2004-12-30 Workshop w/ CountyCITY OF OKEECHOBEE AND ow OKEECHOBEE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DECEMBER 30, 2004 JOINT WORKSHOP
SUMMARY OF WORKSHOP DISCUSSION
II AGENDA III DISCUSSION
I. CALL TO ORDER:
If. BOARD AND STAFF ATTENDANCE:
Mayor James E. Kirk
Council Member Noel A. Chandler
Council Member Lowry Markham
Council Member Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Council Member D. Clayton Williams, Jr.
City Attorney John R. Cook
City Administrator Bill L. Veach
City Clerk Lane Gamiotea
Board of County Commissions Chair John Abney
County Commissioner Cliff Betts
County Commissioner Ray Domer
County Commissioner Elvie Posey
County Commissioner Gene Woods
County Attorney Laura McCall
County Administrator George Long
County Deputy Clerk Debra Lewis
III. DISCUSSION.
155
PAGE 1 OF 3
Board of County Commissioners Vice Chairperson Betts called the December 30, 2004 joint workshop to order at
2:00 p.m. The workshop was held at the Okeechobee County Health Department Annex Building located on
Northwest 9`h Avenue.
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
A. Presentation from Walter H. Keller and Thomas G. Wright regarding County Administrator Long opened the floor for discussion advising that he met with Administrator Veach, Attorney
the City/County Impact Fee Study. Cook and Mr. Wright. It was a very informative meeting. We were able to gain some insight as to exactly what each
party will be able to do and what we are not able to do.
156
DECEMBER 30, 2004 - CITy/COUNTY .JOINT WORKSHOP - PAGE 2 OF 3
AGENDA DISCUSSION
III. DISCUSSION CONTINUED. IIF-- 11
A. Presentation from Walter H. Keller and Thomas G. Wright regarding
the City/County Impact Fee Study continued.
Mr. Walter Keller of Walter H. Keller, Inc. and Thomas G. Wright, Esquire briefly summarized the impact fee approach
they are offering the City and County. The first item to note is that part of the concurrency requirement that is outlined
in both the City and County Comprehensive Plan can be achieved through the use of impact fees. It is a critical part
of the overall funding strategy for the capital improvements that are needed to serve planned development. However,
impact fee's alone will not be sufficient to adequately accommodate projected growth. Other innovative funding
mechanisms can be considered to be used in conjunction with impact fees. Examples of other funding mechanisms
are Special Assessments and Special Improvement Districts.
The Scope of Services offered to formulate the Impact Fee Study is to complete the data collection and analysis;
formulate policy analysis; methodology development; implementation and administration projection; final report; study
requirements and provision of work.
The service areas estimate for fees are as follows:
Service Area Coun C_t_
Transportation $12,380.00 $ 6,815.00
Law Enforcement $ 9,295.00 $ 6,815.00
Corrections In Law Enforcement
Fire $ 9,295.00 $ 6,815.00
EMS Included in Fire
Schools $12,895.00
Stormwater Management $ 6,195.00 $ 6,815.00
Water and Sewer $12,895.00
TOTAL $75,850.00 $27,260.00
The projected schedule is to have the draft final report within seven months, with final report by ten months.
One issue in specific that was clarified for the City was that Impact Fee's are also in effect for any subdivision already
in place. The impact fee would be addressed at the time a building permit is applied for and would be levied regardless
of when your subdivision was adopted by the City Council.
1�
r
1
77
DECEMBER 30, 2004 - CITy/COutm JOINT WORKSHOP - PAGE 3 oA 5
AGENDA DISCUSSION
III. DISCUSSION CONTINUED.
A. Presentation from Walter H. Keller and Thomas G. Wright regarding Discussion ensued. Mr. Keller and Wright addressed each of the members questions and concerns. There is not a
the City/County Impact Fee Study continued. specific method in which they must follow. The fee's area established by collecting data surrounding the existing area.
Therefore the same size house in one area of the county could have a different impact fee than one built across town.
The impact of the existing area is taken into consideration.
IV. ADJOURN WORKSHOP.
Please take notice and be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with
respect to any matter considered at this meeting, he/she may need to insure that a verbatim record of the
proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
City Clerk tapes are for the sole purpose of backup for official records of the Clerk.
ATTEST:
Lane-Gamiotea, CMC, City Clerk.
Tv�
James E. Kirk, Mayor
Administrator's Veach and Long were instructed to ask the School Board and OUA of their intentions to be a part of
this project. This item will be on both the City Council and County Commissioners agenda at their next regular meeting
for offical action and authorization of funds.
There being no further discussion, County Vice Chairperson Betts adjourned the workshop at 3:12 p.m.
The Okeechobee News
P.O. Box 639, Okeechobee, Florida 34973
(863) 763-3134
Published Daily
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OFOKEECHOBEE
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Judy Kasten, who on oath says she is Publisher of the Okeechobee
News, a DAILY Newspaper published at Okeechobee, in
Okeechobee County, Florida; That the attached copy of advertise-
ment, being
in the matter of
in the 19th Judicial District of the Circuit Court of Okeechobee
County, Florida, was published in said newspaper in the issues
of
Affiant further says that the said Okeechobee News is
a newspaper published at Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee
County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been
published continuously in said Okeechobee County, Florida
each week and has been entered as second class mail matter at
the post office in Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee County,
Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first
publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant
further says that she has neither paid nor promised any person,
firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund
for the purpose of securing this advertisemept for publication in
the said newspaper. ! J
me this
day P%-!L� 4-- A.D. 20
PUBLIC NOTICE
The Okeechobee County Board of County Commissioners will c nvene a
workshop session with members of the Okeechobee C'ddyy C ncil on
Thursday, Decembet 30, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. imthe Okeecho Heaah
Department Auditorium at 1798 NW 9th-Avenue, Okeechobee, odda to
discuss Issues relating to the proposed impact tee study for Oka ichobee
County.
Any person decidingg to appeal any decision made by the Board Courdy
Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at this m "ng will
need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purposes, or she
will need to ensure that a verbatim record of such Proceedings f made,
which record shall Include the testimony and evidence upon w iich the
appeal is to be based.
John W. Abney, Sr., Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Sharon Robertson; Clerk
Board of Counrrttyy Commissioners
542878 ON 12J22/04 .
Notary Public, State of Florida at Large , �1PAY—. Karmen R. Brown
Commission #DD272118
Expires: Jan 17, 2008
�"""OF fOP`� Bonded Thru
"" Atlantic Bonding Co., Inc.
•
•
� 4 "Oo p (�-
61 Lk
�1Cl,+u�1t�
Iti'laU( 11G4k
I
1
tz &' W Wol
(' �r�-in
WAN
Ioat,
�IJJO
I
Y ccl
Ocq)�4 'cu,
�yWidm,Kruk -'ir c ti I , �' � .;�,e - c/ot'4 Lk
Al
/c,
`lac n� A C'2 ('PL ac- )oe,-/ c Z.t /
c _ toy Co
Lk
fit. otev)
ay\t-4 cr cbt�k- 0 Wc,, o
i7`'
v I
llvvc�n ram- Al q-w Aw-) C,- <4k
4 azh ttm"Orjk�
can
�4bd
--hcwxo 6"vq(-zcl -h)
� � Gam:
Ste---� �',a j �� %�--� �� �►,�.� �� cu�u,�..
C 0 LL&-7 Joa GLI �a (ZIO- q %-20 /(Oc, ola t1)qa&, ux
tict, LAlf (L-O Id Vi � �?,a , a
-/zo/; ,A
1,d a CO-ku kcdio 14 P-Q& todfco oA k, OjD'l
bid % evu-,m -
CL-
ga a pa vt
cLu-L
O-U
(Jq OVA-
pz�MA (DD
�� &--4uo �O, JM-,� ftvq 4eu�—
•
•
qv-
bit,-
a1C-VAxLl--tD "
UD
L ic&
� , t � t/ -4
���+ tau , - --, C?��
caoluC�ue�, `�d9�.� r�,et.� he 0-
Cwo �k �..f � � vu /X�,� c�, � uoz
�0uQ0ca,� a) etj, , (4ke bu,1Alk wcj 24Wa,�
00
� PC � „��- J� lika ailmen w-
/J6t ?
�� � � GAD � � Gc/ .. ��� � lv►c ���
i of C� C��� Aw U4 �J
SAL/ J
0 0
-i-� CtQ CT,- aS CS - j 0,C
li Vkw
C I U1 y(I/lt /JD� �/-t'u �1 c �,D ..�C � G G�,�ot
I e
k)W
ulPj �r c�u �4, �ov�' �d �eLJ � �-
�����y-�,'
b�&Iu, 14nj
CVIA- 44 0-kICA
417 0-y-
C�,
)�PC M--L,
�cs����C � i���� Coo-<t:u �p �.F-E-
4J.AAe1�w� and ax-lamed
0 •
i
wa LLL
'h
xq d--o a4 �- ckd c ll Via,
`hU)
i
I
Vw / - 5 ��
•
•
l
7
CJz�� � (�o� pe��9,o„ —
Okeechobee, Florida
September 20, 2004
Prepared by:
" s = ! eif Walter H. Keller, Inc,
OEM Consulting Engineers & Planners
WW Coral Springs • Sewall's Point
Tischler & Associates, Inc.
Bethesda, Maryland
Thomas G. Wright, Esq.
Indian River Shores, Florida
n
OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA
CITY/COUNTY IMPACT FEE STUD
RFP #2004-17
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
1. Transmittal Letter
2. Personnel
Walter H. Keller, Inc. Resumes
Thomas G. Wright Resume ..
Tischler & Associates Resumes
3. Relevent Experience (6 projects)
Walter H. Keller, Inc. Projects
Tischler & Associates Projects
Other Experience for Walter H. Keller, Inc.
Walter H. Keller, Inc. Corporate Profile
Tischler &Associates, Inc. Corporate Profi
4. Project Approach & Timeline/Pricing
Project Approach
Approach to Feasibility Study
Approach to Implementation of Impact
Other Funding Mechanisms
Tasks/Subtasks
Manhour/Fee Estimate
Project Schedule
RE
•
0
ML s M ■_
A ■ �
•
s _ E 2AlpWalter H. Keller, Inc.
Consulting Engineers and Planners
Coral Springs • Sewall's Polnt
September 20, 2004
George Long, Okeechobee County
Bill Veach, City of Okeechobee
Okeechobee County Courthouse
304 NW 2"d Street, Room 106
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Re: RFP No. 2004-17
Okeechobee City/County Impact Fee Study
Dear Administration:
Walter H. Keller, Inc. (WHK) is pleased to submit this Proposal to provide Professional
Services for the Okeechobee City/County Impact Fee Study. Our firm specializes in
planning and technical services utilizing the latest computer analysis and presentation
techniques. This letter will summarize our proposal.
Project Team and Professional Qualifications
WHK has assembled a superb project team that provides extensive local knowledge,
superior technical qualifications and the corporate commitment to complete this important
project in a timely and successful manner. The various project team members have
previously worked together on similar studies.
Walter H. Keller. Inc will serve as the lead consultant. WHK 1
and engineering services since 1983. WHK has previously pre
technical and growth management studies for the Florida DOT,
counties and governmental jurisdictions. The firm was recently s
impact fees for the City of Port St. Lucie and the St. Lucie Count
WHK responsibilities in this effort will be Project Managemen
Impact Fee Report and Meetings. Two (2) key individuals will as:
this effort:
Tischler & Associates Inc. is a nationally recognized firm, whic
400 cost of growth/fiscal impact analyses over the last 20 years.
large as well as small jurisdictions. The TA firm's major respon;
Fee Methodology, Technical Analysis and Recommended Fee Stru,
Thomas Wright LL M J D. is an accomplished Land Use and
attorney with considerable legal experience in South Florida. Mr.
previously worked together in developing Broward's 1977 Land
is very knowledgeable on impact fees and concurrency. P
responsibility will be legal sufficiency and impact fee methodology.
Recent Project Experience
The Project Team has significant and relevant experience in the are
the techniques necessary for successful implementation. Six (6) pt
the attached proposal including Student Generation Rates, Imp;
Plans, Household and Population Characteristics, Concurrency
Services
is provided planning
ared major planning,
everal South Florida
ected to prepare the
Fire District. Major
data analysis, GIS,
Iciate with WHK on
has conducted over
TA has worked for
lility will be Impact
irowth Management
right and Mr. Keller
se Plan. Mr. Wright
r. Wright's major
of Impact Fees and
,cts are described in
: Fees, Countywide
rid Expert Witness
continued.....
