POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL COSTS OF THE MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT

TECHNICAL SUMMARY | 2019

Ne 2nd Ave Corridor in Little Haiti Photo Credit: Steven F. via yelp.com AUTHORS

Rebecca Page, Project Director, Earth Economics Trygve Madsen, Research Analyst, Earth Economics Johnny Mojica, Research Lead, Earth Economics Nina Kerr, GIS Analyst, Earth Economics Corrine Armistead, GIS Manager, Earth Economics

Suggested Citation: Page, R., Madsen, T., Mojica, J., Kerr, N., Armistead, C. 2019. Potential Environmental and Social Costs of the Magic City Innovation District: Technical Summary.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Report Design: Cheri Jensen Map Design: Nina Kerr Report Editing: Michael Burnham

Prepared for: Community Justice Project Prepared by: Earth Economics

We would also like to thank Earth Economics’ Board of Directors for their continued guidance and support: Alex Bernhardt, David Cosman, Elizabeth Hendrix, Greg Forge, Ingrid Rasch, Molly Seaverns, Nan McKay, and Sherry Richardson.

The authors are responsible for the content of this report.

Earth Economics is a leader in ecological economics and has provided innovative analysis and recommendations to governments, tribes, organizations, private firms, and communities around the world. eartheconomics.org | [email protected]

Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.

©2019 Earth Economics. All rights reserved.

1 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

3 INTRODUCTION 4 BACKGROUND 4 Little Haiti, Development, and Climate Change 5 Magic City Innovation District special Area Plan (SAP) 6 The Potential Social and Environmental Costs of the Magic City Innovation Project 7 ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT 7 Urban vegetation and Ecosystem Services 7 Increased Traffic Volumes and Congestion 9 Increased Building Heights and Energy Efficiency 11 Increased Building Heights and Canyon Effects 12 SOCIAL COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT − ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 12 The Household Costs of Displacement 12 Upfront Relocation Costs 13 Job Access and Commuting 14 Environmental Conditions 15 Beyond Economic Measure: Additional Household Costs 15 Summary of Little Haiti Household-Level Displacement Costs 16 Alternative Displacement Scenarios − Recurring Relocation, Homelessness, and Homeowner Damages 18 Other Cost Considerations 19 CONCLUSION 20 Appendix A: Household Displacement Costs Summary 21 Appendix B: Detailed Summary of Magic City Traffic Study Critique 22 Appendix C: Upfront Relocation Costs Methodology 25 Appendix D: Commuting Related Costs Methodology 28 Appendix E: Flood Damages and Social Cost Methodology 33 Appendix F: Job Loss, Absenteeism, and Costs of Homelessness 35 Appendix G: Benefit Transfer Method Description and Limitations 37 Appendix H: Benefit Transfer Studies 39 WORKS CITED

FIGURES AND TABLES 4 Figure 1. Little Haiti Neighborhood within the city of Miami 6 Figure 2. Framework: Environmental, Economic, and Social Impacts of Development 7 Table 1. Annual Ecosystem Service Values by Land-Cover Type for Miami Area (USD 2018 Dollars) 9 Table 2. Cost of tailpipe emissions associated with additional cars due to the Magic City project 10 Table 3. Cost of tailpipe emissions due to idling, associated with total estimated peak traffic in the AM (2,057 cars) and PM (2,069 cars), in Little Haiti 11 Figure 3. Estimated aspect ratio from Magic City SAP Road Segments 13 Table 4. Estimated household-level costs associated with relocation 14 Table 5. Estimated household-level costs associated with commuting 14 Table 6. Estimated household-level social costs associated with flooding

EARTH ECONOMICS | 2 INTRODUCTION

The Magic City Innovation District project (“the Magic conduct a literature review and analysis of the City project”), pending approval, is slated to be built project’s potential impacts on ecosystem services, local in the Little Haiti neighborhood of Miami beginning in environmental quality, and financial wellbeing of Little 2020.1 The Magic City project would attract additional Haiti residents at risk of economic displacement. investment and create economic and social benefits for a new wave of Little Haiti residents and businesses. In addition to raising questions specifically related However, there is growing concern among some to the Magic City project for additional research and community members and advocates that the project consideration, a secondary purpose of this study would generate negative environmental impacts is to raise awareness among decision makers and and accelerate the displacement of residents who community members about the range of social, have historically resided in Little Haiti, the majority economic, and environmental impacts that should of whom are low-income families of color. Without ideally be considered when evaluating the costs and taking the time to establish a complete picture of the benefits of large-scale development projects more environmental and social costs and benefits of such a broadly. It is the authors’ hope that the questions project, development projects such as the Magic City raised in this report can support Miami decision project run the risk of perpetuating economic and racial makers in promoting sustainable and inclusive urban inequities across Miami communities and contributing development moving forward. to unsustainable development practices that threaten A high-level synthesis of relevant literature and select Miami’s long-term resilience. project-specific economic modeling is presented in the To better understand the potential environmental and following sections of this report. Detailed explanation social costs of the Magic City project, the Community of economic modeling methodology and data sources Justice Project (CJP) engaged Earth Economics to is presented in Appendices C to F.

3 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 4 BACKGROUND

LITTLE HAITI, DEVELOPMENT, 20.01, 20.03, 20.04, 22.01, and 22.02, which were utilized throughout this analysis.a The area, formerly AND CLIMATE CHANGE known as Lemon City, came to be known as Little Haiti after Haitian immigrants moved in and established As the climate warms, sea-level rise poses significant a strong immigrant community in the 1970s and challenges to Miami and other cities throughout Florida 1980s. In recent years, Little Haiti has seen a dramatic that face continued growth and development pressure. increase in property values, as interest grows among The pace of sea-level rise is increasing; sea levels in the development community to build projects in Miami are projected to increase by six inches in the next higher-elevation areas with lower flood risk.3 While fifteen years alone.2 Anecdotal and emerging empirical the northern portion of Little Haiti is on lower ground evidence3 suggests that, as sea-level rise intensifies (0.01 to 2 meters above sea level), the southern and coastal flooding hazards, property value growth rates southwestern portions of the neighborhood are higher in coastal areas are slowing while property values in elevation, with elevation ranging from 2 to 10 meters higher-elevation neighborhoods such as Little Haiti are above sea level.4 While development pressure and increasing. This “climate gentrification” phenomenon rising housing costs have pushed out many low-income poses significant challenges to the city of Miami, immigrant families over the past several years, Haitian as a shifting housing market pushes lower-income and other immigrant communities still hold a strong communities into increasingly vulnerable parts of the presence in the neighborhood. city.

