 Total I 2,100,579 $4,317,196 $7,555,0931

A-9

Project 195

Row Adjustment Factor:

Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf]

Single Family (1) 205,500 205,500 411,000 Multi-Family 0 0 0 Commercial 345,884 312,739 658,623 Industrial 0 0 0 Agriculture 0 0 0 Estate 0 0 0 Preserve 0 0 0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 Culvert Canal 100,000 0 100,000 Retention Ponds 0 Total I 1,169,623 -----·-·-

(1) The County has acquired 0.75 mile of needed ROWalorig the corridor in Residential Area.

Project Cost:

Project Cost:

Project Cost:

210 $4,531,000 Cost Adopted from FOOT Work Programs


230 $367,032 Cost Adopted from FOOT Work Programs

A-10

1.75

Unit Total Adjusted ROW Cost Cost Cost

$1.00 $411,000 $719,250 N/A $0 $0

$6.00 $3,951,736 $6,915,539 N/A $0 $0 N/A $0 $0 N/A $0 $0 N/A $0 $0 N/A $0 $0

$1.00 $100,000 $175,000 N/A $0 $0

$4,462,736 $7,809,789

Project 232 Row Adjustment Factor: 3.67


Single Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Multi-Family 492,166 492,166 984,331 $1.25 $1,230,414 $4,520,333 Commercial 369,103 369,103 738,206 $8.00 $5,905,648 $21,696,350 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0 Total 1,722,537 $7,136,063 $26,216,683

--

Project 235


Area (W-5) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost

Single Family 181,272 181,272 362,545 $3.00 $1,087,634 $2,175,268 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial 25,593 25,593 51,186 $6.00 $307,113 $614,226 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0 Total I 413,730 $1,394,747 $2,789,494

A-11

Project 240


Area (W-S) Area (E-N) Total Unit Total Adjusted ROW 1

Land Use [sf] [sf] [sf] Cost Cost Cost , Single Family_ 49,094 112,270 161,364 $3.00 $484,092 $847,162 Multi-Family 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Commercial (1) 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Industrial 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Agriculture 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Estate (2) 63,175 0 63,175 $3.00 $189,526 $331,670 Preserve 0 0 0 N/A. $0 $0 Water Bodies 0 0 0 N/A $0 $0 Retention Ponds 0 N/A $0 $0 Total

----- -~ ----- ___L_ __ ~24,539

-$673,618 $1,178,831

(1) No Commercial Land Use cost per square foot was provided for this project. This land use corresponds to the area located at the intersection of Fleming St. and CR510. Therefore, cost corresponding to Project 120 (CR510) for areas that are not the intersection of CR510 with CR512 or SR5/US1 was used. (2) Assumed as Residential.

Project Cost:

Project Cost:


2308721 $811,000 Cost Adopted from FOOT Work Programs

A-12

IRC ROW Costs Relationships<1>- FOOT Projects

Estimated Estimated Initial ROW Final ROW

Project Cost<1> Cost<1> Area<1> Weighted On From To [$/sf] [$/sf] [sf] Factor<2>

SR5-US1 St. Lucie Co. Line N of Highland Dr 13.30 57.55 104,232 451,019 SR5-US1 S ofiR Blvd N ofiR Blvd 20.52 141.92 36,066 249,439 SR5-US1 N of Highland Dr S of Oslo Rd 40.01 324.89 2,799 22,728 SR60 MP19 W 1-95/MP 22.5 0.77 5.06 298,981 1,964,732 SR60 MP 14.634 MP19 0.07 4.14 12,339 729,764 SR60 MP 11.628 MP 14.634 0.23 0.68 1,038,676 3,070,868 SR60 MP 7.74 MP 11.628 N/D SR60 MP 3.38 MP 7.74 0.16 0.54 2,013,542 6,795,704 SR60 MP 3.00 MP 6.00 0.10 0.42 2,246,175 9,433,935 SR60 MP 0.75 MP 3.38 0.13 0.43 2,926,828 9,681,046 SR 60/0sceola Blvd 82nd Ave/CR 609 66th Ave/CR 505 2.35 6.28 510,958 1,365,454 SR 50/0sceola Blvd 1-95 82nd Ave/CR 609 - N/D Total 9,190,596 33,764,690

Factor<3> 3.67

(1) Information provided by FOOT District IV Right of Way Office. (2) The weighted factor was calculated as the relationship between the Estimated Initial ROW Cost and the Estimated Final ROW Cost times the Area. (3) The Factor was calculated based on the total of the weighted factors divided by the total area.

A-13

IRC ROW Costs Relationships - County Projects

Estimated Estimated Initial ROW Final ROW

Project Cost<1> Cost<1> Area Weighted On From To [$/sf] [$/sf] [sf] Factor<2>

26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave $2,235,264 $2,832,897 1,195,264 1,514,837 27th Ave Oslo Rd Aviation Blvd $2,001,194 $5,002,985 1,197,394 2,993,484 43rd Ave 8th St 26th St $533,143 $3,066,285 277,884 1,598,208 53rd St 66th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $1,774,355 $2,661,533 2,279,802 3,419,704 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy us 1 $407,773 $611,660 67,962 101,943 Barber St us 1 Schumann Dr $537,299 $805,948 185,258 277,888 CR 512 1-95 Roseland Rd $3,532,915 $6,182,601 1 '180,787 2,066,377 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave $1,043,279 $1,375,738 591,038 779,383 16th St 90th Ave 66th Ave $1,574,705 . $2,362,057 1,591,326 2,386,989 Indian River Blvd 4th St@ US 1 37th St $1,921,050 $4,802,626 984,578 2,461,445 Oslo Rd 1-95 27th Ave $4,317,196 $7,555,093 2,100,579 3,676,014 Oslo Rd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy $4,462,736 $7,809,789 1,169,623 2,046,840 Fleming St us 1 Easy St $1,394,747 $2,789,494 413,730 827,460 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave Barber St $673,618 $1,178,831 224,539 392,944

13,459,766 24,543,516

Factor<3> 1.82

(1) Information provided by County (2) The weighted factor was calculated as the relationship between the Estimated Initial ROW Cost' and the Estimated Final ROW Cost times the Area. (3) The Factor was calculated based on the total of the weighted factors divided by the total area.