Coral Springs Office
1890 University Drive, Suite 304 • P.O. Box 9740 • Coral Springs, Flo�ida 33075
t9riM 7';5-3R?? • (Ann1 os;F FF fi90 . FAX t9Sgl 7SS-9RFifi
•
i-iPS_ an
� M
Okeechobee City/County Impact Fee Study
September 20, 2004
Page Two
Authorized Representatives
Walter H. Keller, PE., AICP., President or Mary F. Keller, Vice
Walter H. Keller, Inc.
• 1890 University Drive, Suite 304
Coral Springs, Florida 33071
Telephone: 954-755-3 822
Email: wkeller@whkinc.com
Manpower Availability
Based on current workload and the resources of the project team
available for the proposed services identified in Appendix "A".
providing Okeechobee City/County with quality, on -time and cost
Summary and Closing
The WHK Project Team is excited to present this proposal to Okei
This proposal has briefly highlighted several factors for WHK's
project. These factors include:
• Experience in Similar and Relevant Studies;
• Knowledge of County and Local Governmental Staffs;
• Project Team with Outstanding Qualifications;
• Sensitivity to Project Goals and Objectives; and
• Commitment of Firm's President as Project Manager.
We appreciate the opportunity of being considered for this i
forward to providing professional services in the future.
Sincerely,
Ma . eller
Vice President
MFK/us
attachments
ample staffing is
is committed to
ve services.
:chobee City/County.
participation in this
project and look
•
CA
� � t
A ■ �
0
i
PROJECT TEAM
The Project Team has significant and relevant experience in the areas of Impact Fees
and the techniques necessary for successful implementation The Project Team
members have prepared a wide variety of similar studies to the RFP. Project Team
members have considerable experience working together on a ide variety of major
data collection, sampling, forecasting, costing and areawide long range plans.
The Table below identifies the key professionals assigned t the project, project
assignment, firm and years of professional experience.
Project Team for Okeechobee Impact Fee Study
Employee Title
Project Assignment
Firm
Y rs
Exp
W. Keller, PE., AICP. President
Project Manager
WHK
33
P. Tischler President
Ass't. Project Mgr.
TA - j
30
L. Carson Bise II Vice Pres.
Impact Fee Develop
ent TA -t
20
T. Wright, J.D, LL.M. Attorney
Legal Sufficiency
TGW-t
33
Julie E. Herlands, MCP Sr. Planner
Impact Fee Develop
ent TA-t
10
S. Pitkin, AICP. Sr. Project Mngr
Technical Analysis
WHK
40
B. Townsend, AICP. Sr. Project Mngr
Planning Analysis
WHK
20
L. Ta, A.A. Systems Engineer
Data Analysis - GIS
WHK
14
T. White, B.A. Graphics Manager
Presentation Graphics
WHK
12
M. Keller B.A. Vice President
Public Involvement
WHK
28
t - Subconsultant
An Organizational Chart is illustrated on the following page. Res
imes of all key
staff
are then provided.
t
Okeechobee City/County
Impact Fee Study
Protect Team Organizational Chart
Walter H. Keller, PE, AICP.
President
• Project Manager
Thomas Wright, Esq * Bradford Townsend, AICP
President Sr. Project Manager
• Legal and Impact Fee • Data Manager
f
Luong Ta, A.S.
Systems Engineer
• Data Analysis - GIS
Thomas White, B.A.
Graphics Manager
• Presentation Graphics
t - Associate ■ - Subconsultant
Steve Pitldn, AICP.
Sr. Project Manager
• Planning Technical SulDr)ort
Mary Keller, B.A.
Vice President
• )C & Coordination
Paul Tischler, M. B.A. t
President
• Asni-Onnt Prnicr`+ AArv.,....,..
L. Carson Bise II, AICP.
• Impact Fee Development
Julle E. Herlands, M.C.P.
• Impact Fee Development
i
Walter H. Keller, Inc.
consulting Engineers &Planners
Coral Springs . Sewall's Point
•
ILL;(
MOW 01%
WALTER H. KELLER, PE, AICP - PRESIDENT
Professional Engineer - Florida 1976
American Institute of Certified Planners - 1981
Florida Atlantic University - B.S.E - 1971
Mr. Keller has a 33 year professional background in urban planning, transportation and
traffic engineering, land development and technical studies. He has served as President of
Walter H. Keller, Inc. (WHK), a planning and engineering consulting firm, since 1983.
Mr. Keller has been responsible for preparation of more than 30 comprehensive plans
under State of Florida Planning Acts. He has also prepared more than 25 transportation
plans for Florida municipalities, a wide variety of special studies and 24 Developments of
Regional Impact (DRI). He has provided planning and traffic en ineering assistance on a
continuing basis to numerous South Florida municipalities it cluding expert witness
services. He has also provided traffic impact assistance, land deve opment engineering and
computer assistance to municipalities, civic associations and major developers.
Representative projects include:
Impact Fees and Concurrency Studies
Broward County Transit Concurrency and Impact Fee Study Broward Co, FL
Fire & EMS Assessment Fee Study (1997 — 1999), Lauderdale Lakes, FL.
Student Generation Rates for Infill Multifamily Housing, Lenriar Homes
TRIPS Model Update; Generation Rates for B.C. Roadway I-ees, Broward Co, FL.
GAE Traffic Reviews, Palm Bch Countywide Planning Coun il, Lake Worth, FL.
Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering
Traffic Operations Study 5 Turnpike Interchanges, FDOT, Br ward County, FL.
Transportation Plan for Georgetown, Grand Cayman Island, .W.I.
Broward County Regional Transportation Review Program, I toward County, FL.
Broward County 2020 Transportation Plan, Broward County, FL.
Growth Management Reviews, FDOT, Miami, FL.
Traffic Engineering Continuing Contract, Martin County, FL.
Districtwide Trip Generation Study, FDOT, Ft. Lauderdale,
Treasure Coast Travel Characteristics Study, FDOT, Ft. Laude dale, FL.
Martin County MPO 2025 Transportation Plan, Martin County FL.
Comprehensive and Urban Planning
Broward Co. Land Use Plan, Broward Co. Planning Council,
Pompano Beach Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL.
Redevelopment Plan, Lauderdale -by -the -Sea, FL.
Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan, Palm Beach County, FL.
toward Co., FL.
AeMLLe
WALTER H. KELLER, PE, AICP - PRESIDENT
page two
Daytona Beach Comprehensive Plan, Volusia County, FL.
Oakland Park Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL.
Lighthouse Point Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, F
Port Everglades Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, F1
South Miami Comprehensive Plan, Miami - Dade County, I
Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) and Binding
Smith Dairy PUD - DRI Traffic Component, Palm Beach C
Northpointe Corporate Park - DRI Traffic Component, Pain
DRI Review Services, FDOT District VI Planning Office, N.
Design Centers of the Americas DRI, Broward County, FL.
Martin Downs - DRI Traffic Component, Martin County, Fl
Traffic Impact and Parking Studies
unty, FL
Beach County, FL
ami, FL.
Broward County Public Safety Building, Fort Lauderdale,
Port Everglades Traffic and Parking Study, Broward County FL.
Presidential Circle, Hollywood, FL.
Las Olas Retail Area Parking Study, Las Olas Company, Ft. Laud
Sunrise Harbor Apartments, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Coral Square Mall, Coral Springs, FL.
Expert Witness Services
FL Pwr & Light vs. Delray Bch - Zoning Appeal, Circuit Cou.
Broadview S & L vs Town of Highland Bch - Federal Court,
Town of Hillsboro Beach vs Mediterranea — Br County Board
Town of Lauderdale -by -the -Sea vs. Merestsky — Circuit Courl
Sect 28 vs. Martin Co, Circuit Court — Site Ping, Engr, Traffic
Societies and Professional Associations
National Society of Professional Engineers - Senior Member
Florida Engineering Society - Senior Member
Institute of Transportation Engineers - Fellow
American Institute of Certified Planners - Member
American Planning Association - Member
Broward Chapter -Florida APA-Former Chairman, Vice Cha
Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Appeals
FL.
Traffic and Land Use
iffic & Land Use
)f Rules & Appeals
— Civil Engineering
& Comp Planning
and Treasurer
— Member
�1
THOMAS G. WRIGHT
Email:
Education 1989 - 1995 University of Miami School of
1965 -1968 Stetson University College of I
1961 -1964 University of Illinois
405 Sable Oak Drive
i River Shores, FL 32963
Phone: 772 234-8650
Mobile: 772 713-3996
LL.M Master of Law
J.D. Juris Doctor
Commerce/Pre-Law
Professional 1999-2004
experience
Lawyer/Consultant - Planning and
Community Development
1998-2004
University of Miami School of Law
-Adjunct Professor
1994-2002
Florida Atlantic University - Adjunct
Professor
1978-1999
WCI Communities Inc. (Coral Ridge
Properties) -Senior Counsel
1976-1978
Broward County - Planning Council
Attorney
1975-1976
Broward Country - Assistant County
Attorney
1971-1975
City of St. Petersburg - Assistant City
Attorney
1968-1971
U.S. Army -First Lieutenant, 101st
irborne Division (Vietnam)
Additional 2000-2002 Broward County Charter Review Co
professional
activities 1997-2002 Affordable Housing Study Commissi
1985-1987 Substate District Boundary Study Co
1983-2004 Association of. Florida Community D,
1978-1989 Broward County League of Cities — j
fission - Special Counsel
— Appt. by Gov. Chiles
iittee — Appt. by Gov. Graham
rs
•
THOMAs G. WRIGHT (Page 2 - Continued)
Mr. Wright's extensive state and local government experience
• Drafted City of St. Petersburg's Home Rule Charter (f
Development Review Ordinance.
• Drafted Broward's Countywide Plat Ordinance and Re
requirement upheld in Hollywood Inc v Broward Count
DCA 1983). (The first regulatory impact fee requirement
Courts.)
• Drafted the Implementation Section of the Broward County
1977 required that all necessary services be available prior to
model for Florida's Concurrency Doctrine.
the following:
in the State) and its
al Park Impact Fee
1 So.2d 606 (Fla. 4"
field by FL Appellate
Use Plan, which in
opment impacts, the
• Represented the City of St. Petersburg and Broward County in a wide variety of
litigation including home rule charters, land use and zoning, taxation, utilities, personal
injury, false arrest, labor, arbitration hearings, and employee discharge cases including
litigation up to the Florida Supreme Court.
• Drafted Florida's "Uniform Community Development District [CDD] Act of 1980"
(Chapter 190 Florida Statutes) and Arizona's "Communities Facilities Act" enacted in
1988.
• Drafted School Concurrency Amendments to the Local Government Comprehensive
Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163 Florida Statutes, which
in 1995 established the 1 st legislative standards for imposition of school concurrency.
• Authored Law Review Article on the Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Act:
Florida's Private Property Rights Act - What Will It Mean for Florida's Future? Nova
Law Review, Volume 20 number 2, Winter 1996 (Co-author Nancy Stroud).
• Developed the legal basis for the Florida DCA ORC Reports that found the Coral
Springs and Broward County school concurrency plan amendm is not in compliance
with state law.
• Drafted 2002 Report on Countywide Water Governance for
Charter Review Commission (Co-author Allan Milledge).
• Drafted 2003 Preliminary Report (Legal Analysis) on Transit
Transportation Concurrency for Broward County Board of Co
• Testified in Circuit Court as expert witness on zoning for the Ci
Sun Cruz Casinos et al v City of Hollywood et al 844 So.2d 68
2003).
Broward County
,nted Countywide
Commissioners.
of Hollywood in
(FL 4'hDCA
•
BRADFORD D. TOWNSEND, AICP — SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER
American Institute of Certified Planners - 1998
Florida Atlantic University — Masters of Public Administration — 1999
Central Michigan University — BS. - Major in Geography — 19 2
Mr. Townsend has a 21 year professional background in
comprehensive planning, land use, zoning, growth managem
Regional Impact. As Senior Project Manager for WHK, Mr. Tc
major planning studies, transportation planning, compreh,
population and demographic studies and development review,
the firm, Mr. Townsend was the Planning Director for the Cit3
this capacity he was responsible for comprehensive plar.