Little Haiti is a neighborhood located in the heart of Miami, encompassing approximately 3.5 square miles. a The officially designated Little Haiti neighborhood starts at 54th In 2016, Little Haiti was officially designated as a Street, while the census tracts begin at 36th Street. Therefore, the neighborhood. The official neighborhood boundaries census tracts utilized throughout this analysis encompass a larger area than the true boundaries of the official neighborhood. roughly coincide with census tracts 14.01, 14.02,

FIGURE 1 LITTLE HAITI NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI

EARTH ECONOMICS | 4 MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT SPECIAL AREA PLAN (SAP)

The proposed Magic City development, slated to be built in Little Haiti beginning in 2020, spans 37 contiguous parcels that consist of 17.75 acres.5 The developer is proposing a Special Area Plan (SAP), which is a special zoning designation for adjacent parcels that together exceed nine acres. The purpose of an SAP is to encourage a greater degree of integration of public improvements and infrastructure via master planning, and the SAP offers the developer more flexibility in building design.6

The developer is proposing land-use changes and rezoning for 30 of the 37 parcels in the project area. The proposed land-use changes are from medium density restricted commercial and light industrial use to general commercial use.5 In the rezoning application, 30 of 37 parcels currently zoned T-5 and D-1 will be rezoned under custom zoning designations, MCID-1 and MCID- 2. The current maximum allowable height for the T5 zone is five stories, though no existing buildings in the area are taller than one or two stories. Converting to MCID-1 and MCID-2 means that buildings in the area will become significantly taller: building heights will be 20 and 25 stories.7 This repurposing would result in a dense mixed-use area composed of about 2,630 residential units, 432 hotel rooms, 313,165 square feet of retail space, 1,763,820 square feet of office space, and 5,547 parking spaces.5 The development also will include a $31 million neighborhood fund,1 3.8 acres of space not occupied by buildings, and the restoration of the historic DuPuis Medical Office & Drugstore.5

In late March of 2019, the Magic City project won initial approval from the Miami City Commission, which voted 4-0 in favor, with one commissioner not present. Voting on the project had been delayed three times as the City Commission insisted on a greater degree of community engagement on the proposal.8 A second vote to ratify the SAP is scheduled for June 27, 2019, with two town halls scheduled in the interim to offer additional chances for the community to weigh in.9 If the project is approved at that time, the next step will be to produce an environmental impact statement, which would allow the developers to secure building permits.b

b Personal communication, Community Justice Project staff, April 2019.

5 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 6 THE POTENTIAL SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS OF MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT

Proposed development projects such as the Magic City Innovation District can be examined using both an environmental and social lens. Land-use changes and changing economic conditions alike can result in a range of impacts and costs to local government and residents. In Miami, the environmental and social costs stemming from proposed land-use changes must also be examined in the broader context of climate change impacts. For example, residents who must leave Little Haiti due to eviction or inability to afford rising rents may not only incur costs due to moving and living in farther away neighborhoods — they may also be moving to areas with higher flood risk, Moreover, land- use changes that increase density and reduce urban vegetation can impair local air quality and exacerbate the Urban Heat Island Effect, which is concerning particularly in the context of rising temperatures and higher frequency of heat waves.10 Figure 2 is a visual framework demonstrating the causal relationship between development and potential environmental, economic, and social costs. These costs would ideally be weighed against the known benefits of density and property value uplift, in a holistic manner.

FIGURE 2 FRAMEWORK: ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC, AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT

NEW DEVELOPMENT

LAND USE CHANGEECONOMIC CHANGE

Increased Conversion of Urban Vegetation Increased Height Rising Rents and Property Taxes Road to Impervious Surface of Buildings Congestion Long-Term Residents Evicted or Priced Out

Canyon Effect/ Residents move to lower-elevation Some portion of evicted residents Decrease in Air neighborhood with poorer access to transit and jobs. experience homelessness. Circulation

Costs Associated with Moving: Costs Associated with Homelessness:

Loss or Decline of Ecosystem Services: Relocation Costs School Absenteesism Moving and Job Loss and (Direct + Opportunity among some Upfront Rent Costs Costs) Stagnant Wages Air Water Homeless Youth Quality Quality Worsened Increased Urban Heat Commute Costs Air Pollution Increased Flood Damages: Island (Direct + Opportunity Costs) Lost Productivity Stormwater Flood Prevention Increased Flood Damages: Increased Flood Damages: Structural Damage Mental Health and Urban Heat Carbon to Home Anxiety Costs Island Mitigation Sequestration

EARTH ECONOMICS | 6 ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT

There are several potential environment costs to a naturally filters rain water, resulting in less stormwater development project such as the Magic City Innovation runoff downstream and improved stormwater quality.13 District. For urban development projects, potential In addition to generating significant stormwater costs include the: impacts of land-use changes and management benefits, urban vegetation has multiple the associated impacts to ecosystem services; impacts ancillary benefits, including air quality purification, of taller, denser buildings and the effect on local air urban heat island mitigation, urban habitat provision, circulation; energy efficiency of new buildings; and, aesthetic value, and positive mental health impacts.14 potential impacts of traffic and congestion on local These primary and ancillary benefits of urban vegetation air quality. A review of project planning documents can also be described as ecosystem services, or, the and key literature suggests that the Magic City project benefits nature provides to humans. may generate environmental impacts that warrant further study. The following section summarizes IMPLICATIONS FOR MAGIC CITY relevant literature on potential environmental impacts Every acre of vegetation, whether grassy lawns, trees, of development projects and explores potential shrubs, or rain gardens, generates ecosystem services project-specific impacts, based on publicly available that can be quantified in monetary terms. A loss of documentation. even one acre of grass or trees could result in $223 These represent preliminary observations only, and $487 in lost ecosystem services (respectively) every year, including declined air quality, reduced carbon based on limited publicly available data. A full sequestration, loss of urban heat island mitigation, environmental impact study is needed to understand loss of stormwater retention, and loss of urban and quantify the full range of environmental habitat. Grass and trees also serve as a carbon sink -- costs and benefits associated with the proposed conversion of one acre of grass or trees would result Magic City project. in a loss of $130 and $9,562 worth of carbon storage, respectively. While Magic City SAP documents describe incorporation of “open space” into site design, a specific URBAN VEGETATION breakdown of land-cover changes (net changes in AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES pervious surface) is not provided. Significant vegetation (oak, palm, and avocado trees; grassy lawn) currently OVERVIEW exists within the former Magic City trailer park located on the southern extent of the project site — any loss When rain falls onto impervious surfaces made of of this vegetation that is not made up for in other concrete or pavement, rainfall cannot infiltrate into the areas of the project site will result in a tangible loss of ground and instead turns into stormwater runoff. When ecosystem services. runoff travels through the built environment, water picks up pollutants and eventually flushes pollutants into downstream water bodies, causing water quality INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES issues. When existing stormwater drainage and conveyance systems are insufficient, stormwater AND CONGESTION runoff can cause flooding.11 Miami is expected to see increasingly intense rainstorms due to anthropogenic OVERVIEW climate change, increasing both inland and coastal Traffic congestion is a familiar phenomenon: stop- flooding, the latter of which will be further intensified and-go traffic, longer-than-normal trip times relative 10 with sea-level rise. to free-flowing traffic, and slower-than-posted vehicle speeds.15 Congestion happens when the volume of cars While stormwater is typically collected and conveyed surpasses the capacity of a given roadway to move cars with traditional grey infrastructure, soil and urban freely. In economic terms, congestion happens when vegetation such as trees and grass, serve as an the supply of road space is outstripped by demand.16 important part of a city’s stormwater management Factors that drive congestion include “population, system.12 Urban vegetation intercepts, infiltrates, and

7 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 8 TABLE 1 ANNUAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICE formation20), oxides of nitrogen (poisonous gasses VALUES BY LAND COVER TYPE FOR MIAMI AREA that react in the atmosphere to form smog19), and (USD 2018 DOLLARS)c carbon monoxide (which can exacerbate symptoms for people with heart disease19). Vehicles also produce Annual Dollar Value of Ecosystem Services PM2.5 — ultrafine airborne particles that have been Ecosystem Type Low Average High shown — with both short- and long-term exposure — to produce negative cardiovascular outcomes such as Coastal Wetlands $11,077 $14,862 $18,648 heart disease and stroke.21 Finally, burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide — a potent greenhouse gas Mangroves $3,503 $4,219 $4,936 that contributes to global heating and sea-level rise. Estuary / Lagoon $5,276 $5,281 $5,285 IMPLICATIONS FOR MAGIC CITY Urban Trees $249 $487 $724 A traffic impact analysis performed by Kimley-Horn Lawn $164 $223 $281 found that the proposed Magic City project would not meaningfully impact congestion, stating that the c See appendix G for a description of Earth Economics’ methodology “proposed land use designation amendment is not for deriving location-specific ecosystem service values and appendix H for a list of studies utilized to derive the dollar values expected to have a significant or adverse impact on the presented in table 1. roadway segments.”22