A-14

Appendix B

Total Updated Costs

2025 Cost Feasible Roadway Improvements Cost Comparison - County Projects

Project Current ProJect Umlts Project Length New Lane Miles Project Costs(1) Design/Con st. Construction Number On From To (miles) Lanes Added Juris. Description Design ROW Construction Total Relatlonshl~ Unit Cost"'' Comments 10 26th St 66th Ave 27th Ave 3.05 2 6.10 CR Add 21anes $1,717 $2,833 $8,579 $13,129 20% $2,812,90 Urban 20 27th Ave OsloRd Aviation Blvd 4.80 2 9.60 CR Add 21anes $2,700 $5,003 $13,502 $21,205 20% $2,812,900 Urban 30 43rdAve 8th St 26th St 2.00 2 4.00 CR Add 21anes $1,755 $3,066 $8791 $13613 20% Construction Cost Provided by the County 50 53rdSt 661hAve Old DixieHwv 3.04 4 12.16 CR New41anes $2,385 $2,662 $11,923 $16,970 20% $3,922,150 Urban 66% I Rural 34% 55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwv US1 0.06 2 0.12 CR Add 2-lanes $34 $612 $169 $814 20% $2,812,90 Urban 70 66th Ave 4thSt SR60 2.03 2 4.06 CR New 21anes $725 $1,804 $4,835 $7,364 15% $2,381,60 Rural 80 66th Ave SR60 CR510 7.53 2 15.06 CR Add21anes $3,632 $6,161 $18,161 $27,954 20% $2,411,791 Urban 7% 1 Rural 93% 90 82ndAve 26thSt CR510 7.05 2 14.10 CR New21anes $3062 $3,071 $15,315 $21,448 20% $2,172300 Rural 100 Aviation Blvd US1 27th Ave 0.91 2 1.82 Cl Add21anes $512 $429 $2,560 $3,501 20% $2,812,90 Urban 110 BarberS! US1 Schumann Dr 1.36 2 2.72 Cl Add21anes $766 $806 $3,826 $5,397 20% $2,812,900 Urban 120 CR510 CR512 us 1 5.74 2 11.48 CR Add21anes $3229 $9,196 $16,146 $28,571 20% $2,812,900 Urban 140 CR512 1-95 Roseland Rd 4.25 2 8.50 CR Add21anes $2,391 $6,183 $11,955 $20,528 20% $2,812,900 Urban 150 8th St 82nd Ave 66th Ave 2.01 2 4.02 CR New21anes $437 $1,376 $4,366 $6,179 10% $2172 300 Rural 155 16thSt 90th Ave 66th Ave 3.01 2 6.02 CR New21anes $847 $2,362 $8,465 $11,674 10% ·$2,812,30 Urban 170 Indian River Blvd 4thSt@US1 37thSt 4.12 2 8.24 CR Add21anes $2,271 $4,803 $11,349 $18,423 20% $2754600 Urban 190 OsloRd 1-95 27th Ave 4.23 2 8.46 CR Add21anes $2,104 $7,555 $10512 $20171 20% $2 465112 Urban 24% I Rural 76% 195 OsloRd 27th Ave OldDixieHwv 2.50 2 5.00 CR Add21anes $1,406 $7,810 $7,031 $16,247 20% $2812,30 Urban 235 Flemina St us 1 EasvSt 1.24 2 2.48 Cl New21anes $700 $2,789 $3,499 $6,988 20% $2,821,800 Urban 240 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave BarberS! 0.82 2 1.64 CR Add21anes $461 $1,179 $2,306 $3,946 20% $2,812,300 Urban

Total 12&.&8 $31,131 $69,699 $163,289 $264,119 -- ------

~~All the figures are in 1,000 dollars (2l Costs from "2002 Transporlation Costs" , Office of Policy Planning- Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation -FOOT -March 2003

B-1

2025 Cost Feasible Roadway Improvements Cost Comparison - FOOT Projects

Project Project ProJect Umlts Length New Number On From To lmllesl Lanes

210 SRSO W Countv Line CR512 14.00 2 220 SR80 CR512 98th Ave 6.52 2

230121 SR60 98th Ave 1-95 1.19 4 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave 4.00 2 250 US1 S Countv Line 4th St tm IR Blvd 3.86 2

2308721 16th/17th Street 500' W of 14th Ave US1 0.75 1

Total

-· -'''All the figures are in 1,000 dollars 121 4 Lanes in FOOT Work Program - Costs for Design and ROW detennined as follows:

- from 2 lanes to 4 lanes: from FOOT Work Program -from 4 lanes to 6 lanes: from FOOT "2002 Transportation Costs"

Lane Miles Added

28.00 13.04

4.76 8.00 7.72 0.75

62.27

Project Juris. Description Design

SR Add2 lanes $7.457 SR Add2 lanes $2.840 SR Add4 lanes $1,174 SR Add 2 lanes $3,747 SR Add 2 lanes $1,740 Cl Add 1 lane $1.476

$18,433

----

"'Costs from "2002 Transportation Costs" , Office of Policy Planning- Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation- FOOT - March 2003

8-2

Costs''' Construction ROW Construction Total Unit Cost"' Comments

$4.531 $75.474 $87.462 Cost from FOOT Work Proorams $2.011 $19,683 $24,534 Cost from FOOT Work ProQrams

$367 $6,871 $8.411 $2,754.60C Cost from FOOT Work Proarams $26,217 $11,018 $40,982 $2,754,6 Urban $12,080 $14,701 $28,521 Cost from FOOT Work Proarams

$811 $6.480 $8,76 Cost from FOOT Work Programs

$46,017 $134,227 $19B,6n

---- ----- ---

APPENDIX C

Credit Component Calculations

The Value of a Penny in Indian River County

The revenue per penny for the unincorporated county was developed based on the 1st Local Option Gas Tax (LOGT) (1-6¢/gallon). The reason that the LOGT was used in this calculation is that it is the county's primary source for capital expansion of the road system. Tables C-1 reflects those revenues distributed only to the County unincorporated areas only for this tax. As shown in Table C-1, the value per penny (per gallon of fuel) that should be used to calculate the equivalent pennies is $532,407.