Implementation and Land Development Regulations for the C.
also responsible for maintaining the City's parcel data base. N
as the member and Chairman of the Technical Advisory Cor.
County League of Cities. Prior to joining the City of Parklan
Planner for the City of Boca Raton, Florida.
Representative projects include:
Comprehensive Planning
Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Lauderdale -by -the
Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Lighthouse Point,
Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Lauderdale Lakes,
Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Parkland, FL.
transportation planning,
it and Developments of
✓nsend is responsible for
isive planning, zoning,
tivities. Prior to joining
of Parkland, Florida. In
ing and Zoning Code
Y. Mr. Townsend was
. Townsend also served
nittee for the Broward
, Mr. Townsend was a
FL.
Water Use Application — Town of Hillsboro Beach, FL.
Transportation Element — Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Transportation Element — Martin County, FL.
Land Use Amendment County Park Sites 104 & 105 — Lauderdale Lakes, FL.
Land Use Plan Amendment & Development Applications — Parkland Village
Development Review Services — Town of Lauderdale by the Sea, FL.
Development Review Services — Town of Hillsboro Beach, L.
Development Review Services — City of Lauderdale Lakes, L.
Societies and Professional Associations
American Institute of Certified Planners - Member
American Planning Association — Member
•
I!W
�..
STEPHEN H. PITKIN, AICP — SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER
American Institute of Certified Planners
University of Pennsylvania — Master of City Planning 1960
Swarthmore College — BA — Political Science 1957
Mr. Pitkin has an impressive professional background with
experience in urban planning, community development, comprehe
zoning, growth management and Developments of Regional Imf
Manager for WHK, Mr. Pitkin is responsible for major planning
efforts, transportation planning, comprehensive planning, z4
demographic studies and development review activities.
Prior to joining WHK, Mr. Pitkin was Director of Planning
Escambia County, Florida. He was responsible for a redeveh
neighborhood redevelopment plans (with extensive visioning).
implementation emphasizing infrastructure improvements an
reinvestment. Mr. Pitkin also served as Director of Planning
Shreveport, Louisiana in which he successfully implemented a
program. This effort involved revisions of the zoning ordinan
neighborhood plans and suburban sector plans. As Director of I
Development for Springfield, Massachusetts, he admin.
Development Block Grant program with special emphasis on h4
capital improvements projects. He also led a nationally
revitalization program for this community.
Representative projects include:
Redevelopment and Revitalization
40 years professional
isive planning, land use,
act. As Senior Project
studies, redevelopment
►ring, population and
ad Redevelopment for
vent strategy and five
He also directed plan
residential/commercial
�ity and County) for
,wntown revitalization
preparation of urban
ruing and Community
-red a Community
;ing rehabilitation and
-cognized downtown
Redevelopment Strategy& 5 Area Plans- Escambia County,
5 Year Update/Action Plan — Warrington Redevelopment Area - Escambia Co., FL
Corridor Action Plan — Brownsville Redevelopment Area, Esci
Brownfield Projects/Superfund Site, Palafox Redev. Area - Esi
Downtown Revitalization Program — Shreveport, LA
Downtown Revitalization Program —Springfield, MA
Annual CDBG Program — Springfield, MA
Riverdesign — A Riverfront Corridor Plan — Springfield, MA
Redevelopment Area Zoning Provisions — Daytona Beach, FL
Revitalization Component Comprehensive Plan — Miami Beach,
FL
is Co., FL
bia Co. , FL
•
Aew
STEPHEN H. PITKIN, AICP — SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER
PAGE TWO
Comprehensive Planning
Land Use Amendment County Park Sites 104 & 105 — Lai
Land Use Plan Amendment & Development Applications
1989 Future Land Use Element - Broward County, FL
1989 Comprehensive Plan — Daytona Beach, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Indian River Shores, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Key Biscayne, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Key Colony Beach, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Kissimmee, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Miami Beach, FL
Comprehensive Plan — Miami Shores, FL
1989 Comprehensive Plan
— North Miami Beach, FL
1989 Comprehensive Plan
— Oakland Park, FL
1989 Comprehensive Plan
— Pompano Beach, FL
1985 Comprehensive Plan
— Riviera Beach, FL
Additional Experience:
Speaker, National and State Planning Conferences
Adjunct faculty and lecturer-10 colleges/universities
Gubernatorial appointments to various State boards
Societies and Professional Associations
American Institute of Certified Planners - Member
American Planning Association — Member
Palm Beach Planning Congress - Member
Lakes, FL.
- Parkland Village
•
LUONG TA — SYSTEMS ENGINEER
Broward Community College - Engineering - A.S. -1989
Additional Study:
Pascal Programming Course, 1990
FDOT Basic FSUTMS Course, Ft. Lauderdale, 1991
FDOT Land Use Planning Course, West Palm Beach, 199!
FDOT Site Impact Workshop, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 2000
Visual Basic Programming Course, Ft. Lauderdale, 2001
FDOT GIS-TM Version 2.1 Workshop, Orlando, FL, 200
Since joining the WHK in 1989, Mr. Ta's major responsibilities lave included computer
system operations, transportation data collection, data analysis, F5. UTMS Modeling, LOS
and traffic operations analysis, GIS and technical report graphics. He has participated in a
variety of planning and transportation studies for public and privat clients including LOS
analysis, O-D Surveys, Speed and Delay Studies, long -rang traffic forecasts and
tr
intersection improvement alternatives. He has also assisted n writing spreadsheet
computer programs and developing software applications for v rious traffic and city
planning projects.
Representative projects include:
Martin Co. 2025 Transportation Plan, Martin Co. MPO, Stuart, FL.
Broward Long Range Transportation Plan Update 2020, Broward County, FL
Fire & EMS Assessment Fee Study, Lauderdale Lakes, FL.
Pompano Beach Traffic Concurrency Program, Pompano Beach FL.
Pompano Beach GIS Land Use, Zoning and Base Maps
Broward Co. Land Use Plan, Broward Co. Planning Council, Broward Co., FL.
Redevelopment Plan, Lauderdale -by -the -Sea, Broward County, L
Indian Street Traffic Ops Study, Martin County, FL. 7
Pompano Beach Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL
Northwest Broward Capacity Study - Coral Ridge Properties, Coral Springs, FL.
SR A 1 A Traffic Operations Study, Lauderdale -by -the -Sea, FL.
Cypress Gardens Neighborhood Traffic Study, Pompano Beach, FL.
Access Management Study - Dade & Monroe Counties, FDOT, District VI, Miami, FL.
Key West LOS Analysis, FDOT - District VI, Miami, FL.
Pompano Beach Traffic Count & LOS Update, Pompano Beach, FL.
Surfside Traffic Study, Town of Surfside, FL.
Planning & Zoning Assistance (from 1989), Town of Lauderdale -by -the -Sea, FL.
11
MARY FLYNN KELLER - VICE PRESIDENT & PUBLIC INFOR4ATION SPECIALIST
Florida Atlantic University - 1971 - B.A. - Education
Since joining WHK in 1985, Ms. Keller has participated in a wide range of projects
involving the private and public sectors. Major responsibilities include public involvement
activities, coordination of subconsultants, assembly of temporary project staff and quality
assurance tasks. Between 1985 and 2001, Ms. Keller was responsible for public
involvement efforts in the Boynton Beach Turnpike Interchange, the Miami -Dade Access
Management Program and the Martin County MPO 2025 LRTP. Additional
responsibilities involve marketing and financial activities for the firm, client quality control
tasks, liason services and in particular providing exhibit and trade show efforts. Prior to
1985, Ms. Keller served in the public educational system. Her 12 years experience with
the Broward County School System provided her with a strong background in
administrative, leadership and community activities. Ms. Ke ler served as Faculty
Coordinator for several years and was responsible for the imple entation of numerous
educational programs within the school and community.
Representative projects include:
Transportation & Comprehensive Planning
Martin Co. 2025 Transportation Plan, Martin Co. MPO, Stuart,
Broward Long Range Transportation Plan Update 2020, Browa
FL.
County, FL
Boynton Beach Turnpike Interchange PD & E Study, FDOT, Broward County, FL.
Turnpike Operations Study Origin - Destination Survey, Browaid County, FL.
Access Management Classifications Study - District VI, FDOT, Miami, FL.
Key West LOS Study - District VI, FDOT, Miami, FL.
Growth Management Reviews - District VI, FDOT, Miami, FL.
Broward County Land Use Plan, Broward County, FL.
Ft. Lauderdale Traffic Circulation & Mass Transit Elements, Broward County, FL
Pompano Beach Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL
Oakland Park Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL.
Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan, Palm Beach County, FL.
Lauderdale -by -the -Sea Comprehensive Plan, Broward County, FL.
Broward County Public Safety Building, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Northwest Broward Roadway Capacity Study, Coral Springs, FL.
Exhibits and Conferences:
Transportation Research Board - Annual Meeting, Washington D
American Planning Association - Annual Meeting, Montreal, Can
Microcomputers in Transportation Conference, Boston, Massachi
American Planning Association - Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, C
Ll
I AV
�� ■ IS
WARREN THOMAS WHITE, II - CADD • GRAPHICS DESIGNE
Appalachian State University - B.A. Fine Art
ATI Career Training Center - A.A. Drafting/CADD Design
Mr. White has an extensive professional background in the graphics design, web site
design and the presentation graphics environment. Prior to join Ing WHK, he served as
Webb Master/Graphics Designer for a financial institution where h was responsible for the
design and preparation of the firm's graphics and presentations Mr. White's previous
experiences as a graphics designer/illustrator and web site design provides him with an
essential background for working with planning, transportatior and land development
projects. Since joining WHK, Mr. White has been involved in a variety of public and
private projects. Major professional activities include base mapping, zoning maps, traffic
and transportation studies, roadway and intersection design, traffic signalization, signage
and pavement markings. He is very knowledgeable in Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel,
MicroStation, Auto Cadd, Powerpoint, Access, and Outlook Expr ss, Corel Word Perfect,
AmiPro, Eudora Pro, Lotus Notes and Web design activities.
Representative projects include:
Comprehensive Planning, EAR and Base Mapping
Zoning Map, Lighthouse Point, FL
Zoning and Land Use Plan Map, Lauderdale by the Sea, FL
Zoning and Land Use Plan Map, Lauderdale Lakes, FL
Foreign Trade Zone Map, Lauderdale Lakes, FL
Annexation Studies, Lauderdale Lakes, FL
Graphics Projects:
WHK Web Site Design
Tri-County Economic Area Map — Lauderdale Lakes, FL
Transportation Projects:
Intersection Improvements — SR76 & Locks Road, Martin County, FL
Conceptual Plan — C-13 Greenway Trail — Lauderdale Lakes, F
Sunset Trail Concept Plan, Martin County, FL '
Emergency Traffic Signal - Mapp Rd Fire Station, Martin County, FL
Construction Plans and Site Plans
Municipal Complex Safety and Security Plan, Lauderdale Lakes FL
NW 49`h Avenue Construction Plans, Lauderdale Lakes, FL
Seagrape Drive Streetscape, Lauderdale by the Sea, FL
Somerset Drive Access Study — Lauderdale Lakes, FL
•
PAUL S. TISCHLER
Education
M.B.A. Real Estate and Urban Development, American University
B.A. Economics, Johns Hopkins University
Experience
Mr. Tischler has over thirty years of consulting experience in the areas of fiscal evaluations as well as market and
economic feasibility studies. For the last twenty-five years he has been principal of the consulting firm Tischler &
Associates, Inc. (TA). His advice has been sought, by both public and private sector clients, on a broad range of
decisions concerning development and growth management.
Fiscal Impact Analyses - Mr. Tischler has worked on over 400 fiscal
throughout the country. He worked on the FUTURE -Little Rock project, which
and economic conditions of the City, culminating in the fiscal impact analy
economic and fiscal assignment in Howard County, Maryland on the General
American Planning Association Award for Outstanding Comprehensive Plan.
evaluations Mr. Tischler has conducted are King County, WA; Phoenix, AZ; Hil
County, MD; Pima County, AZ; Nashville -Davidson County, TN; Lancaster
Lincoln -Lancaster County, NE; Howard County, MD; Raleigh, NC; Scottsdal
Reno, NV; Carlsbad, CA; Chino Hills, CA; Germantown, TN; Twin Falls, IL
Falls, ID and Parkland, FL.