This finding was likely motivated by the level of service the economy, infrastructure, and the proliferation of (LOS) scale, which measures congestion. LOS A is the 15 rideshare and delivery services.” most free-flowing state, and LOS F is the least free- Lost productive time is the primary cost of congestion flowing. Per county regulation, the minimum LOS is E; borne by drivers. Drivers delayed in heavy traffic could LOS F is unacceptable. have put their time toward more useful pursuits, The study determines that none of the 28 road whether work-related or not. These costs can be segments in the study area would fall below LOS E as a measured through surveys and by using employee result of additional projected traffic from the proposed 17 wages to value costs to employers. Other costs development, taking into consideration both morning borne by drivers are hidden maintenance costs from and evening peak hours. However, a significant number additional wear and tear on vehicles through the of the analyzed street segments would still experience accumulation of the ‘ghost miles’ that accrue while some amount of additional congestion, resulting in 18 idling in traffic, and the increased fuel costs resulting a relative decline in level of service that does not from burning fuel while stuck in congestion. technically tender the segment as “unacceptable,” Congestion also imposes costs on the freight and delivery per county regulation, but still generates some business through increased operating costs, decreased congestion impacts. Aggregating between the morning driver productivity, and decreased reliability.15 A 2018 and evening peak-hour times, 11 percent of the road report by the American Transportation Research segments would see their level of service reduced from Institute found that the Miami/Fort Lauderdale/West LOS C to LOS D in the short term. Quantitatively, that Palm Beach metropolitan area had the third-highest change means going from an >17 mph average travel 23 annual cost of congestion — $2.2 billion in 2016 — and speed to a >13 mph travel speed. In the long term, 16 the third-highest per-mile cost — $921,931 in 2016 — percent of the 56 analyzed road segments would see to the trucking industry in the United States.19 their LOS scores fall — one from C to D, and one from D to E (average speed of >13 mph to >10 mph24). Other costs of congestion include increased pollution rates and a higher risk of accidents,15 both of which These numbers mean that there will be additional are public health concerns. Vehicles burning gasoline congestion in Little Haiti resulting from the proposed and diesel produce harmful emissions including development. While it is difficult to quantify the cost of volatile organic compounds (which contribute to smog these delays due to lack of information on trip distance,

EARTH ECONOMICS | 8 mode of transport, and the labor market, it is certain INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHTS that people will lose time sitting in peak-hour traffic and that vehicles will produce more harmful emissions AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY as a result. Moreover, this analysis excludes additional traffic generated by hotel, restaurant, and cinema/ OVERVIEW entertainment traffic, and focuses exclusively on peak- It is generally accepted in the literature that taller and hour effects. Non-peak-hour traffic could also generate denser construction can be a benefit to cities and additional impacts and should be explored. Total the environment. Dense development can convey vehicle volume is important because, though it may not environmental and social benefits by reducing the time impact peak-hour congestion, additional vehicles bring that people must commute to work; also, increasing more emissions25 and increased wear and tear to the the housing stock in the center of a city can help to road itself.26 Based on the planned number of parking ease supply-side housing pressures that inflate house spots in the development and a rough estimate of the prices and drive people to live far from where they additional vehicle trips generated by transportation work. In the abstract, growing a city vertically rather network companies (TNCs) such as Lyft/Uber (also than horizontally is a sustainable practice that prevents excluded from the traffic study), it is estimated that urban sprawl. However, there can be a disconnect Little Haiti would see 9,406 additional vehicle trips between the idea of tall, dense construction and per day due to the Magic City project (see appendix the reality of these new buildings once they arrive B for a detailed description of the methodology and in a neighborhood. Without intentional and explicit assumptions used to arrive at this estimate). This mitigation planning, tall and dense construction can number represents the sum of morning and evening produce a number of undesirable environmental peak-hour traffic, non-peak traffic, and TNC-related outcomes. traffic. These additional trips will add additional In the macro sense, density is preferable to sprawl from emissions, congestion that has not been measured (in the perspective of sustainability. However, the relative the case of the TNC traffic), and roadway wear and tear sustainability and energy efficiency of an individual to Little Haiti. building can vary wildly according to its design and construction. As buildings rise higher, walls and roofs extend above the canopy of trees growing at the street level. This increased exposure leads buildings to absorb more solar energy by removing the natural passive

TABLE 2 COST OF TAILPIPE EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH 9,406 ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS DUE TO THE MAGIC CITY PROJECT SEE ENDNOTES #25-29 FOR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS AND HEALTH COST ESTIMATE REFERENCES

Health cost Total health costs associated with Emissions Pollutant Unit per gram of one mile of driving, among 9,406 (grams) pollutant additional vehicle trips

VOC 1.304 per mile $0.00 $39.83

NOx 0.693 per mile $0.01 $83.30

PM2.5 0.012 per mile $0.58 $65.90

SO2 0.002 per mile $0.02 $0.35

Total $189.38

9 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 10 cooling benefits offered by shade-providing trees. Glass as double-skin façades and “smart” technologies that exteriors feature commonly in modern architecture, integrate building design and management systems can and glass — despite recent improvements in window all improve efficiency,33 but can be costly to implement. technology — is a poor insulator. The extent of glass used on the exteriors of new buildings renders them IMPLICATIONS FOR MAGIC CITY more expensive to cool and heat. In New York, the all- The proposed Magic City SAP development will glass 7 World Trade Center was found to be less energy significantly change the skyline of Little Haiti. The efficient than the Empire State Building and the Chrysler tallest properties (MCID-1 and MCID-2) within the Magic Building — both built in the 1930s, and with significantly City SAP can rise to 20 and 25 stories, respectively. In less glass.30 In Vancouver, Canada the combined effect contrast, existing buildings in Little Haiti are one and of tall, glass buildings on energy use is clear: compared two stories tall. The impacts of the additional heat to shorter buildings, the glass-skin taller buildings absorbed and re-radiated by these tall buildings and use double the energy per square meter.31 Additional the impacts of the shade they may potentially cast on energy consumption means additional costs as well as nearby lower buildings should be examined further. additional emissions of greenhouse gasses. One path to greater building efficiency is through Another consequence of density that effects energy LEED certification, to which the development group efficiency is the heat generated by the buildings. has a stated commitment. The LEED program — short Replacing open spaces with densely packed and human- for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design made structures that absorb a greater amount of solar — promotes the construction of green buildings. The radiation creates a phenomenon called the urban program offers ratings systems that measure whether heat island effect.32 Besides increasing temperature each portion of a project is built according to a green by absorbing solar energy and re-radiating heat standard. Ratings systems for new construction throughout the day, buildings that are closely packed evaluate both building design and construction, as well together reduce the ability of the wind to penetrate as interior design and construction. Buildings accrue and cool the area. These forces combine to increase the points on a scorecard, which add up and result in a areal temperature, thereby requiring more energy for building being either 1) not certified 2) LEED Certified cooling. In this way, the heat island effect compounds 3) LEED Silver 4) LEED Gold or 5) LEED Platinum. the energy efficiency challenges faced by tall buildings. Additionally, there are rating systems that can evaluate Of course, there are ways to mitigate the energy the net effect of multiple buildings in a campus efficiency challenges of tall buildings. Solutions such (volume certification of a group of buildings) or even at