C-1


Table C-1 Estimated Fuel Tax Distributions for Indian River County {Unincorporated), FY 2003-04

Tax

1st Local Option Tax (1-6 cents)- excl. municipalities' shares

Source: Florida Legislative Committee on Intergovernmental Relations, http:/lfcn.state.fl.us/lcir/estimatesnogovest04.html

Total Distributed to Capital Projects


Amount of Levy per Gallon

C-2

$0.0600

$0.0600 $0.0600

Total Distribution Distribution Per Penny

$3, 194,442* $532,407

Weighted Average Average

$532,407 $532,407


GAS TAX CREDIT

County Portion

The information used to develop the County gas tax credit was provided by the Indian River County Budget Office. The County has two funding sources for capital expansion of the road system:

• Local Optional Sales Tax • Gas Tax

To develop the equivalent average County gas tax to be used in the credit calculation, both historical expenditures (last five years) and future appropriations (next five years) were reviewed.

Table C-2 illustrates the historical expenditures forthe Optional Sales Tax and Gas Tax that were used lor capacity expansion projects during the last five years. The Optional Sales Tax revenues generate an equivalent gas tax of $0.0273 cents, while the gas tax revenues generate $0.0401 cents. Thus, the total equivalent cents of County gas tax is $0.0674 cents for the five year period from FY 1999 to FY 2003.

Table C-3 illustrates the future appropriations for the Optional Sales Tax and Gas Tax that are projected for capacity expansion projects during the next five years. The Optional Sales Tax revenues generate an equivalent gas tax of $0.0347 cents, while the gas tax revenues generate $0.0555 cents. Thus, the total equivalent cents of County gas tax projected for the next five years is $0.0902.

Finally, Table C-4 illustrates the average equivalent Optional Sales and Gas Taxes based on the historical and projected information provided in Tables C-2 and C-3. The Optional Sales Tax revenues generate an average equivalent gas tax of $0.0310 cents, while the average gas tax revenues generate $0.0478 cents. Thus, the total average equivalent cents of county gas tax is $0.0788. This average equivalent cents of County gas tax is recommended for use as the County component of the transportation impact fee credit.

Tinda/e-0/iver and Associates, Inc. May 2004

C-3


Table C-2 Traffic Impact Fee Study - Historical Local Funding Sources

Project Descriotion/Name

Right of Way King's Highway Widening Oslo Road Widening

Total

Project Description/Name

Capital ProjeCts Salaries & Benefits <1> 43rd Avenue Widening - Right of Way 43rd Avenue Widening 4th Street Widening- U.S. 1 to Old Dixie C.R. 510/ U.S. 11ntersection King's Highway Widening Oslo Road Widening

Total - Capacity Increasing Projects

Traffic Impact Fee Study - Optional Sales Tax (OST) Funding Historical OST Expenses on Capacity Increasing Projects

I Fiscal Year I Fiscal Year I Fiscal Year I Fiscal Year I Fiscal Year I Total - FY 98/99 -1998/99 1999/2000 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 02/03

I $425,041 I $593,676 I $802,511 I $630,477 I $465,748 I I I $3,ooo 1 I $4,201,617 I $1501 I I I $136.472 I T $1,074 I

I $425,041 I $596,676 I $938,983 L $4,832,094 I $466,9721

Average Annual Expenditures:

Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny:

Optional Sales Tax Equivalent Historical Gas Tax: $

Traffic Impact Fee Study - Local Option Gas Tax Funding Historical LOGT Expenses on Capacity Increasing Projects

$2,917,453 $4,204,767

$137,546

$7,259,766

$1,451,953

$532,407

0.0273

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total- FY 98/99-

I

1998/99 1999/2000 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03

$3,861 $11,346 $195 $100,507 $166,473 $25,816

$4,531 $127,000 $250 $358

$125,000 $3,934,412 $90,275 $1,336 $1,451,522 $4,624,904

$6,260

$4,074,314 I $101,621 I $1,531 I $1,552,029 I $4,944,551 I

Average Annual Expenditures for Capacity Expansion Projects:

Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny: $

Historical Gas Tax : $

Total Historical Equivalent Gas Tax Local Funding (Sales Tax and Gas Tax): $

02/03

$282,382 $25,816

$131,531 $608

$10,102,449 $6,260

$10,674,045

$2,134,809

532,407

0.0401

0.0674

(1) Capital Projects salaries & benefits is a proration of the cost of employees paid out of LOGT funds. Three employees (1 Project Engineer, 1 Construction Inspector, and 1 ROW Agent) are funded from LOGT. The proration is based upon the ratio of expenditures on capacity Increasing projects to total LOGT expenditures.

Source data provided by Indian River County Budget Office


C-4


Table C-3 Traffic Impact Fee Study- Future Local Funding

Optional Sales Tax (CST) Funding Capacity Increasing Projects 2004 to 2008

Description Total- Capacity Increasing Appropriations 2004 to 2008 I $9,250,000

Average Annual Appropriations: I $1,850,000 Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny: I $532,407

Optional Sales Tax Equivalent Future Gas Tax: I

Local Option Gas Tax (LOGT) Funding Capacity Increasing Projects - FY 2003104 Budget @ 1131104

$0.0347

Total -Capacity Increasing Projects Next Five Years I $14,769,348

Average Annual Expenditures: I $2,953,870

Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny: I $532,407

Gas Tax Future: I $0.0555

Total Local Funding Gas Tax Credit: J $0.0902


Table C-4 Traffic Impact Fee Study -Summary of Local Funding Sources

Optional Sales Tax (OST) Funding Capacity Increasing Projects 2004 to 2008

Description Historical Future Average

Total -Capacity Increasing Expenditures I Appropriations $7,259,766 $9,250,000 $ 8,254,883 Average Annual Expenditures I Appropriations: $1,451,953 $1,850,000 $1,650,977 Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny: $532,407 $532,407 $532,407