Impact Fee Evaluations - Mr. Tischler has worked on over 500 impact and
throughout the U.S. As part of the TA work team which has calculated more iml
firm in the country, Mr. Tischler has worked in such locations as Peoria, AZ;
Boulder, CO; Castle Rock, CO; Deerfield Beach, FL; Manatee Co., FL; Post Fal
Co., MD; Billings, MT; Chatham Co., NC; Nags Head, NC; Albuquerque, NM; I
North Logan, UT; Salt Lake Co., UT; Chesterfield Co., VA; Suffolk, VA; Eau C
Mr. Tischler has written articles on impact fees which have been printed in d
Planning magazine and the National Association of Homebuilders Land Develoon
mpact analyses for jurisdictions
icluded an analysis of the market
s. Mr. Tischler worked on the
Ilan, which won the prestigious
Among the other fiscal impact
,borough County, FL; Baltimore
�ounty, PA; Albuquerque, NM;
AZ; Boise, ID; Pasadena, CA;
Dublin, OH; Venice, FL; Post
velopment fees for communities
;t fees than any other consulting
:ottsdale, AZ; Chino Hills, CA;
ID; Carroll Co., MD; Frederick
Cruces, NM; Beavercreek, OH;
ire, WI; and Jefferson Co., WV.
American Planning Association
,I magazine.
Capital Improvement Plans - Whether the assignment is fiscal impact anal is or preparation of impact fees,
there is generally a capital improvement plan that is prepared. In addition to the above assignments, Mr. Tischler
participated in Kenosha, Wisconsin, where TA was retained to develop a multi -year capital improvement program
and in Westminster, Maryland where a CIP process was implemented.
Speaking Engagements - Mr. Tischler has spoken on fiscal impact anal sis, revenue strategies, capital
improvement programming, and impact fees at a number of professional meetings d conferences. These have been
sponsored by the American Planning Association, the National Association of egional Councils, the American
Civil Engineers Society, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, the State of Florida lanning Association, and others.
Publications - Financing Tomorrow's Infrastructure - "Solutions for Local
Council/National Academy of Sciences Compendium.: "New Fangled Im
contributing author; "Fiscal Impact Software", MicroSoftware News for Local Gc
Impact of Development", International City Management Association (ICMAI
(MIS) Report.; "Fiscal Impact Analysis - From a Developer's Perspective",
Analysis, A Process which Evaluates the Future of a Community", Practicing 1
Reader Beware, Some Caveats", The Growth Management Reporter.; "Real
Computer", National Capital Area Realtor. (Reprinted by the Institute for Busing
Relation to Investment", Baltimore Real Estate and Building News.; "An Exampl
and Best Use Analysis", The Real Estate Appraiser.; "Managing Growth in Ami
(Contributor).; "Guide to County Capital Improvement Programming", N
Publication (Contributor).; "20 Points to Know about Impact Fees", Planning ma
Them or Be Sorry", Land Development magazine.; "Impact Fees Break Out in 1
"Introduction to Infrastructure Financing", International City/County Manageme
Report.
rnment" - National Research
Fees", Planning magazine,
cents.; "Analyzing the Fiscal
Land Magazine.; "Fiscal Impact
inerr.; "Fiscal Impact Analysis:
state Decision -making and the
Planning.); "Cash Flow and Its
The Importance of the Highest
a's Communities", Island Press
anal Association of Counties
nine.; "Impact Fees - Understand
ryland", urban Land Mag zing.;
•
L. CARSON BISE II, AICP
Education
Master of Business Administration, Shenandoah University
Bachelor of Science in Geography, East Tennessee State University
Bachelor of Science in Political Science, East Tennessee State University
Experience
Mr. Bise has over twelve years of experience in the areas of fiscal and
infrastructure finance and comprehensive planning.
Fiscal Impact Analyses. Mr. Bise has conducted a number of fiscal impact ei
marginal approach. Mr. Bise's fiscal impact work includes the following
Kissimmee, FL; Hernando County, FL; Sarasota County, FL; North Port, FL;
County, TN; Chattanooga, TN; Germantown, TN; Knox County, TN; Prince
County, MD; Calvert County, MD; Charles County, MD; Howard County, MI
MN; St. Paul, MN; Cary, NC; Wake County, NC: Wilmington -New Hanc
Albuquerque, NM; San Antonio, TX; Tyler, TX; Stafford County, VA; Sun Prairi(
impact analysis, impact fees,
aluations, using the case study -
communities: Anchorage, AK;
Iteamboat Springs, CO; Shelby
George's County, MD; Carroll
; Rockville, MD; Minneapolis,
✓er County, NC; Salem, NH;
, WI and Draper, UT.
Impact Fee Evaluations. Mr. Bise has completed impact fee studies for wa er and sewer, roads, parks and
recreation, open space and trails, transit, general government buildings and equip ent, schools, and public safety
buildings and equipment. Mr. Bise's impact fee assignments include Castle Roc , CO; Greeley, CO; Steamboat
Springs, CO; Appoquiniminck School District, DE; School District of Lee C unty, FL; Polk County, FL;
Greenville, NC; Draper, UT; Farmington, UT; Wellsville, UT; Calvert Count , MD; Charles County, MD;
Washington County, MD; Worcester County, MD; Hampstead, MD and East Greenwich, RI.
Capital Improvement Plans. Mr. Bise gained extensive capital improvement programming experience while
working in the public sector. Mr. Bise was responsible for coordinating the annual Capital Improvement Plan in
Frederick County, VA and was the project manager of the Public Facilities Plan inChesterfield County, VA.
Economic and Market Feasibility Studies. Mr. Bise has conducted seve
measure the direct and indirect jobs and payroll and associated costs and benefits ge
from a particular project. One recent project measured the cost and benefits of a pro
Ohio. In addition to a fiscal component, this study measured economic impacts incl
from the project. Both the construction period and the operating period were
Chesterfield County, Virginia, Mr. Bise was project manager for a market ana
strategy for an older commercial area in the County. As part of this project, Mr. Bi
a business group to aid in the implementation of the business development strategy.
Comprehensive Planning. Mr. Bise has participated in several comprehensive
County, Virginia, Mr. Bise co-authored the Implementation component of the
adoption process for the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. In i
County, Virginia, Mr. Bise was responsible for components of several area and cc
economic impact studies that
rated in the regional economy
;ed Hospital facility in Toledo,
ing spin-off jobs and earnings
aluated. While working for
is and business development
facilitated the organization of
.ng efforts. In Spotsylvania
irehensive Plan and led the
rfield County and Frederick
plans.
Computer Model Development. Mr. Bise has developed more case study-marginall fiscal impact applications than
anyone in the country. He recently completed development of TA's CONCUR$ pplication for adequate public
facilities/concurrency management.
Seminars. Workshops and Memberships. Mr. Bise has conducted fiscal and leconomic impact seminars for
several American Planning Association State Conferences, the American Planning A sociation National Conference,
National Association of Homebuilders and other organizations. Mr. Bise is the past Secretary/Treasurer of the
Economic Development Division of the American Planning Association.
•
JULIE E. HERLANDS
Education
Masters of Community Planning, University of Maryland
B.A. Political Science, University of Buffalo
Experience
Ms. Herlands has over five years experience in planning and economic
sectors. Her experience includes the following:
• Fiscal Impact Analyses
• Impact Fee Studies
• Economic and Market Feasibility Studies
• Economic Development Assessments
Fiscal Impact Analyses Ms. Herlands' fiscal evaluations include analyzing th
scenarios and site -specific development proposals using the case -study margil
conducted fiscal impact analyses for the City of Bluffdale, UT, Queen Creek, A
Howard County, MD. For the City of Bluffdale, a suburb of Salt Lake City, I
impact of a major mixed -use development on the City. For this analysis, Ms. H
improved levels of service for three different development scenarios. For the 7
growing suburban Phoenix community, Ms. Herlands analyzed the fiscal impact
residential growth scenarios as well as varied jobs -to -population ratios. In Howar
the fiscal impact of a major new mixed -use development in the Town Center of
original new towns.
in both the private and public
impacts of various development
[al approach. Ms. Herlands has
Z, and a private development in
4s. Herlands evaluated the fiscal
srlands evaluated both current and
own of Queen Creek, a rapidly
if growth based on three different
f County, Ms. Herlands analyzed
Columbia, Maryland, one of the
Impact Fee Studies Ms. Herlands has completed or is currently completing impact fee studies for Talbot
County, MD, Kellogg, ID, Henrico County, VA, Dorchester County, MD, and Caroline County, MD. For Talbot
County, she is preparing fees for roads, libraries, County facilities, parks and recreation, and schools; for Kellogg:
parks, sewer, and public safety improvements; for Dorchester County: schools, public safety, and a communication
system; for Henrico County: a road impact fee; and for Caroline County: schools.
Economic and Market Feasibility Studies Ms. Herlands has conducted d managed economic and market
feasibility analyses while working for both the private and public sectors. While in the private sector, Ms. Herlands
conducted feasibility analyses for clients such as community development corporations. In Fairfax County, Virginia,
she managed an economic and fiscal impact study for a proposed public -private redevelopment venture and assessed
the feasibility of public revitalization initiatives.
Economic Development Assessments Ms. Herlands has conducted numerous economic development
assessments, which include investigation into a community's economic development infrastructure as well as tools
and sources for public financing of economic and real estate development. Proj ets have included an economic
assessment and implementation strategy for the City of Espanola, New Mexico; investigation of innovative
financing options for real estate redevelopment in the City of Hartford; identificati n and implementation strategies
for various tools and incentives to advance urban redevelopment in the state of Michigan; and facilitation of an
economic development strategy for the City of Abilene, Texas. While with Fairfax County, Ms. Herlands assessed
the financial tools available for revitalization in the County. For a community gro p in Baltimore, she developed a
strategy to increase private financial support for struggling schools.
Memberships Ms. Herlands is a member of the American Planning
publication
"The Connection between Growth Management and Lcwal Economic Development " Economic Development News
Views. Economic Development Division of the American Planning Association.
LJ
U
RELEVENT PROJECTS
Six projects follow which describe relevant experience in Impact
projects. Other Experience for Walter H. Keller, Inc. is then pr
the proposal.
Example Projects provided for the Prime Consultant Walter H. Kel]
Broward County Transit Impact Fee and Concurrency Stud
Lauderdale Lakes Fire/Rescue Assessment Rate & Implem(
Martin County MPO 2025 Long Range Transportation Pla:
Example projects provided for Subconsultant Tischler anct a
Manatee County Impact Fee Study
Deerfield Beach Impact Fee and Annexation Studies
Plant City Fiscal Impact Annexation Study
Studies and similar
ed in this section of
nc. are:
ion Study
nc. are:
1. Name & Location of the project:
Broward County Transit Impact Fee and Concurrency Study
Broward County, Florida
The nature of the firm's responsibility on this project:
Walter H. Keller, Inc., as Prime Consultant and Thomas
Subconsultant, investigated the technical and legal basis for rev
• fee process from platting to the building permit level and revis
primarily Transit based in lieu of the existing Highway based
G. Wright as Legal
sing Broward's impact
m ! the fee basis to be
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
Elliot Auerhaun, Director
Broward County Development Management Division
115 S. Andrews Avenue, Room A-2, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 3 301
Telephone: 954-357-6666
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number:
Broward County Department of Planning and Environmental Protection
115 S. Andrews Avenue, Room A-2, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Telephone: 954-357-6666
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed: January 2003
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 1,700,000.
Was Implementation part of this project : No, Project was to provide Technical and Legal
Basis of converting to Transit based fee system.
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the Project vs. Actual Performance and explain difference.
Budgeted Amount : $48,780.00
Actual Amount: $14,740.00 Phase I, Broward County placed project on hold after
Phase I due to Capital Improvement Funding deficiencies for th4 5 Year Transit Plan.
Work for which the staff was responsible:
WHK was the Prime Consultant, Thomas Wright, Esq. was the Legal Subconsultant.
Present status of this project:
Completed; Broward County is currently implementing the Transit fee based system.
Project Manager & key professionals involved on listed project & who of that staff to be assigned to this
project:
Project Manager - Walter H. Keller, PE., AICP.
Systems Engineer — Luong Ta
Thomas Wright, Esq. (Legal Subconsultant)
Vice President - Mary F. Keller
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reaso able technical assistance in
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was com eted?