TABLE 3 COST OF TAILPIPE EMISSIONS DUE TO IDLING, ASSOCIATED WITH TOTAL ESTIMATED PEAK TRAFFIC IN THE AM (2057 CARS) AND PM (2069 CARS), IN LITTLE HAITI

Health cost Total health costs associated Emissions Pollutant Unit per gram of with five minutes of idling during (grams) pollutant AM and PM peak hours

VOC 0.269 per minute $0.00 $18.03

NOx 0.079 per minute $0.01 $20.84

Total $38.87

EARTH ECONOMICS | 10 the neighborhood scale for mixed-use developments near the surface. (focused on integrated land use and transportation), as well as a recertification program to ensure ongoing IMPLICATIONS FOR MAGIC CITY LEED compliance as buildings age.34 Given the varied options for LEED certification, it is important to solicit The canyon effect is a particularly salient problem for the a formal commitment from the development group proposed Magic City SAP, given the volume of additional that details the suite of LEED certification options traffic it would generate. Additional traffic means that, they intend to pursue, and what level of certification in the presence of urban canyons, additional hazardous they intend to target. Securing specific green-building emissions such as carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide commitments will help the city assess the degree to (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and particulate matter 2.5 37 which the proposed Magic City development will be (PM2.5) will be concentrated at street level. sustainable and energy efficient. According to details on thoroughfare segments in the Magic City SAP concept book, the aspect ratio of all nine of the segments would have an aspect ratio of > 1, which INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHTS means that air is likely to stagnate and pollutants will AND CANYON EFFECTS become trapped at street level. The proposed Magic City SAP concept book states the number of stories of the OVERVIEW buildings on each segment, and the width of each urban canyon between the two buildings. One assumption was Another result of buildings growing taller is the necessary to calculate building height: when maximum potential development of urban canyons. Described in building height differed on either side, the lower number simple terms, an urban canyon occurs when a street of stories was selected to define the urban canyon. has buildings on either side. At its most basic level, an urban canyon is defined by its aspect ratio: the height To convert from stories to height, this analysis used of the buildings divided by the width between the figures from the Regulating Plan for the development: 35 buildings (i.e., the width of the street, plus sidewalks, 25 feet maximum height for the first story, and 14 feet bike lanes, and setbacks). Urban canyons exist on a maximum height for each additional story. Dividing the spectrum: wide canyons have low aspect ratios (e.g., calculated height by the given width resulted in aspect .5), and narrow canyons have higher aspect ratios (e.g., ratios greater than one for each of the nine segments 36 2). Restricted airflow is one important effect of urban (see pp. 32-37 in the Magic City SAP concept book for canyon development, and the degree that airflow is thoroughfare segment details). Figure 3 summarizes the restricted tends to increase with aspect ratio. When the estimated aspect ratio for each thoroughfare segment. aspect ratio > 1, the wind tends to skim over the top of the buildings and does not reach the street. Instead, this type of flow creates a separate vortex that traps pollutants at street level and reduces air quality.36 Not FIGURE 3 ESTIMATED ASPECT RATIO only do urban canyons contribute to the urban heat FROM MAGIC CITY SAP ROAD SEGMENTS island effect by preventing wind from penetrating and cooling the area, but the reduced airflow also St contributes to poor air quality by trapping pollutants st

36 PROM NE 61 at street level. 6 rd NE 3

Other factors can affect the degree to which urban Ave rd St 4 Ave PROM th canyons trap pollutants, including the design and shape th th Les Ateliers NE 3 Les Residences of the buildings that make up the urban canyon, and NE 4 NE 4 NE 60 the orientation of the canyons relative to the wind.37 2 Les Bureaux However, the literature is clear on the most basic point: Tall buildings flanking narrow streets in the presence of 0 many cars has significant potential for trapping harmful

11 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 12 SOCIAL COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT − ECONOMIC DISPLACEMENT

While the proposed Magic City project includes THE HOUSEHOLD COSTS about 2,630 residential units, the units are targeted to households with an average income of $55,000 OF DISPLACEMENT to $75,000. Though developers are contributing $31 When property values rise and higher-income million to a neighborhood development fund to households move into a neighborhood, existing support affordable housing, the Magic City project tenants with lower incomes are often forced to move. may exacerbate declining affordability in the The move can be precipitated by a formal eviction, neighborhood, as many new housing developments by landlord harassment, or by simply being priced of this scale often do.38, 39 And while gentrification and out and unable to bear the additional financial burden resulting displacement of low-income households has of higher rent.41 In some cases, households may choose been occurring in Little Haiti for several years, there to move because their networks (i.e., friends, family, are still a number of low-income residents who have associates) have already moved on.42 managed to stay in Little Haiti and are increasingly at Studies have documented a range of outcomes risk of displacement.d associated with economic displacement, including The following sections summarize key literature on moving to farther away neighborhoods, crowding, the costs of displacement to households and the and/or moving into substandard housing conditions41, 43 estimated cost of displacement to at-risk households In some cases, households may choose to stay and grow in Little Haiti. The estimated household-level costs increasingly burdened by housing costs as rents rise.42 were derived from publicly available datasets. Depending on the mechanism by which households Anecdotal evidencee suggests that Little Haiti are forced to move (formal eviction versus being priced households are primarily moving to North Miami, out) and where households move to, displacement North Miami Beach, and Broward County. News generates a range of financial and social costs. coverage of Little Haiti displacement pressures has also referenced Sweetwater as a potential area UPFRONT RELOCATION COSTS where Little Haiti residents are moving to.40 To narrow the scope of the analysis, it was assumed that Little OVERVIEW Haiti residents are moving to North Miami, North The cost of relocating to a new home is a significant and Miami Beach, and Sweetwater (the analysis depended immediate burden.43 Not only do households incur the on public datasets that are not available for Broward direct costs of moving but may also face opportunity County). For a detailed description of assumptions costs and disruption to work associated with finding and methodologies utilized to model displacement temporary or permanent housing.41, 44 In the case of costs to Little Haiti residents, see appendices evictions, working adults may be forced to miss work C through G. to attend eviction proceedings in court and may need The cost estimates presented in the following to spend more time searching for housing due to the sections are meant to illustrate the household stigma associated with formal eviction.44 Displaced costs of displacement in general terms and to raise families often must settle for sub-par housing and may awareness of the true impact of displacement. search for new housing again within a year after the The precise impact of the Magic City project— initial move.41 and the proposed mitigation measures such COST TO LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLDS as the neighborhood development fund—on neighborhood displacement is unknown and should Upfront relocation costs — lost security deposits, direct moving costs, and opportunity costs associated be examined further. with missing school/work to search for housing and move — were estimated for a hypothetical Little Haiti

d Personal communication, Community Justice Project staff, April 2019. e Personal communication, Community Justice Project staff, April 2019.