Optional Sales Tax Equivalent Gas Tax: $0.0273 $0.0347 $0.0310

Local Option Gas Tax (LOGT) Funding Capacity Increasing Projects - FY 2003104 Budget@ 1131104

Total -Capacity Increasing Expenditures I Appropriations $10,674,045 $14,769,348 $ 12,721,697 Average Annual Expenditures I Appropriations: $2,134,809 $2,953,870 $2,544,339 Unincorporated County Average Gas Tax Per Penny: $532,407 $532,407 $532,407 Gas Tax: $0.0401 $0.0555 $0.0478 Total Local Funding Gas Tax credit: $0.0674 $0.0902 $0.0788




C-5

State Portion

This section describes the calculation of the equivalent pennies of gas tax from the State, which is based on an examination of capacity roadway projects from the 1999-2025 timeframe that are either completed, under construction, or planned. For the time period from 1999 to 2008, the FOOT Work Program for District Four was reviewed for Indian River County for this 1 0-year period. Due to the significant State and Federal expenditures on the expansion of State Road 60 during this period, the State investment in capacity-adding projects in the County is equivalent to 30.48 pennies of gas tax revenue on an annual basis. However, based on state roadway capacity projects in the County's current 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan, the total planned state expenditures on capacity-adding projects in the subsequent 17-year period (i.e., 2009 through 2025) drops to an average of 1.17 pennies of gas tax annually. Combined, the period from 1999 to 2025 for State expenditures in the County for capacity-adding roadway projects results in an average of 12.02 pennies. Table C-5 documents this calculation.

Table C-5 :qUiva en E I tP enny a cu a 1on or ae 0 10n C I I f f St t P rt•

Funding Source Cost of Number of Revenue from Equivalent Projects Years 1 Penny Pennies

FOOT Work Program (FY 99-08) $162,268,000 10 $532,407 $0.3048 Indian River LRTP (FY 09-25) $10,571,000 17 $532,407 $0.0117 State Total $172,839,000 27 $532,407 $0.1202

The specific State projects that were utilized in the equivalent penny calculations shown in Table C-5 are summarized in Tables C-6 and C-7.


C-6


Table C-6

FOOT Roadway Capacity-Adding Projects in Indian River County: 1999-2008 Project#

New Old On 4065891 IR County 4047401 IR County

2286131 4115428 IR County 2285781 4115428 SRA1A 2285831 4115433 SR5/US1 2285832 SR5/US1 2285833 SR5/US1 2285834 SR5/US1 2285931 4115443 SR5/US1 2285935 SR5/US1 2286291 4115479 SR5/US1 2285821 4115432 SR60 2285991 4115499 SR60 2286001 4115450 SR60 2286011 4115451 SR60

4114811 SR60 2286091 4115459 SR60 2286101 4115460 SR60 2286161 4115466 SR60 4036901 SR60 2285951 4115445 SR60 2285961 4115446 SR60 2285971 4115447 SR60 2285981 4115448 SR60 2286271 4115477 SR60 2286281 4115478 SR60

4056061 CR510 2308851 4125367 Jungle Trail 2308611 4125343 IR County 2308721 4125354 16th/17th St 4107181 66th Ave 2308791 4125361 82nd Ave

Total

Source: FOOT Work Program Gaming Reports


Streets

From To Signal System Group 2 Signal Ops on SHS Enhance Traffic Signal System S of 17th N ofSR60 St Lucie Co Line N of IR Blvd St Lucie Co Line N of Highland Dr S of IR Blvd N of IR Blvd N of Highlander Dr S of Oslo Rd 17th St Oslo Rd IR Blvd Vista Royle Blvd Osceola Co Line 1-95 MP3.38 MP7.444 MP3.00 MP6.00 MP0.75 MP3.38 Corridor PE 1-95 66th Ave E of Merril Barber B at Riverside Dr 27th Ave Vero Beach 74th Ave MP19.00 MP22.50 MP14.634 MP19.00 MP11.628 MP14.634 MP7.74 MP11.80 82nd Ave 66th Ave 1-95 82nd Ave CR512 SR5/US1 LAP Project Signal System-Group 1 500'W of 14th Ave US1 SR60 CR510 26th St CR510

C-7

Description Total Cost Traffic Signal Update $2,721,000 Traffic Signal Update $375,000 Traffic Signal $1,320,000 Add Lanes & Reconstruct $393,000

PD&E Study Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Turn Lane Add Lanes & Reconstruct Traffic Signal PD&E Study Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct

· Preliminary Engineering PD&E Study Traffic Signal Intersection (Major) Intersection (Minor) Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct Add Lanes & Reconstruct PD&E Study PD&E Study Traffic Signal Update Add Lanes & Reconstruct PD&E Study New Road Construction

$21,000 $6,235,000

$10,331,000 $989,000

$6,000 $9,836,000 $6,663,000

$5,000 $15,533,000

$644,000 $13,206,000

$100,000 $184,000

$2,000 $663,000 $200,000

$10,811,000 $14,572,000 $19,981,000 $27,240,000

$3,196,000 $49,000

$3,956,000 $805,000

$6,000 $8,619,000 $1,050,000 $2,556,000

$162,268,000


Table C-7

State Roadway Capacity-Adding Projects in Indian River County 2025 LRTP: 2009-2025 Project# Streets

New Old On From 232 N/A SR60~-- 1-95

-~

66th Ave ---- ----

Source: Indian River County 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan.


To Description Add Lanes & Reconstruct

C-8

1999-2008 i

FOOTWork 2oo9-202s I LRTPCost Program

$14,014,000 $3,429,000 $10,585,0001


Fuel Efficiency

Another input to the credit component is the average fuel efficiency of motor vehicles. The data used in this calculation were obtained from the Federal Highway Administration's Highway Statistics 2001.1 Based on these calculations completed in Table C-8, the new fuel efficiency rate to be used in the updated impact fee equation is 17.01 miles per gallon.

1 The data used in Tables C-2 and C-3 in Appendix C were compiled from Table VM-1 (Section V) of the

document, Highway Statistics 2001, Office of Highway Policy Information, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. The document can be accessed on-line at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hsOO/.