No, project was placed on hold pending future capital improve
'I"ent funding.
r
2. Name & Location of the project:
Fire and Public Service Assessment Fee Study
Lauderdale Lakes, Florida
The nature of the firm's responsibility on this project:
Walter H. Keller, Inc. prepared the assessment rate study to
combat and emergency rescue services within the City of
develop a non -ad valorem assessment role to assess all props
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
Dan Holmes, Director of Community Development
City of Lauderdale Lakes
4300 NW W Street
Lauderdale Lakes, Florida 33319
Telephone: 954-535-2753
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number:
City of Lauderdale Lakes
4300 NW 36' Street
Lauderdale Lakes, Florida 33319
Telephone: 954-535-2753
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed:
Project was completed in 1997 with annual updates in 1998
-tion the cost for fire
3erdale Lakes and to
their pro-rata share.
1999.
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 30,000.
Was Implementation part of this project : Yes, Project implemented /Prop Appraisers Office.
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the project vs. Actual Performance and explain difference.
Budgeted Amount 18 0.1997 997 St Study; $8,5 0 OOO.00 eachach for f1 98998 & 1999 Updates & 1999 tes
Actual Amount: $ ,0 0.00
Work for which the staff was responsible proportionate share
WHK was responsible for data collection, service analysis, pro p
' analysis, fee schedule, public presentations and coordination with County Property
Appraiser for assessment roll and City Attorneys Office on Ordinance preparation.
Present status of this project: Completed and successfully
Project Manager & other key professionals involved on listed project & who
this project:
Principal in Charge - Walter H. Keller, PE., AICP.
Systems Engineer - Luong C. Ta
Vice President - Mary F. Keller
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reas
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was corrr
Yes and the firm prepared Annual Updates in 1998 and 1999.
of that staff to be assigned to
technical assistance in
•
3. Name & Location of the project:
Martin County MPO 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan
Martin County, Florida
The nature of the firms responsibility on this project:
Walter H. Keller, Inc. served as the Prime Consultant for this major and complex
planning study. This effort included land use and population forecasts; alternative
land uses; highway and transit sketch planning; financial forecasts of revenues; capital
and operational costs for plan improvements and public involvement.
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
Mr. Gary Roberts, Deputy County Engineer
Martin County Public Services Department
2401 SE Monterey Road
Stuart, Florida 34996
Telephone: 772-221-2300
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number:
Martin County Metropolitan Planning Organization
2401 SE Monterey Road
Stuart, Florida 34996
Telephone:
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed: May 2001 Final Documentation)
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 150,000 (Pelik Season)
Was Implementation part of this project : Yes, Monitoring Program established.
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the project vs. Actual Performance and explain difference.
Budgeted Amount : $424,500
Actual Amount: $441,300 for additional public meetings and 3 month extension.
Work for which the staff was responsible:
Walter H. Keller, Inc. was Prime Consultant responsible for Overall Project
Management, Public Involvement, Financial Resources Plan, Highway and Transit
Needs Plan, Highway and Transit Cost Feasible Plans and Plan Adoption Process.
Present status of this project: Project Adopted by MPO in February 2001.
Project Manager & other key professionals involved on listed project & who of that staff to be assigned to
this project:
Project Manager - Walter H. Keller, PE., AICP.
Systems Engineer - Luong C. Ta
Public Involvement & Quality Control - Mary F. Keller
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reasona le technical assistance in
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was complet d?
Yes, WHK provided Technical Support upon completion of the a ort.
E
4. Name & Location of the project
Manatee County Impact Fee
Manatee County, Florida
The nature of the firms responsibility on this project:
Tischler & Associates (TA) updated the technical support
ensured that the fees were technically and legally supportabl
fees were calculated: Roads, Parks, EMS, police and public
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
Carol Clarke, AICP., Planning Director
Manatee County Planning Department
1112 Manatee Avenue West, 4'Floor
PO Box 1000
Bradenton, Florida 34206
Telephone: 941-748-4501
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number:
Manatee County Planning Department
1112 Manatee Avenue West, eFloor
PO Box 1000
Bradenton, Florida 34206
Telephone: 941-748-4501
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed:
March 2004—Project completed within an 8 month timeframe.
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 260,000
Was Implementation part of this project : Yes, Ordinance and Fee
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the project vs. Actual Performance and
Budgeted Amount : $98,200
Actual Amount: $106,300 to address affordable housing.
Work for which the staff was responsible
Tischler Associates served as the Prime Consultant for this effo
Present status of this project: This project is completed.
Project Manager & other key professionals involved on listed project & who of
this project:
Project Manager - Paul Tischler
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reasons
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was comple
Yes, Tischler and Associates provided technical assistance up(
project.
the fee schedule and
The following impact
were approved.
difference.
staff to be assigned to
technical assistance in
completion of the
u
S. Name & Location of the project:
Impact Fee Study and Annexation Studies
Deerfield Beach, Florida
The nature of the firms responsibility on this project:
Tischler and Associates had two assignments in Deerfield l
Study included police capital improvements, which were
County Sheriff's Department. The other assignment was c
annexation studies for four (4) possible areas to annex.
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
Larry R. Deetjen, City Manager
City of Deerfield Beach
150 NE 2' Avenue
Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441
Telephone: 954-480-4263
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number:
City of Deerfield Beach
150 NE 2' Avenue
Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441
Telephone: 954-480-4263
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed
April 1997—The Impact Fee project was completed in four mot
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 53,000
Was Implementation part of this project: No
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the project vs. Actual Performance and explai
Budgeted Amount : $52,000 Impact Fees and $44,300 for Annex
Actual Amount: $52,000 Impact Fees and $44,300 for Annexatic
Work for which the staff was responsible:
Tischler and Associates was the Consultant for this effort.
Present status of this project: This project is completed
Project Manager & other key professionals involved on listed project & who of
this project:
Project Manager - Paul Tischler
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reasonal
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was complet
No, technical assistance was not required in this effort.
FL. The Impact Fee
ded by the Broward
ng fiscal impact and
ths.
difference.
Lion Studies
Studies
staff to be assigned to
technical assistance in
•
6. Name & Location of the project:
Fiscal Impact Annexation Study
Plant City, Florida
The nature of the firms responsibility on this project
Tischler and Associates was a subconsultant responsible for
land use policy issues for the City and the Chamber of Comn
Project Owner's Representative name, address & phone number:
David Sollenberger, City Manager Marion Smith, Pr
302 W. Reynolds Street Greater Plant City
P.O. Box C 106 N. Evers Stre,
Plant City, FL 33564 Plant City, FL 33
813-659-4200 800-760-2375
Project user Agency's representative name, address & phone number
Same as above
Date project was completed or is anticipated to be completed:
March 2004—This project and study effort was completed in 3
Population of entity for which the Feasibility Study was done: 30,000
Was Implementation part of this project: No
Please state the Forecasted Cost of the project vs. Actual Performance and expla
Budgeted Amount : $60,000
Actual Amount: $60,000
Work for which the staff was responsible
Paul Tischler conducted a workshop on the policy implications i
Present status of this project: This project is complete.
Project Manager & other key professionals involved on listed project & who of
this project
Project Manager - Paul Tischler
Did this project require your firm to provide the entity's staff with reasona
responding to questions about fees and documentation after the study was comple
No, technical assistance was not required in this effort.
economic and
ent
of Commerce
difference.
Impact Fees.
that staff to be assigned to
technical assistance in
? If yes, please explain.
•
OTHER EXPERIENCE FOR WALTER H.
Comprehensive Planning
Florida - WHK was the Prime Consultant responsib
Traffic Circulation, Coastal Management, and Conserval
City's Comprehensive Plan. In the Traffic Circulation
reviewed and assessed current traffic conditions, prepar
identify future traffic conditions and prepared a
implementation of a traffic impact fee system. In the C
Element, original research was performed to identify ct
provide a detailed economic base analysis and complete a
The Conservation Element inventoried unique natural ai
and developed a program for future preservation. WHK 1
for printing of the combined City Planning Staff and Cc
elements into a three (3) volume set, packaging and shippi
DCA and assisting the City staff in responding to DCA Ol
Plan was found in Compliance by DCA.
Florida - The firm was the Prime Consultant responsible for
County's Land Use Plan. This Plan, which was initially
underwent major revision relative to the 1985/1986 Growth
Major responsibilities of WHK included: the mapping of i
(1 "-2,000'); mapping of Natural Resources (1 "-6,000'); a
availability of Regional Facilities and Services, identificatio;
land required for the future population; mapping and tabula
Land Use Map and Level of Service Standards for Regiona
was responsible for preparing Volume 2 - the Technical S
for the County Land Use Plan. Broward County was th
receive a Compliance Determination from DCA.
5076 — 2003). Broward County Florida - Walter H. Keller,
City'q 2002 Comprehensive Plan. The 2002 Plan incorporat(
Lakes Condominiums and Intracoastal Beach Area annexatio.
which effectively doubled the population and land area of the
was responsible for all plan elements, public involvement,
processing approval through the Department of Community
was also responsible for preparing the Certification Package
the Future Land Use Element with the Broward County Planni
INC.
for preparing the
n Elements of the
?lement, the firm
a traffic model to
parate report on
astal Management
'ent water quality,
)mputer base map.
is within the City
is also responsible
;ultant based plan
the documents to
report. The City
ipdating Broward
)proved in 1977,
✓Ianagement Act.
,isting Land Use
analysis of the
of the amount of
on of the Future
Services. WHK
pport Document
first County to
Inc. prepared the
:d the Sea Ranch
as into the Town
Town. The firm
scheduling and
Affairs. WHK
for recertifying
ng Council.
•
Zoning Overlays -
manager yJ4- / /0-JU /0 — 2.UU3 Broward Countv. Florida - — The Town
Commission authorized establishment of two (2) zoning overlay districts to
facilitate redevelopment efforts. WHK was responsible for preparing the
Marina Village and RM-25 Overlay Districts. The districts allow the Town
Commission to approve quality residential projects With reductions in
pervious area, front and side setbacks through the site plan review process.
The overlay districts encourage multi -lot development and established
procedures for review and approval. Developers are r quired to provide
increased architectural features and details, pedestri n orientation and
landscaping.
%.0 va.y Ljaac IYia J — W-ALY Ul r-UJ11J2dHu peacn r. La Jcnuster,
City Planner 954-786-4654 - 12 500 Broward Count FL. - This project
involved preparing new digital base maps for use by the City, City
Departments and for distribution to the public. WHK prepared both color and
black and white Zoning Maps at 1" to 1,000 and 1"- 600' scales. The Future
Land Use Map was also prepared in the same scales and colors. A City-wide
Base Map was also developed. The firm also assisted the City in updating of
the maps to reflect local zoning and land use revisions. The City Zoning Map
was also provided in pdf format and can be found on the ity website at this
location: httD://www.ei_nomnnnn-heath fl nc/riirr�rtnn�/inrl
.1 � %a Ja1 - t.11 w Lamucruale LaKeS Mr. huigene Beck Lilt
Councilman (954-73 1 -5 126),Broward County Florida - I Valter H. Keller,
Inc. serves as the City's Consultant Planner. In this ca )acity the firm is
responsible for the day to day planning activities includin site plan review,
plat review, concurrency management and land development regulations. The
firm has also performed special planning studies such as the 1995 Annexation
Study. WHK also prepared the 1995 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. In this
effort, computer base mapping was also provided to the City. The City's EAR
was found Sufficient by DCA. WHK is currently developing the 1996 EAR
based Plan Amendments,
��nP\/P�ATInn 'P-r .} 1_%e--l...4 T ..-..1 TT.._ T._.._-___ff T _ . I r ...
c.eia a yZ)4-3J /-0033 - -L) UUU Broward County. Flori a — This project
reviewed and assessed the current Comprehensive Plan an i other on -going
transportation efforts within Broward County. The purpose of the Study was
to identify potential changes to the Future Land Use, Transportation and other
Plan Element goals, objectives and policies to improve the relationship
between land use and transportation and therefore increase Itransit ridership.
The cost benefits of TOLUPs is discussed relative to the 2 25 Long Range
Transportation Plan and the Broward County Land Use Plan.
0
%J. LUL1U11 Li-_.il-_ilL - �_uii-lrucuon-ervices s. c:ecelia Hollar,
AICP. Director 954-828-5261 Citv of Fort LauderdaleFlorida - WHK was
responsible for developing the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan for the major city (population 150,000) in Broward County (population
1,500,00). A unique feature of the Element was the inco oration of land use
- transportation strategies that support mass transit ridersl iip and multi -modal
transportation. The Element included an ExecutiveSummary/Adoption
Document with goals, objectives and policies and major transportation maps.