EARTH ECONOMICS | 12 household. Several additional known relocation costs were omitted due to data limitations; therefore, these numbers should be considered an underestimate of the true cost of relocation (see appendix C for details). It was conservatively assumed that 25 percent of households would lose their security deposit at the time of moving45 and that a typical household pays the equivalent of one month’s rent (average rent in Little Haiti according to U.S. Census is $829 per month).46 The national average cost of moving locally (within the same city) was used to estimate the direct costs of moving. Finally, it was conservatively assumed that working adults would miss up to one week (five days) of work, to look for housing and to move. Additionally, it was assumed that children would miss up to one week (five days) of school during the moving process (see appendix C for a description of valuing education in monetary terms). The total one-time, upfront cost of relocation associated with lost security deposit, moving costs, and opportunity costs of missed work/ school is $2,705. TABLE 4 ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD-LEVEL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RELOCATION.

Cost Category Description Average

Upfront costs to renters moving to new location, due Upfront rent costs $207 to loss of security deposit

Physical moving costs Cost associated with moving belongings to new home $1,250

Opportunity cost of Cost of lost wages due to missed work during moving $1,088 time spent moving

School absenteeism cost Cost of lost educational hours due to missed school $160 of time spent moving during moving

Total $2,705

JOB ACCESS AND COMMUTING

OVERVIEW Aside from housing, transportation accounts for the largest single cost to households in the U.S.42 Among households who move to new neighborhoods, those new neighborhoods on average have fewer job opportunities42 and require longer and more costly commutes.43 Because proximity to public transit increases housing prices, low-income families facing displacement are moving to areas with overall poorer transit access49 and poorer access to employment opportunities.50 Moving to less convenient locations may result in increased tardiness or absenteeism at work.44 The combination of declined job and transit accessibility can result in a significant financial toll to displaced individuals who must spend more time commuting and, in some cases, may need to purchase a vehicle if public transit is insufficient.50

COST TO LITTLE HAITI RESIDENTS Earth Economics modeled the direct costs and opportunity costs associated with commuting from new neighborhoods for a hypothetical Little Haiti household. Earth Economics compared general data on job and

13 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 14 transit accessibility for Little Haiti and new potential neighborhoods with higher flooding risks due to sea- neighborhoods. On average, census tracts in Little Haiti level rise.3 This suggests that, in the long-term, climate were found to have better job and transit access than gentrification may result in lower-income residents North Miami, North Miami Beach, and Sweetwater. Earth being pushed to more climate-vulnerable areas. Economics used Longitudinal-Employer Household Flooding events not only damage property — they Dynamics data to estimate the average commute also generate significant social costs, including mental distance for low-earnings households currently anxiety and disruption to work productivity. residing in Little Haiti and the likely commute distance from new neighborhoods for households of similar COST TO LITTLE HAITI RESIDENTS earnings brackets (see appendix D for methodology, Earth Economics estimated and compared the flood assumptions, and data sources). risk associated with Little Haiti and the assumed The average additional direct cost of commuting neighborhoods where current Little Haiti residents after displacement, as compared to what was would resettle. Using Federal Emergency Management spent when still living in Little Haiti, is $906 per Agency (FEMA) data on the costs associated with year, and the average additional opportunity cost mental health and anxiety, and lost work productivity, of commuting is $1,344 per year. These findings Earth Economics estimated the additional social cost are built on the assumptions that the working adults of flooding for a hypothetical Little Haiti household within a Little Haiti household are equally likely, once moving to a new neighborhood (see appendix E for relocated, to keep their same job rather than find a detailed description of methodology and assumptions). new job, and that they will continue to use the same The estimated additional cost of flooding associated mode of transportation to commute after moving. with mental health/anxiety and lost work productivity for a displaced Little Haiti household is $100 and $156, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS respectively, per year.

OVERVIEW Displaced households often move to areas with poorer environmental conditions.41 In Miami, there is a growing body of empirical evidence that higher- elevation neighborhoods, such as Little Haiti, are seeing faster property growth rates than lower-elevation

TABLE 5 ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD-LEVEL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMUTING

Cost Category Description Average

Cost of additional time spent commuting from home to job Opportunity cost of longer commute $1,344 (assuming mix of keeping same job and finding new job) Cost of fuel and wear on vehicle for additional commute distance Direct cost of longer commute $906 (assuming mix of keeping same job and finding new job)

Total $2,250

TABLE 6 ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD-LEVEL SOCIAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH FLOODING

Cost Category Description Average

Mental stress and anxiety Cost associated with mental stress and anxiety due to flooding $100

Lost productivity Cost associated with lost productivity due to flooding $156

Total $256

EARTH ECONOMICS | 14 BEYOND ECONOMIC MEASURE: of displacement risk.54 According to the 2017 American Community Survey, out of 10,819 households living in ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD COSTS Little Haiti, approximately 5,614 households earn less There are multiple displacement-related impacts than $25,000 per year,55 and 3,154 households earn less discussed in the literature that could not be modeled than $20,000 and spend more than 30 percent of their for a hypothetical Little Haiti household, including income on housing. Assuming the 3,154 low-income ongoing disruption to schooling due to stress and housing-cost-burdened households are displaced in trauma, disruption to healthcare services, impacts to the coming years with increased gentrification, the total social networks, and loss of culturally relevant services. estimated annual cost of displacement to households is more than $16 million in the first year of moving, • SCHOOL ABSENTEEISM AND TRAUMA: Displacement and nearly $8 million per year after moving. has also been shown to be disruptive and traumatic to children, either due to missing school or switching The more than $8 million of ongoing costs are incurred school districts.41 each year simply due to living in less accessible, more flood-prone neighborhoods. The additional cost of • HEALTHCARE ACCESS: Households may experience living in these new neighborhoods is a reality that disruption to healthcare43 and may relocate to areas will stay with displaced households for many years to with poorer access to healthcare overall.41 come (notwithstanding the additional costs of being • COMMUNICATION COHESION AND SOCIAL displaced again and incurring upfront moving costs NETWORKS: Displacement has also been shown to all over again). For example, assuming the 3,154 fragment social networks and disrupt community housing-cost-burdened, low-income (<$20,000) 42, 43 cohesion. Social networks among friends and households in Little Haiti are displaced, the total family provide a critical economic role for families cost incurred by these households over the next (e.g. childcare) as well as mental and emotional ten years is more than $68 million, using a discount benefits. rate of 7 percentg. In reality, the full 5,614 households • ACCESS TO CULTURALLY RELEVANT GOODS AND earning less than $25,000 in annual income could be SERVICES: Access to culturally relevant services is at risk of displacement, which would generate an even also disrupted when displacement occurs,52 the higher total damage estimate. value of which is beyond economic measure. f While the proposed project will not directly impact current residents, the project has already impacted residents who formerly lived in the Magic City Trailer Park. The Magic City Trailer Park SUMMARY OF LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLD- was purchased by an LLC, in August 2014. The park was closed in 2015. Media coverage at the time reported 40 mobile homes were LEVEL DISPLACEMENT COSTS impacted at the time of closure (Bojnansky, E., Biscayne Times, 2015). However, the Florida Department of Health reported the HOUSEHOLD-LEVEL COSTS park as comprised of 122 lots and may have contained 97 mobile homes on site, according to a prospectus (Mobile Home Parks, The total upfront cost to a single household displaced Florida Department of Health). from Little Haiti amounts to more than $5,200; after g Discount rates are utilized when examining how costs and benefits the initial year of moving, the estimated ongoing accrue over time. Discounting allows for sums of money occurring annual costs incurred by the same household is in different time periods to be compared by expressing the value more than $2,500. Based on the neighborhood’s in present terms. In other words, discounting shows how much median household income of $24,80053 this additional future sums of money are worth today. Discounting is designed to take into account time preference (people tend to prefer annual cost of living in more remote, more climate- consumption now over consumption in the future, meaning a vulnerable areas accounts for 10 percent of displaced dollar today is worth more than a dollar received in the future) and households’ annual income. the opportunity cost of investment (investment in capital today provides a positive return in the future but renders those funds unavailable for other investment opportunities). AGGREGATED COSTS OVER TIME The precise number of households already economically displaced or at risk of displacement within Little Haiti is uncertain.f However, studies suggest that household income and housing-cost burden are useful indicators