C-9


Appendix D

Capacity Calculations

2025 Cost Feasible Roadway Capacities - County Projects

ProJect Limits Project Daily Service ven1c1e 1999 2025 Volume Miles of Project Length New Project Lane Miles Added Capacity Number On From To l_miles) #Lanes Type #Lanes Type Lanes Juris. Description Added LOS Standard Current Future Capacity Added 10 261h St 661hAve 271h Ave 1.00 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 2.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 19,420

1.00 2.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 19,420 1.05 2.10 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 20,391 20 271hAve Oslo Rd Aviation Blvd 2.00 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 4.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 38,840 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9710 0.30 0.60 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 5,826 0.40 0.80 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 7,768 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710 0.30 0.60 D 11,680 31,100 19420 5,826 0.30 0.60 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 5,826 30 43rdAve BthS! 261h St 0.50 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 1.00 D 11,680 31100 19,420 9,710 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710 0.50 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710

50 53rd St 661hAve Old Dixie Hwy 1.03 0 0 4 D 4 CR New41anes 4.12 D 0 29,300 29,300 30,179 2.01 8.04 D 0 31,100 31,100 62,511

55 53rd St Old Dixie Hwy US1 0.06 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 0.12 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 1,165 70 661h Ave 4thSI SR60 1.01 0 0 2 u 2 CR New 21anes 2.02 D 0 11,680 11,680 11,797

1.02 2.04 D 0 11,680 11,680 11,914 80 66th Ave SR60 CR510 0.50 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 1.00 D 11,680 31100 19,420 9,710

1.50 3.00 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 27,630 0.50 1.00 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 9,210 0.98 1.96 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 18,052 1.53 3.06 D 10880 29,300 18,420 28,183 0.52 1.04 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 9,578 2.00 4.00 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 36,840

90 82ndAve 261h St CR510 2.99 0 0 2 u 2 CR New21anes 5.98 D 0 10,880 10,880 32,531 1.68 3.36 D 0 10,880 10,860 18,276

·0.36 0.72 D 0 10,660 10,660 3,917 2.02 4.04 D 0 10,660 10,660 21,976

100 Aviation Blvd us 1 271h Ave 0.91 2 u 4 D 2 Cl Add 21anes 1.62 D 11,660 31,100 19,420 17,672 110 BarberS! US1 Schumann Dr 1.36 2 u 4 u 2 Cl Add 21anes 2.72 D 11,660 24,680 13,200 17,952 120 CR510 CR512 US1. 1.73 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 3.46 D 10,660 29,300 18420 31,867

2.51 5.02 D 10,660 29,300 18,420 46,234 1.00 2.00 D 10,660 29,300 16,420 18,420 0.50 1.00 D 10,680 29,300 18,420 9,210

140 CR512 1-95 Roseland Rd 3.00 2 D 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 6.00 D 11,660 31,100 19,420 56,260 1.25 2.50 D 11,660 31,100 19,420 24,275

150 8th St 82ndAve 66th Ave 2.01 0 0 2 u 2 CR New21anes 4.02 D 0 10,880 10,660 21,869 155 161h St 901hAve 661hAve 1.02 0 0 2 u 2 CR New 21anes 2.04 D 0 11,660 11660 11914

1.99 3.96 D 0 11,660 11,660 23,243 170 Indian River Blvd 4thSt@US1 371h St 1.00 4 D 6 D 2 CR Add 21anes 2.00 D 31,100 46,800 15,700 15,700

0.50 1.00 D 31,100 46,600 15,700 7,650 0.50 1.00 D 31,100 46,600 15,700 7,650 0.39 0.76 D 31100 46,800 15,700 6,123 0.19 0.36 D 31,100 46,600 15700 2,963 0.37 0.74 D 31,100 46,600 15700 5609 0.46 0.92 D 31,100 46,800 15,700 7,222 0.71 1.42 D 31,100 46;6oo 15,700 11,147

D-1

2025 Cost Feasible Roadway Capacities -County Projects

Daily Service ven1c e Project Limits Project 1999 2025 Volume Miles of Project Length New Project Lane Miles Added Capacity Number On From To (miles) #Lanes Type #Lanes Type Lanes Juris. Description Added LOS Standard Current Future Capac~_ Added 190 Oslo Rd 1-95 27th Ave 0.23 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 2lanes 0.46 D 10880 29,300 18,420 4,237 2.00 4.00 D 10880 29,300 18,420 36,840 1.00 2.00 D 10,880 29,300 18,420 18,420 1.00 2.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 19,420 195 Oslo Rd 27th Ave Old Dixie Hwy 0.50 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 1.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 9,710 2.00 4.00 D 11,680 31,100 19,420 38,840 235 FlemingS! US1 EasySt 1.24 0 0 2 u 2 Cl New21anes 2.48 D 0 11,680 11,680 14,483 240 Schumann Dr CR 510@ 66th Ave BarberS! 0.82 2 u 4 D 2 CR Add 21anes 1.64 D 11,680 24,880 13,200 10,824

Total 125.58 1,023,133

Added Capacity in Vehicles per Lane-Mile 8,147

---- --·· --··

D-2

2025 Cost Feasible Roadway Capacities - FOOT Projects

Daily Service Project Limits Project 1999 2026 Volume Vehicle Miles Project Length New Project Lane Miles Added of Capacity I Number On From To I miles) #Lanes Type #Lanes Type Lanes Juris. Description Added LOS Standard Current Future Capacity Added 210 SR60 W County Line CR512 14.00 2 u 4 D 2 SR Add 21anes 28.00 c 10,880 29,300 18,420 257,880 220 SR60 CR512 98th Ave 6.52 2 u 4 D 2 SR Add 21anes 13.04 c 10,880 29,300 18,420 120,098i 230 SR60 98th Ave 1-95 1.19 2 u 6 D 4 SR Add 41anes 4.76 D 11,680 53,500 41,820 49,7661 232 SR60 1-95 66th Ave 2.00 4 D 6 D 2 SR Add 21anes 4.00 D 35,700 53,500 17800 35600 2.00 4.00 D 35,700 53,500 17,800 35,6001 250 US1 S County Line 4th St@ IR Blvd 2.30 4 D 6 D 2 SR Add 21anes 4.60 D 35,700 53,500 17,800 40,9401 1.56 3.12 D 35,700 53,500 17,800 27,7681 2308721 16th/17th Street 500' W of 14th Ave US1 0.75 4 u 5 u 1 Cl Add 1 lane 0.75 D 23,325 31,100 7,775 5,831