The Support Document included the data and analysis for the goals, objectives
and policies. The Transportation Element is schedul d for adoption in
December, 2001.
Beach. Florida - WHK was responsible for developing die Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan for a major city (population 75,000) in
Broward County (population 1,500,00). A unique feature of the Element was
the incorporation of transportation strategies that support ri-Rail Commuter
Rail. The Transportation Element was adopted in Janu , 2000 and was
found in compliance by the Department of Community Aff irs.
Expert Witness Services
��Ae
County, Florida - WHK provided a variety of expert witness services to
assist Martin County and the Legal Team in defending a major lawsuit
attacking the County's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordina es and Land Use
Plan. In this effort, the firm provided Comprehensive lanning support,
traffic impact analysis, development of site and engineering plans with cost
estimates under existing County Codes, preparation of a variety of court
exhibits and testimony. WHK work intensely with the legal team in this
important and landmark case to support the Comprehensive Planning Process.
- In this case, WHK provided assistance to the City at both the quasi-judicial
hearing in front of the City Commission and for the Circuit Court Hearing.
The case involved assessing the proposed site plan for consistency with the
City's permitted uses in the Business - Office Commercial District.
CJ
Traffic and Transportation
- - ------- •__.. 1771 - JUI1C ---- 3u� uuu r. Phil Steinmiller,
Transportation Plannin Manager (305 377 5896) Miam Florida - Walter H.
Keller, Inc., has provided Growth Management Review Sf,,rvices to the District
VI Planning Office since 1991. As part of these services, WHK has reviewed
Comprehensive Plan Amendments by Dade County (3) Homestead, Miami
Beach, Miami Springs and the Comprehensive Plan of Monroe County. The
firm has provided DRI review services for the International Corporate Park
DRI, the Villages of Homestead DRI, Porto Fina DRI, Miami International
Airport DRI, Beacon TradePort DRI, Dolphin Stadium (JRS), the Brickell
Square and Miami International Mall NOPC's and the Blockbuster Park DRI.
Special projects include: Key West Level of Service Analysis, Travel Time and
Delay Studies for 6 Dade County Corridors, 1993 Level of Service Update for
500 miles of Dade County State Arterials, HEFT/NW 12th t Interchange TIJR,
Cadd Mapping Assistance and validation assistance fo the Dade County
FSUTMS OS/2 model.
Countywide Planning Council 1991 - 95 000 Mr.
armen Annunziato
AICP., former Ex Director at (561 393 7781), Lake Wo
h Florida. - WHK
provided Traffic Review Services to the Countywide Planning
Council relative
to applications for Geographical Areas of Exception (GAE)
and Land Use Plan
Amendments. The firm prepared the technical reviews
of 5 large GAE's.
These projects represent portions of governmental jurisdictions
requesting
exceptions to the County Level of Service Standards somewhat
similar to
STA's. In addition to preparing a sufficiency response anc
the final technical
review, the firm also performed FSUTMS Modeling and an
lternatives analysis
of the cumulative impacts of the 5 GAE applications. Th
five applications
included: Palm Beach International Airport; Downtown'Vest
Palm Beach;
Riviera Beach Redevelopment Area; Westgate -Belvedere Re
evelopment Area;
and Delray Beach Downtown Redevelopment Area.
- 1 V, wv — nian Li Al P. FD T Miect Mana r
(954-777-4655) Fort Lauderdale FL - This Study involved extensive
sampling and survey efforts to establish the trip making char, cteristics of the
Martin, St. Lucie and Indian River County area. Random sampling from
Property Appraiser tapes was used to develop a sample pool 0 5,000 Treasure
Coast households. Telephone surveys were completed with 1 800 households
and detailed travel log diaries were collected from 600 hc useholds. The
results of the Study was utilized to modify the FSUTMS default values to
represent Treasure Coast conditions.
•
va uua� 1"L -
WHK was the prime consultant responsible for updatir g Broward's Long
Range Transportation Plan from 2015 to 2020. This pro ect will developed
two Plan products: a 2020 Needs Plan and a 2020 Cost Feasible Plan. Major
responsibilities of WHK include Project Management and Quality Control,
Public Involvement, Financial Resource Plan, Model Validation, Highway
and Transit Plan Development and Plan Adoption Process. The 2020 Plan
was approved by the MPO in December, 1998.
"untinuingy contract - Since 1 — Martin Count
Engineering Division —Gary Roberts 772 221 2300) - The firm was selected
to provide continuing traffic engineering services to the County. Example
projects have included: Intersection Improvements at SR 714 and CR 76-A ;
Roadway Geometric Study of High Meadows Avenue and Murphy Road;
Traffic Signalization at SR 714 and Waterfall Boulevard; Traffic
Signalization at SR714 and SW 42"d Avenue; Traffic Signalization at Mapp
Road and SW 36' Street; Traffic Circle at Mapp Road and CR 714, Traffic
Circle at High Meadows and Murphy Road; Traffic Calming & Landscaping
Improvements to Murphy Road and Flashing Warning Signal at Seaward and
Commerce Avenue. Firm responsibilities include traffic counts (machine and
turning movements), capacity and Level of Service Studies, traffic
projections, intersection and roadway improvement design, traffic
signalization design, permitting and bid documents.
Redevelopment and Revitalization
Fort Lauderdale 1997- P. Sheridan-954-761-5086 - 3 200 000) - The firm
was retained as the Civil Engineer for the Revitalization Plan for a 25 acre
Revitalization Plan at the Intracoastal Waterway and Oakland Park Boulevard.
As part of this effort, WHK was responsible for all traffic studies, roadway
and grading plan, drainage plan, water and sewer plan and co t estimates. An
assessment roll is under preparation by the City and if ap roved, detailed
engineering plans will be prepared.
-- - -- - wa aqua uacu1G111 - LGlyd neacn LI
Walter H. Keller, Inc. prepared the Traffic Circulation and F
the Delray Beach downtown CRA. This area covered the dow
district. This area included retail, office and historical uses
parking occupancy surveys were used to identify the current
demand for approximately 2,300 parking spaces. The firm ide
deficiencies, analyzed future demands and prepared immediate
improvements for downtown parking and traffic circulation.
arking Plan for
ntown business
Time of day
parking space
ntified existing
and long-range
•
--- ---- --- - avuuu a aal 11111 LG CUU11G11L -
Walter H. Keller, Inc. prepared a comprehensive development and
redevelopment study for the 295 acre area including the West Palm Beach
Auditorium and Stadium Complex, the former Palm Beach Lakes Golf Course
property, the Palm Beach Mall and Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. commercial
frontage and the Forum office area. The purpose of the study was to
inventory existing land use and development, to assess the feasibility of
various development and redevelopment scenarios and to make
recommendations to the City regarding future development, land use
designations and zoning for the study area. WHK also provided expert
testimony to the City Commission regarding the Area St dy and a proposed
AutoNation development within the study area.
1�1{111" Vl 7✓T-, , V-V / ✓V 1 -- / — 177wnsuucu n Uos[ - i own or
Lauderdale by the Sea. Florida — WHK served as the Engineer of Record for a
Revitalization Project in the Town's main business — tourist area adjacent to
the public beach area. This project includes an extensive paver brick
streetscape, landscaping, drainage, lighting and parking.
Florida — Walter H. Keller, Inc. was responsible for preparing the Town's first
Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan. In addition to developing concept
plans for four new target areas for long-term redevelopm nt , the Plan also
incorporated a 10 year capital improvement program targ ting landscaping,
streetscape, sidewalk, drainage and beautification projects.
a. v— 111 L111R Vl 7✓T-I /V-V!✓V LVVV - GVVG DUU L)VV lows] of
Lauderdale by the Sea. Florida — The firm served as the pri a consultant for
preparing a streetscape project for South Seagrape Drive. Major features of
the project included a new color sidewalk with pavers, land Gaping, drainage
improvements, upgraded street lighting, traffic calming (s eed humps) and
resurfacing. The firm prepared the conceptual plans, presented alternatives
for public review, prepared final construction drawin 3,s and contract
specifications, cost estimates, bidding documents, utility oordination and
permitting. This project also include a traffic calming improvement at
Hibiscus Avenue and Bougainvilla Drive to reduce "cut —through" traffic in
the neighborhood. WHK is also responsible for constructior observation and
final certification efforts. Construction was initiated or this project in
September 2002.
SA
MLMLAN
i�
)orate Profile
Since 1983, Walter H. Keller, Inc. (WHK) has provided professional Planning,
Traffic and Development assistance to government, developers and numerous
consultants in solving the complex issues of growth, infrastructure and
budget. The firm is committed to meeting client needs with professional
quality services using "state of the art" technology and practices. The firm's
website is: http://www.whkinc com.
WHK's primary service area includes Monroe Count), on the south and Indian
River County on the north serviced by two (2) offic s. The firm's corporate
office is located in Coral Springs in Broward County. A Treasure Coast Office
was opened in 1996 in Sewall's Point in Martin Coun _
Extensive use of computer -assisted analysis and design
provides long term
reductions in cost and more efficient presentation options.
professional is assigned as Project Manager
An experienced
to eacfi,
house equipment and resources along with our firm's
and every project. In-
knowledge and training,
allows us to meet complex and difficult challenges. The
firm's key capabilities
satisfy client's "out -sourcing" requirements, since the
maintained cost -efficiently with "in-house" personnel.
capability cannot be
The professional services provided by WHK are described
below:
Comprehensive and Urban Planning Services —
Growth management
systems,
project review services, urban and regional
impact analysis, zoning, land development codes, co
planning, site planning,
management systems, permit processing, comprehensive
currency analysis and
plans, evaluation
and appraisal reports, redevelopment studies, mark
studies, annexation studies, impact fee evaluation,
ling and demographic
presentation graphics, mapping, GIS and neighborhood
economic studies,
studies.
Traffic and Transportation Services — Traffic studies, transportation planning,
travel modeling, traffic operation studies, level of services analysis, capacity
analysis, transit studies, transit oriented design, land use - transportation
relationships, parking studies, intersection design, traffic signalization, signal
timing plans, traffic simulation and permitting.
Civil Engineering and Development Services — Site
grading plans, drainage plans, water and sewer pl
intersection design, parking lot design, lighting, c
phasing, capital improvement programming, pern
supervision.
W
Manning, paving and
ns, roadway design,
st estimates, project
its and construction
r H. Keller, Inc.
tiuv
a lb
orate Profile
Walter H. Keller, Inc., is organized as a Corporation under the laws of the
State of Florida. The firm is authorized by the Florida Board of Professional
Engineers as an Engineering Business to practice Engineering in the State of
Florida. The firm maintains licenses with Broward County, Coral Springs and
Martin County.
The firm is also pre -qualified with several jurisdictions including Broward
County (Qualified Vendor List for Engineering M 6 01.137 A3), Town of Davie
(Development Reviews), Fort Lauderdale (Traffic Eng eering), Martin County
(Traffic Engineering) and the Florida Department of T ansportation (FDOT).
FDOT pre -qualifications are noted below:
Groin Designation
2.0 Project Development & Environmental Stu lies
3.1 Minor Highway Design
6.1 Traffic Engineering Studies
7.1 Signing, Pavement Marking and Channeliz lion
7.2 Lighting
7.3 Signalization
13.3 Policy Planning
13.4 Systems Planning
13.5 Subarea/Corridor Planning
13.6 Land Planning(for appraisal support)
Walt r H. Keller, Inc.
Tischler & Associates, Inc. (TA) has provided fiscal, econo is and planning consulting
services to public and private sector clients for over 30 years. In s time, TA has prepared over
500 impact fees and over 400 fiscal impact analyses.
As illustrated on the map below, TA has provided fiscal,
services to jurisdictions across the country.
d
The professional services offered by Tischler & Associates include:
- Impact (Development) Fees
- Fiscal Impact Analyses
- Capital Improvement Plans
- Market & Economic Feasibility Studies/Economic I
- Fiscal and Economic Software
www. tischterassociates. com
and planning consulting
Strategies
Impact Fees are one-time payments used to fund capital improvements needed to accommodate
new development. Since impact fees are applied only to new development, they have become an
increasingly popular revenue source for local governments.