15 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 16 ALTERNATIVE DISPLACEMENT SCENARIOS − RECURRING RELOCATION, HOMELESSNESS, AND HOMEOWNER DAMAGES While the household-level costs of displacement presented above represent one particular displacement scenario (renters who successfully find new housing in a new neighborhood and either keep their jobs or find new jobs, without any period of unemployment), in reality a number of other scenarios could occur. Studies show that a significant proportion of households experiencing homelessness in the U.S. became homeless due to eviction; there are numerous social and economic impacts of homelessness, most of which are beyond economic measure. Another possible displacement scenario involves low-income homeowners who must move due to rising property taxes or inability to pay mortgage.56 The following section presents cost estimates associated with multiple alternative scenarios. • IMPACTS OF JOB LOSS AND SCHOOL ABSENTEEISM. Involuntary displacement through formal eviction or other informal actions can result in chronic and non-chronic homelessness.41 Families experiencing housing insecurity and homelessness are more likely to lose their jobs than their housing-secure counterparts,44 resulting not only in temporary loss of wages but also long-term barriers to finding employment due to stigma associated with involuntary job loss.57 Involuntary job loss often results in decline in wage earnings and long- term earnings losses,58 as well as negative mental health impacts.59 Parents experiencing housing insecurity face many barriers to employment, including inability to find work and childcare responsibilities.60 Children experiencing homelessness are much more likely to miss school and experience chronic school absenteeism than children with secure housing.61, 62 It is estimated that, for one Little Haiti household, job loss after displacement would incur an estimated $10,569 in lost wages. For one Little Haiti household that experiences a period of homelessness after eviction, the cost of chronic school absenteeism could amount to $255 in lost educational value. (See appendix F for assumptions and methods).

IT IS ESTIMATED THAT, FOR A LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLD FACING FORMAL EVICTION, JOB LOSS AFTER DISPLACEMENT WOULD RESULT IN AN ESTIMATED $10,569 IN LOST WAGES. FOR A SINGLE LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLD THAT EXPERIENCES A PERIOD OF HOMELESSNESS AFTER EVICTION, THE COST OF CHRONIC SCHOOL ABSENTEEISM COULD AMOUNT TO $255 IN LOST EDUCATIONAL VALUE.

EARTH ECONOMICS | 16 • RECURRING RELOCATION. Displaced families must • PROPERTY DAMAGES FROM FLOODING. As climate often settle for sub-par housing and may search gentrification intensifies in Miami, low-income for new housing again with a year after the initial residents will continue to move to low-elevation move,44 resulting in recurring upfront moving costs. neighborhoods more vulnerable to flooding. More The estimated costs of displacement within the first obvious than the social costs of flooding are the costs year ($5,200) could actually be incurred over multiple associated with property damages — both structural years. These additional costs amount to 22 percent property and belongings inside of the home. of the average income of a Little Haiti household. While some homeowners and renters purchase The estimated cost to a Little Haiti household that flood insurance, many do not. The estimated cost must move twice within one year after displacement associated with flood-induced property damages for amounts to $7,916, or 33 percent of the median a Little Haiti resident purchasing a home in a low- household income of Little Haiti residents. elevation area is $1,852 to $8,786 per year (see appendix E).

THE ESTIMATED COST TO A LITTLE HAITI THE ESTIMATED COST ASSOCIATED WITH FLOOD- HOUSEHOLD THAT MUST MOVE TWICE WITHIN INDUCED PROPERTY DAMAGES FOR A LITTLE ONE YEAR AFTER DISPLACEMENT AMOUNTS TO HAITI RESIDENT PURCHASING A HOME IN A $7,916, OR 33 PERCENT OF THE MEDIAN LOW-ELEVATION AREA IS $1,852 TO $8,786 HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF LITTLE HAITI PER YEAR. RESIDENTS.

17 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 18 OTHER COST CONSIDERATIONS

This analysis focused specifically on displacement- experience homelessness also generate a cost, related costs on the household level. However, other through increased demand for homelessness- economic units such as local businesses and local related government services such as shelters. government agencies are impacted by gentrification Miami-Dade County spends more than $20,000 each and displacement as well. year per homeless household in support services.65 • IMPACTS TO LOCAL BUSINESSES. While the impacts For every household displaced from Little Haiti of gentrification and neighborhood change to that experiences a period of homelessness, the minority-owned businesses is less understood, County would incur over $4,800 in homelessness there is a growing body of research on this topic. service costs, assuming each household is As demographics change at the neighborhood scale, homeless for the median days of homelessness minority- and immigrant-owned businesses may at the county-level. see a loss in customer base, as long-term customers leave the neighborhood and new residents entering the neighborhood patronize newer businesses targeting incoming residents.63 Similarly, if minority- FOR EVERY HOUSEHOLD DISPLACED owned businesses leave the neighborhood due to FROM LITTLE HAITI THAT EXPERIENCES prohibitive rent increases (most small business owners do not own the property or building they A PERIOD OF HOMELESSNESS, THE occupy), residents who stay may no longer be able COUNTY WOULD INCUR OVER $4,800 to access culturally relevant goods and services64 and displaced businesses may not be able to re- IN HOMELESSNESS SERVICE COSTS, build a customer base in a new location. ASSUMING EACH HOUSEHOLD IS HOMELESS • IMPACTS TO CITY GOVERNMENT — COST OF EVICTIONS/HOMELESSNESS. The cost of economic FOR THE MEDIAN DAYS OF HOMELESSNESS AT displacement is not only borne by households. Local THE COUNTY-LEVEL. city and county governments also bear an economic burden. Eviction impacts local governments through unpaid utility bills; evicted households who then

EARTH ECONOMICS | 18 CONCLUSION

Even though the Magic City Innovation District project will generate economic value for those residents and visitors able to take advantage of its amenities, the proposed development project will invariably generate environmental, economic, and social impacts that should not be overlooked. While this report attempts to highlight, and in some cases model, some of the potential environmental and social costs of the Magic City project, this analysis is meant to raise questions only. A full assessment of the potential consequences is warranted.

While calculated specifically for a Little Haiti displacement scenario, the household-level costs presented in this report can be utilized to roughly estimate household-level costs of displacement for other communities throughout Miami facing displacement. The analysis can also be easily expanded and scaled, based on different displacement contexts. The detailed appendices at the end of this report present a step-by-step description of all methods utilized for this analysis, in an effort to aid future researchers and community advocates interested in expanding displacement cost research. The environmental impact considerations discussed in this report may also be generalized to other urban locations.

This report also holds important implications for developments beyond the proposed Magic City project. Across the city of Miami, as development pressure continues and climate vulnerabilities intensify, some low-income communities and communities of color may bear the brunt of this burden, in the form of ongoing financial costs, health and safety impacts, disrupted social fabrics, and even reduced political voice as communities spread out. Moreover, increasing density through high rises and conversion of green space may threaten the long-term resilience of the city if not handled in conjunction with integrated land-use and transportation planning. The city of Miami has an important opportunity to build environmental and social resilience and counter the effects of climate gentrification by carefully vetting all new proposed developments through a holistic lens.