Total 62.27 673,4831

Added Capacity In Vehicles per Lane-Mile 9,2101

C-3

Appendix E

Proposed Impact Fee Schedule

Indian River County - Net Impact Fee Schedule

Fee Schedule Assume,tlons: Gasoline Tax: Unit Construction Cost: $2,463,847 Local Trip Length: 0.5 $ per gallon to capital: $0.1990 Capacity per Ia no: 8,499 lntitrstato Mileage%: 0.0% Facility life (years): 25 Fuel efficiency: 17.01 Across-tho-Board Adjustment: 0% Interest rate: 5.0% Effective days per year: 365

Total Percent Total Annual Gas Not ITE111

Trip Trip Trip Now Impact Gas Tax Impact Current Percent C~do Land Use Unit Rate Length Length Trips Cost Tax Credit Fee Foe Difference

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) (K) (L) Residential·

210 du 6.35 5.70 6.20 100% nla nla nla nla $1,523 nla 210 Single Family

Less than 1,500 sf du 6.35 5.70 6.20 100% $5,246 $84 $1,185 $4,061 nla nla 1,500 to 2,499 sf du 9.57 5.70 6.20 100% $7,906 $127 $1,786 $6,120 .nla nla 2,500 sf or larger du 10.74 5.70 6.20 100% $8,873 $142 $2,004 $6,869 n/a nla

230 Accessory Single-Fa mil du 5.86 5.10 5.60 100% $4,332 $70 $988 $3,344 $830 303% 230 Multi-Family du 5.86 5.10 5.60 100% $4,332 $70 $988 $3,344 $830 303% 240 Mobile Home du 4.81 4.30 4.80 100% $2,998 $49 $695 $2,303 $568 305% 310 Hotel room 8.23 6.30 6.80 66% $4,960 $79 $1,112 $3,848 $960 301% 320 Motel room 5.63 4.30 4.80 77% $2,702 $44 $626 $2,075 $512 305% 620 Nursing Home bed 2.61 2.60 3.10 89% $875 $15 $217 $659 $159 314% 252 ACLF bed 2.15 3.10 3.60 72% $696 $12 $168 $528 $129 310%

Office and Financial· 720 Medical Office 1.000 sf 36.13 5.20 5.70 87% $23,690 $383 $5,393 $18,297 $4,542 303% 911 Bank 1,000 sf 156.48 2.40 2.90 47% $25,583 $455 $6.420 $19,163 $4,603 316% 912 Bank w/Drive-ln 1,000 sf 265.21 2.40 2.90 47% $43,359 $772 $10,880 $32.479 $7,801 316% 710 Office up to 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf 18.31 4.60 5.10 92% $11,231 $183 $2,586 $8,645 nla nla 710 Office over 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf 13.27 4.60 5.10 92% $8,139 $133 $1,874 $6,265 nla nla

Industrial· 140 Manufacturing 1,000 sf 3.82 4.60 5.10 92% $2,343 $38 $539 $1,804 $446 304% 150 Warehouse 1,000 sf 4.88 4.60 5.10 92% $2,993 $49 $689 $2,304 $570 304% 151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf 2.50 4.60 5.10 92% $1,533 $25 $353 $1,180 $292 304% 110 General Industrial 1,000 sf 6.97 4.60 5.10 92% $4,275 $70 $984 $3,291 $814 304% NIA Concrete Plant acre 15.60 4.60 5.10 92% $9,569 $156 $2,203 $7,366 $1,822 304% NIA Sand Mining acre 2.00 4.60 5.10 92% $1,227 $20 $282 $944 $234 304%

Retail· 820 Retail under 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf 111.82 1.80 2.30 54% $15,753 $297 $4,180 $11,573 nla nla 820 Retail50,001 to 100,000 GSF 1,000 sf 70.70 1.90 2.40 64% $12,460 $232 $3,269 $9,192 $2,170 324% 820 Retail100,001 to 200,000 GSF 1,000 sf 54.50 2.00 2.50 69% $10,901 $201 _$2,830 $8,071 $1,913 322% 820 Retail over 200,000 GSF 1,000 sf 42.00 2.40 2.90 75% $10,957 $195 $2,750 $8,208 $1,971 316% 844 Gas Station121 fueling position 168.56 1.90 2.40 23% $10,676 $199 $2,801 $7,876 $1,859 324% 841 New and Used Auto Sales 1,000 sf 37.50 4.70 5.20 79% $20,181 $329 $4,637 $15,544 $3,847 304% 831 Qualitr_ Restaurant 1,000 sf 89.95 3.10 3.60 77% $31,120 $533 $7,505 $23,615 $5,753 310% 832 Restaurant 1,000 sf 130.34 3.00 3.50 73% $41,372 $711 $10,024 $31,348 $7,625 311% 834 Fast Food Restaurant 1,000 sf 496.12 1.60 2.10 59% $67,880 $1,313 $18,502 $49,378 $11,468 331% 850 StJ2E!rmarket 1,000 sf 111.51 2.10 2.60 62% $21.D43 $384 $5,411 $15,632 $3,720 320% 847 Car Wash stall 108.00 2.50 3.00 69% $27,002 $477 $6,729 $20,273 $4,882 315% 853 Convenience Store 1,000sf 636.30 1.60 2.10 29% $42,792 $828 $11,664 $31,128 $7,230 331% 890 Furniture Store 1,000sf 5.06 6.10 6.60 54% $2,416 $39 $543 $1,873 $467 301%