PUBLICSECTOR
TA has completed over 500 impact fee studies for jurisdictions across the country. The types of
facilities for which TA has calculated impact fees include: roads, utilities, schools, parks,
libraries, police, fire/EMS and municipal buildings. For those communities not sure about the
practicality of impact fees and/or the impact fee categories to evaluate, TA offers an impact fee
feasibility analysis. This cost-effective study (under $9,000) provides a road map for the
jurisdiction and can serve as a white paper. Some of TA's publi sector impact fee clients
include:
Bentonville, AR
Avondale, AZ
Pasco Co., FL
Edmond, OK
Camp Verde, AZ
Polk Co., FL
Sunny Isles Beach, FL
tillwater, OK
Carefree, AZ
Tarpon Springs, FL
ower Markham Township, PA
Flagstaff, AZ
Venice, FL
. Greenwich, RI
Glendale, AZ
Post Falls, ID
orry Co., SC
Goodyear, AZ
Peoria, AZ
Barnstable TownshipMA
.
ock Hills, SC
ummerville, SC
Phoenix, AZ
Calvert Co., MD
Carroll Co., MD
merican Fork, UT
Queen Creek, AZ
Cecil Co., MD
righam City, UT
Scottsdale, AZ
Show Low, AZ
Charles Co., MDClinton
learfield, UT
City, UT
Surprise, AZ
Frederick Co., MD
Queen Anne Co., MD
raper, UT
Tolleson, AZ
Chino Hills, CA
Washington Co., MD
Farmington,
Hyde
UT
Park, UT
Boulder, COysville,
Westminster, MD
Worcester Co., MD
UT
Castle Rock, CO
Madison, MS
rth L
rthogan, UT
Eaton, CO
Billings, MT
P
nt Grove, UT
Greeley, CO
Bozeman, MT
S
uth Valley Sewer District, UT
Johnstown, CO
Missoula, MT
Slit
S
I Lake Co., UT
Louisville, CO
Chatham Co., NC
Sp
anish Fork,
anish Fork, UT
Pitkin Co., CO
Steamboat Springs, CO
Durham Co., NC
S
W
lle, UT
llsville, UT
Appoquinimink School Dist., DE
Greenville, NC
Nags Head, NC
W
ods Cross, UT
New Castle, DE
Orange Co., NC
C
esapeake, VA
State of Delaware
Albuquerque, NM
C
st Co., VA
Deerfield Beach, FL
Las Cruces, NM
Isleeterfield
Wight, VA
Hillsborough Co., FL
Taos NM
Su
V,
Key Biscayne, FL
Manatee Co., FL
Clifton Park, NY
Ea
Ne
Claire,
ire, WI
N Berlin, WI
Delaware, OH
Tel
n County, WY
www, tischierassociates. com
0
•
OKEECHOBEE CITY/ COUNTY IMPACT F STUDY
PROJECT APPROACH
Florida's Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act
Chapter 163 Part II Florida Statutes (the "PlanningAct"provides
ents are
expected to provide for an adequate level of publicfacilit esand se that
that will be available
when needed to support planned development. This concurrency req irement can be achieved in
part through the use of impact fees.
The City of Okeechobee (City) and Okeechobee County (County) I
land development regulations related to impact fees. The impact fee
for implementation of the City and County comprehensive plans. (
fees will include the adoption of appropriate amendments to the La
may include revisions of the City's capital facility plans and 1
improvement and land use related elements of the City's Comprehens
The Project Team members for this effort have unique and sl
accomplishing this effort for the City and the County. Walter H. Kell
as the Prime Consultant for this effort. Tischler and Associates, 1
Wright, J.D., LL.M. (TGW) will serve as major sub consultants for th
have considerable Florida experience and WHK has previously perfi
the County. TA has both Florida and National experience in Impac
Assessments. The combined resources of the project team men
innovative, succinct and defensible procedures to be put into place they
the County to collect revenue to assist in meeting capital infrastructure
ve decided to update their
ystem is an important tool
eating a system of impact
d Development Code and
ograms, and the capital
e Plan.
cialized credentials for
Inc., (WHK) will serve
(TA) and Thomas G.
effort. WHK and TGW
med assignments within
Fees and Fiscal Impact
ers will allow unique,
)y allowing the City and
The following narrative discussion highlights our approach to this important effort. A listing of
Tasks/Subtasks of the Scope of Services is provided at the back porti n of this Section along
with manhour estimates, fee estimate and project schedule.
Approach to the Feasibility Study
Impact fees have proven to be an important implementation tool for the
as a critical part of the overall funding strategy for the capital improven
to serve planned development. However, impact fees alone will not be
accommodate projected growth. Other innovative funding mechanisms
used in conjunction with impact fees.
Continued development can only be satisfactorily accommodated if ad
will be available when needed. Expansion and upgrading of these facilii
which development and redevelopment can continue in accordanc,
Comprehensive Plan. Impact fees can be used as incentives or disini
planning objectives. The Project Team's state as well as national exl
calculations and implementation approaches will be important in this effor
iprehensive plan and
; that will be needed
Icient to adequately
be considered to be
luate public facilities
s will be a means by
with the applicable
ntives for achieving
rience in impact fee
u
A primary objective of the Technical Feasibility Study and Implementation of Impact Fee
Program will be to provide an implementation tool for the City,
Utility Authority long-range plans for public facilities. County, School District, and
Capital facility plans need to be financially feasible and to describe 1he need for and costs of the
additional facility improvements that will be necessary to provide public facilities at established
levels of service. Creating the system of impact fees will include 1he adoption of appropriate
amendments to the Land Development Code and may include revisi;nts of capital facility plans
and programs, and the capital improvement and land use related elems of the City and County
Comprehensive Plans.
Interviews should be conducted with developers/builders involved in residential, commercial and
industrial activity in the City and County and neighboring areas in which there is relevant
competition. Although there is recent literature regarding impact fees and lot sale prices,
development costs and housing prices (prepared for Brookings Institution), local interviews will
be more reliable than the national findings. The local findings will be discussed in relation to
national findings and differences will be noted, when appropriate.
Based on interviews with various City, County, School District and Utility Authority personnel,
including service providers as well as planning officials, we will be able to better assess other,
objectives. This will include utilizing impact fees as an incentive tool which encourages growth
in areas that it is desired, an impact fee schedule that achieves economic development objectives
such as encouraging large scale commercial and industrial development as well the feasibility of
differential and tiered impact fees approaches. As part of these considerations we will review the
comprehensive plan relative to the recommended impact fee strategies.
New categories of impact fees that are appropriate may be considered as well as other concepts
that could better address the City and County infrastructure needs through impact fees and other
concepts, whether land use or revenue which would enhance the ability of the City and the
County to meet their goals.
The Project Team's state and national experience in impact fees, fiscal analysis, planning and
implementation techniques will lead to comprehensive, defensible and understandable products.
This will include a summary matrix of options and recommendations for the City and County to
review as well other interested parties. Our team has conducted many facilitation meetings,
presented at many public forums and served as expert witnesses on i pact fee and land use
topics. We know what to provide and how to present it.
For an impact fee to be valid in Florida there must be a nexus between ti. e impacts created by a
development project on capital facilities, the cost of providing those acilities, and benefits
conferred upon the development from the expenditure of the collected fun s. The revenues from
the impact fee may only be used to prevent future deficiencies caused by new development and
may not be used to alleviate existing conditions. This is a simplified statement of the dual
rational nexus test established in the landmark case of Holl ood Inc. vs. Coun 431
So. 2d 606 (Fla.4`h DCA 1983). The Broward
Appellate Court in the Hall wo d Inc. case upheld a
regional park impact fee requirement adopted by the Broward County Commission in 1977. This
was the first time that a regulatory impact fee had been upheld by a 1
imposition of user charges for sewer utility capital improvements had
& Builders Association of Pinellas Count vs. Cit of Dunedin
Following the Holly —wood lid Inc. case, road impact fees were uph
Contractors Association vs. Palm Beach Coun 446 So.2d 140 (Fla. �
The U. S. Supreme Court ruled in Nollan v. California Coastal Com . that when an exaction condition is placed upon the approval of
regulation imposing the exaction condition must substantially advanc In Dolan v. City of Ti and 512 U.S. 374 (1994) the U.S. Su an
prei
recognize the need for a "rough proportionality" between the exacti i
caused by the development. The Court also stated that because the City
(quasi-judicial) decision to impose the exaction condition the burden o
Because both the Nollan and Dolan cases dealt with dedications and
access to private property, it has been thought by some that those tali 1
fees which are cash payments that do not directly diminish real p
rc
thinking, and the rule of law in almost every state other than Californi
fairness requirements of equal protection and due process in addi i
necessitate application of the Nollan and Dolan standards to all exactin
ionda appellate court. The
been upheld in Con=ors
29 So.2d 314 (Fla.1976).
Id in Home Builders and
't' DCA 1983.
development permit, the
a legitimate state interest.
ie Court went further to
i required and the impact
had made an adjudicative
Proof is on the City.
sements allowing public
s do not apply to impact
:)erty rights. The better
is that the fundamental
►n to the takings issue
including impact fees.
The Nollan and Dolan cases apply to exactions the long standing principle applied to zoning in
Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co 272 U.S.365 (1926) that a regulation must bear a
reasonable relationship to legitimate state interests. In Dolan the Court also stated that when an
exaction results from an adjudicative decision it must be based on an individualized
determination that the exaction is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the
development.
Florida's dual rational nexus test for impact fee exactions, established in the Hollywood Inc case
already required the "essential nexus" test of Nollan between the exactions imposed on the
Proposed development and the advancement of legitimate governmental interests the regulation,
and more precision than the "roughly proportional" test of Dolan betwe n the exaction and the
impact of the development.
Over a century ago, in Norwood v. Baker 172 U.S. 269 (1898), the U.S. S apreme Court applied a
benefit requirement to special assessments. The Court said that "... the exaction from the owner
of private property of the cost of a public improvement in substantial excess of the special
benefits accruing to him is, to the extent of the excess, a taking, under t e guise of taxation..."
The U.S. Supreme Court has not yet applied a No_ style benefit rec uirement to exactions,
but the Florida Courts have in the dual rational nexus test. An ordina ice meeting the more
stringent Florida standards for impact fees, which also require that the us of the fee benefit the
payer of the fee should readily pass muster with the U. S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court only sets the minimum standard under the Federal Constitution. A
State may set a higher standard for regulatory exactions, and Florida has done so. A historical
basis for this higher standard is Florida's constitutional requirement in S ction 1, Article VII,
u
Florida Constitution, that local governments may not impose a t
specifically authorized by general law. Many early attempts to impo
as unauthorized taxes or as being outside the local government'
consequence, the Florida Courts crafted the dual rational nexus test
between a lawful regulatory exaction under home rule and an illegal t
In 1991, school impact fees were addressed in St. Johns County vs
Association 583 So.2d 635 (Fla.1991). In the Stcase the Flori,
the principles of the dual rational nexus test first established in the Ho
that impact fees could be imposed for schools, although the ordina
deficiencies that needed correction. Florida's Constitution establishes
in the provision of public schools that must be given special consi<
Volusia County vs Aberdeen at Ormond Be
ach, L.P. 760 So.2d 1�
Supreme Court held that a community with deed restrictions prohib
under 18 would not receive a sufficient benefit to justify the impositi
This case reinforces the requirement that the payer of the fee receive a
the fee that it paid.
: unless the tax has been
impact fees were stricken
home rule powers. As a
tat carefully distinguishes
Supreme Court relied on
wood Inc. case, and held
e in question had some
luirements of uniformity
ation. More recently in
(Fla. 2000) the Florida
rig permanent residents
. of school impact fees.
nonstrable benefit from
Florida does not have a standardized impact fee format established by statute. This is actually to
the benefit of the City and County in their desire to find appropriate impact fee programs to help
solve their special needs. Under home rule, a city or county can create and implement its own
unique system of impact fees provided that Florida's dual rational nexus test is met.
Approach to Implementation of Impact Fees
The Florida Legislature has recognized that there is statewide need for ong range planning and
particularly a need to coordinate public facility planning with land use planning. Because local
governments are primarily responsible for land use planning and devel pment permitting, it is
essential that each local government also address the long-range public f Icilities needs within its
jurisdiction through comprehensive planning, land development regu ations, and innovative
funding mechanisms including techniques such as impact fees.