19 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 20 APPENDIX A: HOUSEHOLD DISPLACEMENT COSTS SUMMARY

SUMMARY OF DISPLACEMENT COST ESTIMATES FOR SINGLE LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLD

Cost to a single household Cost Category Description due to displacement (in the first year)

Moving

Upfront costs to renters moving to new Upfront rent costs $207 location, due to loss of security deposit

Cost associated with moving belongings to Physical moving costs $1,250 new home

Cost of lost wages due to missed work during Opportunity cost of time spent moving $1,088 moving

Cost of lost educational hours due to missed School absenteeism cost of time spent moving $160 school during moving

Commuting

Cost of additional time spent commuting from Opportunity cost of longer commute home to job (assuming mix of keeping same $1,344 job and finding new job)

Cost of fuel and wear on vehicle for additional Direct cost of longer commute commute distance (assuming mix of keeping $906 same job and finding new job)

Flooding

Cost associated with mental stress and anxiety Mental stress and anxiety $100 due to flooding

Cost associated with lost productivity due to Lost productivity $156 flooding

Total cost to displaced household during the Total $5,211 first year after moving

After first year, annual additional cost of $2,506 living in new neighborhood

% of average household income spent on annual displacement related costs (assuming 10% $24,800 average income).

EARTH ECONOMICS | 20 APPENDIX B: DETAILED SUMMARY OF These numbers mean that there will be additional congestion in Little Haiti resulting from the proposed MAGIC CITY TRAFFIC STUDY CRITIQUE development. While it is difficult to quantify the cost of these delays due to lack of information on trip distance, The Kimley-Horn traffic impact analysis found that mode of transport, and the labor market, it is certain that the proposed Magic City SAP would not meaningfully people will lose time sitting in peak-hour traffic. More impact congestion, stating that the “proposed land time in traffic means more vehicles idling and producing use designation amendment is not expected to harmful emissions. have a significant or adverse impact on the roadway 66 segments.” Furthermore, the peak-hour analysis represented in tables 21 through 28 is based on trip generation This finding was likely motivated by the level of service calculations for apartment, general office building, (LOS) scale, which measures congestion. LOS A is the and shopping center land-use types. This analysis most free-flowing state, and LOS F is the least free- undercounts peak-hour traffic increases by excluding flowing. Per county regulation, the minimum LOS is E; the additional traffic generated by hotel, restaurant, and LOS F is unacceptable. Because LOS E is the minimum cinema/entertainment traffic — all of which are planned accepted standard in Miami, the fact that none of the for the Magic City SAP. road segments was found by Kimley-Horn to fall to LOS F likely prompted the “no significant and adverse Though the Kimley-Horn report focused exclusively on impacts” claim. congestion by studying peak-hour effects, it is also worth exploring the additional traffic that the proposed Magic In the Kimley-Horn report, Tables 21 through 24 compare City SAP would generate during non-peak times. Total projected morning and evening peak-hour traffic flows vehicle volume is important because, though it may not in the short term, calculated with and without the impact peak-hour congestion, additional vehicles bring proposed development. Tables 25 through 28 repeat more emissions68 and increased wear and tear to the this analysis, but in the long term. There are a total of road itself.69 28 road segments in the study area, which are analyzed separately in the morning and evening peak hours. In To examine potential non-peak traffic volumes, the 5,547 the short term, aggregating between the morning and parking spots in the development give an idea of the evening analyses, none of the 56 total road segments additional traffic the developers hope to attract. Of this would fall below LOS E as a result of additional projected total, 1,494 spots are reserved for residents. Subtracting traffic from the proposed development. In the long those residential use spots yields 4,053 parking spaces term, the same is true: no road segments would fall for people to come to Magic City for office/retail/hotel below LOS E, even with additional traffic generated by uses. Assuming a single car fills each spot for the entire the development. day, daily non-peak traffic would amount to 4,053 additional cars in the area around the Magic City SAP. However, just because congestion is not projected to Adding that to the morning peak traffic (2,057 vehicle increase past a certain threshold of acceptability does trips) and the evening peak traffic (2,069 vehicle trips), not mean that the additional traffic from the proposed results in an all-day total of 8,179 vehicle trips resulting Magic City SAP has no impacts. On the contrary, and per from the proposed development. the Kimley-Horn report itself, a significant number of the analyzed street segments would experience additional This non-peak vehicle trip calculation may undercount congestion resulting from the proposed Magic City SAP. additional traffic for three reasons. First, because of the Aggregating between the morning and evening peak- nature of retail and restaurant visitation, a single parking hour times, 11 percent of the 56 road segments would spot will generally be occupied by more than one vehicle see their levels of service reduced from LOS C to LOS during the day. Second, some drivers will choose to park D in the short term. Quantitatively, that change means outside of the Magic City SAP, which means that total going from an >17 mph average travel speed to a >13 proposed parking spots is likely a conservative proxy 67 mph travel speed. In the long term, 16 percent of the for measuring the additional traffic that the developers 56 analyzed road segments would see their LOS scores hope to generate. Third, this analysis does not account fall — one from C to D, and one from D to E (average for the truck traffic required to support the retail and 57 speed of >13 mph to >10 mph ). restaurant businesses. At the same time, a different

21 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 22 assumption may generate an overestimate of additional APPENDIX C: UPFRONT RELOCATION traffic, which would work to neutralize a portion of the overestimate. Some number of the 2,057 vehicles trips COSTS METHODOLOGY during the morning peak hour are likely to be commuters inbound to the Magic City development to work in the OVERVIEW office/retail/hotel spaces. These commuters would Based on literature review and available data, the presumably occupy some number of the additional upfront relocation costs for a hypothetical Little Haiti spaces, and would therefore be double counted by household were estimated. A number of upfront costs appearing in both the peak-hour analysis and the off- were considered, including upfront costs associated with peak, parking-based analysis. paying first and last month’s rent for a new rental unit, cost associated with inability to recover a security deposit Though these factors neutralize each other to a when leaving a rental unit, opportunity cost (missed certain degree and combine to produce a conservative school and missed work) associated with searching for estimate of additional traffic, one important variable new housing and/or moving, the direct costs of physically is unaccounted for. Both the Kimley-Horn peak-hour moving (hiring movers, hiring a moving truck, borrowing analysis and this parking-based estimate of non-peak friends/family’s time and the associated opportunity traffic omitted the impact of the additional volume of cost, other direct costs), additional utility fees associated cars and congestion resulting from the operations of with setting up new utilities in a new rental home, and transportation network companies (TNCs) like Lyft and the cost of dealing with eviction court in the case of Uber. Accounting for these additional cars would likely formally evicted homeowners. have changed the results of the Kimley-Horn congestion analysis. OMITTED UPFRONT COST CATEGORIES According to a recent Gallup poll from 2018, people Ultimately, three cost categories were valued, due to who use TNCs tend to be younger and wealthier70 — data limitations: lost security deposit, direct moving the target demographic for the residential portions of costs, and opportunity cost associated with missing the Magic City SAP. Because TNCs tend to closely guard work/school in order to search for housing and/or move. their ridership data it is difficult to say precisely how The reasons for excluding additional cost categories are many additional cars these services add to the roads. as follows: However, researchers from Northeastern University • The potential upfront cost of paying first/last month and San Francisco County Transportation Authority rent was excluded from the analysis, since, in theory, conservatively estimate that 15 percent of daily vehicle a household would recover some of that money at trips and 9 percent of all trips happening in San Francisco a later date (in the form of not paying last month’s — a city experiencing congestion problems similar to rate, for a household staying through the end of a Miami71 — were the result of TNC operations.72 Using the lease) when they again decide and/or are forced percentages from San Francisco, this analysis estimates to move. In reality, many households will likely not that the additional volume of TNC-related traffic in Little benefit from having paid last month’s rent upfront. Haiti will be an additional 1,227 vehicle trips per day (15 percent of the 8,179 additional car trips). Unfortunately, • Anecdotal evidence suggests that households would this analysis is only able to identify additional vehicles, face additional costs when moving to a new rental and cannot determine how they would impact the unit, due to the installation fees often required when congestion findings of the Kimley-Horn report. setting up new utilities. These fees can be significant for a low-income family. Insufficient data on average The final estimate of the additional traffic in Little utility hookup fees meant that this cost category had Haiti resulting from the Magic City SAP is 9,406 to be excluded. vehicles trips per day. This number represents the • Costs associated with eviction court were also sum of morning and evening peak-hour traffic, non- excluded, as this analysis did not make any peak traffic, and TNC-related traffic. These additional assumptions about the likelihood of a displaced trips will add additional emissions, congestion that has household being displaced due to formal eviction. not been measured (in the case of the TNC traffic), and The authors could not find reliable data to make roadway wear and tear to Little Haiti. any grounded assumptions about eviction rates.