Recreational· 430 Golf Course hole 35.74 4.30 4.80 90% $20,047 $330 $4,647 $15,400 $3,801 305% 492 Racquet Club/Health Club/Dance Studio 1,000sf 17.14 4.30 4.80 94% $10,041 $165 $2,328 $7,713 $1,904 305% 412 County Park acres 2.10 4.30 4.80 90% $1,178 $19 $273 $905 $223 305% 491 Tennis Court court 31.04 4.30 4.80 90% $17,411 $286 $4,036 $13,374 $3,301 305% 420 Marina berth 2.96 4.30 4.80 94% $1,734 $29 $402 $1,332 $329 305%

Governmental· 732 Post Office 1,000 sf 108.19 4.60 5.10 35% $25,246 $412 $5,813 $19,433 $4,807 304% 590 Library 1,000 sf 54.00 4.60 5.10 85% $30,602 $500 $7,046 $23,556 $5,827 304% 730 Government Office Building 1,000 sf 68.93 4.60 5.10 92% $42,280 $691 $9,735 $32,545 $8,047 304% 733 Government Office Complex 1,000 sf 27.92 4.60 5.10 92% $17,125 $280 $3,943 $13,182 nla nla 571 Jail bed 1.21 4.60 5.10 85% $686 $11 $158 $528 $131 304%

Miscellaneous· 565 Day Care Center 1,000sf 79.26 2.00 2.50 73% $16,772. $309 $4,354 $12.418 $2,944 322% 610 Hospital 1,000 sf 16.78 5.10 5.60 77% $9,551 $155 $2,178 $7,373 $1,829 303% NIA Veterinary Clinic 1,000 sf 32.80 2.00 2.50 70% $6,656 $123 $1,728 $4,928 $1,168 322% 560 Church 1,000 sf 9.11 3.90 4.40 90% $4,635 $77 $1,086 $3,549 $873 307% 444 Movie Theater w/ Matinee screen 153.33 2.20 2.70 87% $42,535 $769 $10,841 $31,694 $7,568 319% 520 School Elementary) student 1.02 1.90 2.40 80% $225 $4 $59 $166 $39 324% 530 School (High) student 1.40 4.30 4.80 90% $785 $13 $182 $603 $149 305% 540 School College student 1.60 7.30 7.80 90% $1,524 $24 $338 $1,186 $297 300% NIA Fire Station 1,000 sf 5.40 2.60 3.10 89% $1,811 $32 $448 $1,363 $329 314%

E-1

ITE Code

210

230 230 240 310 320 620 252

720 911 912 710 710

140 150 151 110 N/A N/A

820 820 820 820 844 841 831 832 834 850 847 853 890

430 492 412 491 420

732 590 730 733 571

565 610 N/A 560 444 520 530 540 N/A

Indian River County -Traffic Impact Fee Schedule Alternatives

Land Use Unit

Residential· Single Family

Less than 1,500 sf du 1 ,500 to 2,499 sf du 2,500 sf or larger du

Accessory Single-Family du Multi-Family du Mobile Home du Hotel room Motel room Nursing Home bed ACLF bed

Office and Financial· Medical Office 1,000 sf Bank 1,000sf Bank w/Drive-ln 1,000sf Office up to 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf Office over 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf

Industrial· Manufacturing 1,000 sf Warehouse 1,000 sf Mini-Warehouse 1,000sf General Industrial 1,000 sf Concrete Plant acre Sand Mining acre

Retail· Retail under 50,000 GSF 1,000 sf Retail 50,001 to 100,000 GSF 1,000 sf Retail100,001 to 200,000 GSF 1,000sf Retail over 200,000 GSF 1,000 sf Gas Station fueling position New and Used Auto Sales 1,000 sf Quality Restaurant 1,000sf Restaurant 1,000 sf Fast Food Restaurant 1,000 sf Supermarket 1,000 sf Car Wash stall Convenience Store 1,000sf Furniture Store 1,000 sf

Recreational· Golf Course hole Racquet Club/Health Club/Dance Studio 1,000 sf Couni)'_Park acres Tennis Court court Marina berth

Governmental· Post Office 1,000sf Library_ 1,000 sf Government Office Building 1,000 sf Government Office Complex 1,000 sf Jail bed

Miscellaneous· Day Care Center 1,000 sf Hospital 1,000sf Veterinary Clinic 1,000sf Church 1,000 sf Movie Theater w/ Matinee screen School (Elementary) student School_{_ High) student School (College) student Fire Station 1,000 sf