The challenge is to calculate impact fees that are realistic and fair to the payer of the fee and yet
adequate to sufficiently improve the facilities to make up for future deficiencies that would result
from the development being allowed to proceed. The fee should be in an amount proportionate to
the need for the public facilities and services generated by the new development. Fees for
impacts may be used as a funding component of the Capital Improv ment Element of the
Comprehensive Plan and capital facility plans to provide public facilities that will be needed to
help offset the impacts of the new development.
Long range facilities plans need to be financially feasible to most strongly
of impact fee requirements. The capital improvements element of
Comprehensive Plans may be revised if necessary to describe the public
that will be needed, and that can be funded, and to provide for an adequa
the land uses authorized by the future land use plan element. Facility Pla
should be consistent with each other and land use permitting decisions net
plans. Increased density and intensity of development resulting fro;
pport the imposition
City and County
cilities and services
level of service for
and land use plans
to implement those
development and
0
redevelopment can only be satisfactorily accommodated if adequate facilities will be available.
The functionality and serviceability of levels of service currently used by the City and the
County should be evaluated and addressed.
In reviewing future development projects, the total demand of the prc
each type of public facility. The total demand should be based on the
or intensity of the project. This total need created by the develol
against the future facility improvement needs in the area where the pr
fee assessment is calculated based on legislative determinations mac
adoption. The basis for the determinations should be reviewed p4
necessary. The impact fee ordinance should provide that the calculatic
made administratively based on the costs of facilities and pre-det(
Particular densities and intensities of development.
There must be a nexus between the need created by the project and b,
development and the cost of providing the benefit. The revenues fror
be used to prevent or correct future deficiencies caused by new devi
used to alleviate existing conditions. To demonstrate the required bi
applied within a reasonable period of time to specific projects in the (
will demonstrably improve, or at least minimize the deterioration of, tl
public facilities in the area serving the proposed development.
Improvements should be targeted to meet the needs of that particu
imposed. The improvements should be prioritized for use of impact fE priority given to those capital improvements, which can most readily 1
benefit to the development upon which the fee was imposed.
Arterial, collector, and local residential roads can be addressed indepe:
the needs of each type of road in each area of the City and County. A tiej
to unit cost of providing facilities could provide adequate funds needed
targeted facilities. Where facilities are currently lacking, those impa
Differential impact fees that encourage growth within the areas that the
encourage growth and discourage growth where facilities are inadequate
financial feasible plan to improve them may be given consideration.
A variety of different impact fees may be used to address the impacts of
they are implemented in a manner that provides a benefit to the payer
created through the use of impact fees can be demonstrated to addres: provide such a benefit then such an impact fee could be feasible. In Flo
new categories of impact fees for capital facilities can be established, pros
of the dual rational nexus test are met.
A basic tenant of impact fees is that they can not be waived if the waiv
impacts of the waived development being paid by the impact fees o
However, there are a number of ways that affordable housing can be adds
schedules can be based on the type of dwelling unit, square feet of li,
bedrooms, and other criteria that better reflect the number of occupants an
of the unit on facilities and services.
fect should be measured for
type of use and the density
ment should be compared
►ject is located. An impact
e at the time of ordinance
riodically and revised as
a of the assessment can be
rmined demand rates for
refits conferred upon the
the impact fee may only
apment and may not be
refit, the funds must be
ipital Facility Plans that
level of service for the
area where they are
funds with the highest
demonstrated to be of
idently and targeted for
,d impact fee correlated
to improve specifically
I fees may be higher.
City or County wish to
and there is no current
development provided
)f the fee. If facilities
those impacts and to
'ida, under home rule,
ded that the standards
would result in the
other development.
'sed. Residential fee
ng area, number of
the potential impact
11
Impact fee districts are particularly suitable where there is a wide variation between the existing
levels of services in different areas. In areas where existing levels of service are adequate a
district could be used to maintain that level of service.
If there are areas of the City and County that are composed of un aved and or significantly
deteriorated roads that may not provide safe and adequate access, then concurrency is an issue.
Under concurrency, building permits should not be issued, even fbr a platted lot, if roads
necessary to provide safe and adequate access to the lot are not availa le. Areas with inadequate
roads will necessitate special treatment for building construction to continue. Separate funding
sources may be necessary for areas of inadequate roads that also inclu a existing homes.
The City and County could encourage jobs that could be provided by 1 e-scale commercial and
industrial development located in appropriate areas through a broad stiategy that includes the use
of impact fees. Community Redevelopment Agencies (CRA) or special districts such as
Community Development Districts (CDD) may be appropriate vehicles for services and capital
improvements in some areas.
Subject to vested rights, impact fees may be applied to redevelopmer
the redevelopment would have a greater impact on facilities and se
level of service is below the adopted level of service for the area..
directly at the building permit stage would apply to redevelop:
development and would be more accurate, more efficient, and more by
stages of the permitting process.
For an impact fee program to be viable, a formal process needs to be
developer the opportunity to prepare a study demonstrating that it wi
the facilities to be provided or alternatively to make a propo,
improvements in the capital facilities plans that would expand the caps
to accommodate the impacts generated by the project. This proces
problem of a lack of benefit to the payer of the impact fee which occu
case.
A recent example of an innovative/non-traditional category of impai
2003 Broward County Transit Impact Fee and Concurrency Study. A
an issue in the City and County, this recent Study demonstrates how i
used to address the specific needs of a community. This Study prc
addressing future transportation needs by providing the technical a
transportation concurrency program to refocus primarily on tral
recommended the imposition of concurrency assessments for transport
transit and the imposition of transit impact fees tailored to specific are
improved transit. The legal principles set forth in the Study to all
concurrency assessments and impact fees at the building permit stage
compatible, with the imposition of other impact fees on a similar basis.
if it is demonstrated that
ices or that the existing
nposition of impact fees
ent as well as to new
adly based than at earlier
railable to give a project
receive no benefit from
l to construct or fund
ity of the public facilities
can help to prevent the
;d in the Volusia County
fees is described in the
ough transit may not be
tovative thinking can be
ised a new approach to
legal basis to revise a
t services. The Study
.on with an emphasis on
that would benefit from
i for the imposition of
also applicable to, and
•
Examples of Other Funding Mechanisms to Consider in
Special Assessments
Special assessments are a funding tool available to local governmei
facilities. Both specific state statutes and home rule provide adec
government to levy a fairly and reasonably apportioned assessment
special benefit assessment from the service or facility that will be pri
local government is authorized by general law to collect non -ad valor(
it has levied through the ad valorem tax bill.
Simply stated, the requirements for a valid special assessment
specific than are impact fees which with careful drafting can be
fees and special assessments are two different means to help
facilities to benefit its residents. A funding program including im]
funding sources could be developed in a manner that could ei
property owners to approve the levy of special assessments against
Special Improvement Districts
with Impact Fees
to provide services and
to authority for a local
t property that derives a
ded with the revenue. A
special assessments that
are even more detailed and
readily distinguished. Impact
a local government provide
)act fees and other innovative
icourage specially benefited
the' property.
There has been extensive use of special improvement districts in Florida to provide basic
infrastructure and services. Special improvement districts are specia limited purpose units of
local government as opposed to cities and counties which are general purpose units of local
government. A special district, depending on its charter or governing law, can levy taxes and
special assessments, and impose fees and charges to fund the facilit es and services that it is
authorized to provide.
Special improvement districts may either dependant or independent s defined in Chapter 189
Florida Statues. A dependant district in essence functions as a component of another government
entity, whereas an independent district once created stands on its own and operates pursuant to
the law under which it as established and is not directly responsible to another government
entity. The bonded indebtedness and other liabilities of an independe special district are not a
burden on the City or County in which the district is located.
Community Development Districts (CDD) are a type of independent s ecial district authorized by
Chapter 190 Florida Statutes. A CDD of 1000 acres or greater is established by the Florida Land
and Water Adjudicatory Commission after public hearings by the local government where the
CDD will be located. A CDD of less than 1000 acres is established by the local government within
which it is to be located.
Public Participation
Public participation is essential to the success of these potentially co troversial efforts to create
impact fee programs as described in the RFP. The key to a successful public involvement effort
will be the ability to clearly explain the reasons why a revised impact fee program is necessary to
maintain the quality of life that the citizens and business community dt mand. The public must be
educated to understand Florida's legal requirements of a reasonable f e related to the impacts of
the development and the use of those fees in a manner that benefits the payer of the fee. These
•
legal requirements are a safeguard that prevents the arbitrary imp(
There can, and should, be a healthy debate as to what proportion of
borne by taxpayers or by impact fee payers. The Project Team, toget]
reach out to identify and communicate with interest groups and in
Project. With a solid foundation of fact and an understanding o
objectives of the City and the County, the debate that will ensue c
plane.
ition or use of impact fees.
,ublic facility cost should be
;r with appropriate Staff will
ividuals at all stages of the
the law and the goals and
n be conducted on a higher
•
Task/Subtasks per RFP Scope of
This portion of the proposal repeats the RFP Task/Subtasks. The estimated manhours and
Consultant Fee to perform both the County and City assignments follows. Note, the fee is based
on providing all service fees and removal of a service fee assignment will require a revised fee
amount. The estimated time for completing County and City efforts is 9 months. Provisions to
encumber impact fees during the study process will be provided.
Task 1.0 - Data Collection and Analysis
Subtask 1.1- Data Inventory
Subtask 1.2 - Population/Service Unit Estimation
Subtask 1.3 - Existing Level of Service (LOS) Identification
Subtask 1.4 - Adopted LOS Identification
Subtask 1.5 - Population/Service Unit Estimation
Subtask 1.6 - Cost/Revenue Identification
Subtask 1.7 - Level of Service Analysis
Subtask 1.8 - Future Demand Analysis
Subtask 1.9 - Future Capital Cost Projections
Subtask 1.10 - Data Collection and Analysis Report
Task 2.0 -Policy Analysis
Subtask 2.1- Legal Requirements for Imposing Impact Fees
Subtask 2.2 - Adopted Level of Service Review
Subtask 2.3 - Funding Source Review
Subtask 2.4 - Policy Analysis Report and Presentation
Subtask 2.5 - Policy Revisions
Task 3.0 -Methodology Development
Subtask 3.1 - Formula Development
Subtask 3.2 - Fee Schedule Preparation
Subtask 3.3 - Impact Fee Formula Report and Presentation
Task 4.0 - Implementation and Administration Process
Subtask 4.1 - Ordinance and Agreement Preparation
Subtask 4.2 - Administration Procedures
Subtask 4.3 - Update Process Development
Subtask 4.4 - Implementation and Administration Process Development Report
Task 5.0 - Final Report
Subtask 5.1 - Public Hearings
Subtask 5.2 - Document Preparation
Subtask 5.3 - Electronic Document Preparation
Task 6.0 - Study Requirements and Provisions of Work
Subtask 5.1 - Project Schedule
Subtask 5.2 - Meetings and Presentations
Subtask 5.3 - Progress Reporting and Invoicing
•
Okeechobee City/County Impact Fee Manho
Total Manhour Estimate for Okeechobee Co
and Fee Estimate
........ 504 Hours
Total Manhour Estimate for City of Okeechobee .�........ 208 Hours
Se
Transportation
Law Enforcement
Corrections
Fire
EMS
Park and Recreation
Schools
Storm Water Management
Water and Sewer
Total
Count * City t
� Am unt Fee Amoi
$12,380.00
$ 9,295 00
*
$ 9,295 00
t
$12,895 00
$12,895 00
$ 6,195 00
$12,895.00
$ 6,815.00
$ 6,815.00
$ 6,815.00
$ 6,815.00
$75,850.00 $27,260.00
* - County Fee is Total Amount Not by Individual Servic
* - City Fee is Total Amount Not by Individual Service R
** - Included in Law Enforcement
tt - Included in Fire
Fee Cost
e Cost
Okeechobee City/County
Impact Fee Study
Protect Schedule
1.0 Data Collection and Analysis
2.0 Policy Analysis
3.0 Methodology Development
4,0 Implementation and Administration Process
5.0 Final Report
6.0 5tudy Requirements and Provisions of Work
�C Public Meeting / Hearing
City/County Staff Meeting
Tech Memo # 1
Tech Memo # 2:
Tech Memo # 3
Tech Memo # 4
rvr
4
:
Yrmai Kepori
9ubm(s6ton
Documet.9
E
LLWWalter H. Keller, Inc.
Consulting E— - — & Planners