Current Foe

n/a n/a n/a

$830 $830 $568 $960 $512 $159 $129

$4,542 $4,603 $7,801

n/a n/a

$446 $570 $292 $814

$1,822 $234

n/a $2,170 $1,913 $1,971 $1,859

$3,847 $5,753 $7,625

$11,468 $3,720 $4,882 $7,230

$467

$3,801 $1,904

$223 $3,301

$329

$4,807 $5,827 $8,047 n/a

$131

$2,944 $1,829 $1,168

$873 $7,568

$39 $149 $297 $329

Proposed Rate September 1, 2004

30% Discount

$2,843 $4,284 $4,808 $2,341 $2,341 $1,612 $2,694 $1,453

$461 $369

$12,808 $13,414 $22,735 $6,052

-· $4,386

$1,263 $1,613

$826 $2,304 $5,156

$661

$8,101 $6,434 $5,650 $5,745 $5,513

$10,881 $16,530 $21,944 $34,564 $10,943 $14,191 $21,790

$1,311

$10,780 $5,399

$633 $9,362

$932

$13,603 $16,489 $22,782 $9,228

$369

$8,693 $5,161 $3,449 $2,484

$22,186 $116 $422 $830 $954

E-2


26% Discount

$3,046 $4,590 $5,151 $2,508 $2,508 $1,727 $2,886 $1,557

$494 $396

$13,723 $14,372 $24,359 $6,484 $4,699

$1,353 $1,728

$885 $2,468 $5,524

$708

$8,680 $6,894 $6,053 $6,156 $5,907

$11,658 $17,711 $23,511 $37,033 $11,724 $15,205 $23,346 $1,405

$11,550 $5,785

$679 $10,031

$999

$14,575 $17,667 $24,409 $9,887

$396

$9,314 $5,530 $3,696 $2,662

$23,771 $124

. $452 $889

$1,022


20% Discount

$3,249 $4,896 $5,495 $2,675 $2,675 $1,842 $3,078 $1,660

$527 $422

$14,638 $15,331 $25,9a3

$6,916 $5,012

$1,443 $1,843

$944 $2,633 $5,892

$755

$9,258 $7,353 $6,457 $6,566 $6,300

$12,435 $18,892 $25,078 $39,502 $12,506 $16,218 $24,902

$1,498

$12,320 $6,171

$724 $10,700

$1,066

$15,547 $18,845 $26,036 $10,546

$422

$9,935 $5,898 $3,942 $2,839

$25,355 $133 $483 $948

$1,090


16% Discount

$3,452 $5,202 $5,838 $2,842 $2,842 $1,957 $3,271 $1,764

$560 $449

$15,553 $16,289 $27,607

$7,348 $5,326

$1,533 $1,958 $1,003 $2,797 $6,261

$803

$9,837 $7,813 $6,860 $6,977 $6,694

$13,212 $20,072 $26,646 $41,971 $13,288 $17,232 $26,459

$1,592

$13,090 $6,556

$769 $11,368

$1,132

$16,518 $20,023 $27,663 $11,205

$449.

$10,555 $6,267 $4,189 $3,016

$26,940 $141 $513

$1,008 $1,158

APPENDIX F

Single Family Residential Tiering

Analysis

Fee Tiering for Residential Single Family (Detached) Use

Indian River County has expressed an interest in having an option for the tiering of the assessed impact fee for the residential Single Family (Detached) land use. To accommodate this, an analysis was completed on the comparative relationship between housing unit size and household travel behavior. This analysis utilized national data from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) and the 2001 American Housing Survey (AHS) to examine this relationship through the linkage of annual household income.

Table E-1 presents the trip characteristics for the residential Single Family (Detached) land use category that are being utilized in the proposed impact fee schedule. To address the County's desire for a tiered fee option for this particular use, the 2001 AHS database was consulted first to examine the distribution of housing units in the United States by size in terms of square footage. This review helped develop three potential tiers for the Single Family (Detached) category based on ranges of housing unit size: less than 1 ,500 sf, 1 ,500 to 2,499 sf, and 2,500 sf or more. The AHS database then was used to estimate median annual household incomes for the three tiers using a comparison of median annual family/household incomes with housing unit size. The results of this analysis are presented in Table E-2.

Table E-1

Total Trip Proposed Values Excluding Tiering Trip Rate Length Daily VMT

Ratio to Mean

Single Family (Detached) 9.57 6.20 59.334 1.00

Table E-2

2001 AHS Median Income Data by Housing Unit Size (US)

Annual Income

Less than 1 ,500 sf 1 ,500 to 2,499 sf 2,500 or more Total Average

$31,695 $54,581 $74,249 $45,473

The next step involved the use of the NHTS database to assess average annual household vehicle miles of travel (VMT) for the annual household ·income levels that were identified for the three tiers using the AHS data. For example, as shown in Table E-2, households in the less-than-1 ,500-sf tier have a median annual household income of approximately $31,695. Therefore, the NHTS data were used to estimate the annual VMT per household for those households with a median annual income of $31 ,695. This analysis resulted in an annual VMT per household of 18,604 miles, which translates to a daily VMT of 50.97 miles. The NHTS-specific analysis is documented in Table E-3 for all three tiers.

Table E-3

2001 NHTS Travel Data by Annual HH Income

Median of $30,000 Mean--> Total

Median of $55,000 Median of

Tin dale-Oliver and Associates, Inc. May2004

Annual VMT/HH

18,604 22,063 28,039 31

F-1

Ratio to Normalized to Days Daily VMT . Mean 1.271

365 50.970~ 365 60.447 1.000 365 76.81 365


The final step in the tier development process is to calculate corresponding trip rates for the three new Single Family (Detached) tiers for use in the fee schedule. This is accomplished through the use of comparative ratios. As shown in Table E-3, the average daily household VMT for the $30,000 median income level is 50.97 miles. The comparison of this figure to the overall average daily VMT in the U.S. (60.447 miles) results in a ratio of 0.843. Since the currently proposed Single Family (Detached) category is considered to represent the 1,500-to-2,499-sf range of the three housing-unit size-based tiers, this calculated ratio for the $30,000 median income level must be normalized to the ratio for the $55,000 median income level (i.e., 1.271 ). This results in a normalized ratio of 0.664.

This ratio is then applied to the daily VMT of 57.25 miles for the currently proposed Single Family (Detached) category (again, which represents the mean, or middle range, of the three housing-unit-size-based tiers) to generate a daily VMT of 39.37 for the new less-than-1,500-sf category, as shown in Table E-4. This daily VMT figure is then divided by the assessable trip length of 6.20 miles to obtain a typical trip rate of 6.35 trips per day.1

Table E-4

Alternative Values Including Tiering Single Family (Detached) Less than 1,500 sf

Mean ---> 1,500 to 2,499 sf 2,500 sf or larger

Total Trip Trip Rate Length

-~, 6.20 9.57 6.20 ~ 6.20

Ratio to Daily VMT Mean

39.37IIIIJJB 59.33 1.000 66.59Bf~

Table E-5 illustrates the impact that the incorporation of these new tiers for the Single Family (Detached) land use has on the County's proposed updated impact fee schedule. As shown in the table, the net impact fee for a housing unit of less than 1,500 sf is $4,061. From this tier, the net impact fee increases as housing unit size goes up, with the 2,500-sf-or-larger housing units having a proposed net impact fee of $6,869.

Table E-5

Impact of Tiering on Fee Schedule Single Family (Detached)

Less than 1 ,500 sf Mean ---> 1 ,500 to 2,499 sf

sf or

Total Trip Trip Rate Length

6.35 6.20 9.57 6.20

10.74 6.20

DailyVMT

39.37 59.33 66.59

Net Fee

1 Assessable trip length is assumed to remain constant at 6.20 miles since the NHTS data show that average trip length characteristics are relatively uniform across the annual household income levels; only average daily trip rates are significantly different.


F-2


Documents

UPDATE OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE - COST ESTIMATE