EARTH ECONOMICS | 22 However, anecdotal and empirical evidence reasons. ($27.20). The value of personal travel is suggests that costs associated with eviction court based on national average hourly wage, which can be significant.39 was used instead of the actual estimated hourly wage earnings of Little Haiti households, to avoid Due to these omissions, it is important to interpret the racial- and class-related bias associated with estimated upfront relocation costs in this analysis as an income-based economic modeling techniques. underestimate of the true upfront costs a household It was conservatively assumed that one week of would experience. work (40 hours, assuming average- length work week) would be missed (this was based on best METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS professional judgement, given the lack of existing data measuring days of work missed during to The following methods and assumptions were utilized displacement). when calculating the three cost categories under upfront relocation costs: 4. OPPORTUNITY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RELOCATION — MISSED SCHOOL. Relocating 1. COST ASSOCIATED WITH LOST SECURITY DEPOSIT. homes can also impact school-aged children within It was assumed that, on average, a household has a household. A dollar value can be assigned to the paid equivalent of one-month’s rent as a security educational value of one hour of schooling, based deposit. Studies suggest that, on average, 25 on the amount of money spent on schooling. While percent of renters do not receive their security the true value of education is beyond economic deposit upon moving. Though in reality this rate measure, this is a common approach used by would likely be significantly higher for Little Haiti economists to value education in monetary terms. households and any households facing involuntary To estimate the dollar value per pupil-hour of displacement and eviction, a 25 percent rate was education in Miami-Dade County, the following used to be conservative. The average household steps were taken: monthly rent of $829 (derived from Housing and Transit Affordability Index datasets for Little Haiti • Data on the per-pupil amount of spending on census tracts) was used to estimate the security instruction was derived from the US Census deposit amount. Bureau. In the Miami-Dade school system, that figure in the 2016 fiscal year was $5,748.13. 2. DIRECT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH MOVING. While • Summing the number of days per grading the actual cost of moving depends greatly on how period from the Miami-Dade public schools far a household is moving, what additional support website indicates that there are 180 total the household utilizes (movers, moving trucks, school days in the county. etc.), how large the household is, etc., a national • Start and end times vary by grade within the average value was utilized for this analysis ($1,250), county; the mean school day for K-12 students which assumes the use of professional moving lasts 6.33 hours. Multiplying the hours per day assistance. and days per year figures results in a total of 1,133 hours in a school year in Miami-Dade 3. OPPORTUNITY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH County. RELOCATION — MISSED WORK. Studies suggest that moving requires significant opportunity cost, • Finally, dividing the annual per-pupil spending in the form of missing work to deal with eviction by the number of hours in the school year proceedings in court, looking for housing, and/or produces the hourly value of public education moving. Opportunity cost associated with missed as measured via costs to the county. Each hour work was calculated using the U.S. Department of education in Miami-Dade County schools is of Transportation (DOT) value of travel time, worth $5.07 per pupil. specifically associated with travel for personal

23 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 24 RESULTS

The following table summarizes the cost estimates associated with relocation, for one hypothetical Little Haiti household. These per-household estimate can be scaled based on the estimated number of displaced households under examination.

ONE-TIME COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RELOCATION FOR ONE LITTLE HAITI HOUSEHOLD

Cost Category Description Low Average High

Upfront costs to renters moving to new Upfront rent costs $207 $207 $207 location, due to loss of security deposit Cost associated with moving belongings to Physical moving costs $1,250 $1,250 $1,250 new home Opportunity cost of Cost of lost wages due to missed work $1,088 $1,088 $1,088 time spent moving during moving School absenteeism cost Cost of lost educational hours due to $160 $160 $160 of time spent moving missed school during moving

Total $2,705 $2,705 $2,705

DATA SOURCES

Wood, G. 2013. Security Deposit Refund: 1 in 4 Renters Don’t Get Their Money Back, Survey Finds. Accessed from https://www.aol.com/2013/01/29/security-deposit-refund/ (accessed 5.23.19).

Moving Cost Calculator for Moving Estimates. https://www.moving.com/movers/moving-cost-calculator.asp. (accessed 5.23.19)

Boone M. 2018. How much does it cost to move? https://www.zillow.com/blog/how-much-will-you-pay-to-move-91663/. (accessed 5.23.19)

Housing and Transit (H+T) Affordability Index census tract data for Little Haiti census tracts; originally from U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey. Available from: https://htaindex.cnt.org/download/data.php (accessed 5.23.19)

U.S. Census Bureau, 2016. Public elementary-secondary education finance data. Table 18—per pupil amounts for current spending of the 100 largest public elementary-secondary-school systems in the United States by enrollment: fiscal year 2016. Available from https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/econ/school-finances/secondary- education-finance.html (accessed 5.23.19)

Miami-Dade County Public Schools, 2018. 2018-2019 school calendar, elementary and secondary. http://www. dadeschools.net/calendars/18-19/18-19_el-sec.pdf (accessed 5.23.19)

Miami-Dade County Public Schools, 2018. 2018/19 M-DCPS Back to School Tool Kit. http://toolkit.dadeschools.net/ school_hours.asp (accessed 5.23.19)

EARTH ECONOMICS | 24 APPENDIX D: COMMUTING RELATED COSTS METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW Commuting to work takes time and costs money. This analysis is interested in whether, in being displaced, Little Haiti residents will experience an increase in costs associated with commuting to and from work. These metrics are based on time and distance, so it was assumed that if Little Haiti residents are forced to move further away from their jobs, their cost of commuting would increase. Two components of cost were considered in this analysis, direct cost and opportunity cost. The direct cost of commuting is the money individual spend on things including gas, car repairs, and transit passes. Opportunity cost is the missed opportunity of spending time on other pursuits, specifically working, because that time was spent commuting. To assess these costs, this analysis considers two scenarios: the current scenario and a displacement scenario. Under the displacement scenario, Little Haiti residents who are forced to leave their neighborhood are assumed to move to either North Miami, North Miami Beach, or Sweetwater. After moving, Little Haiti residents may either keep their current job or switch jobs because of their forced move — both of these options were factored into the analysis described below.

METHODS Average commute times and associated costs were calculated to find the direct and opportunity costs associated with relocation and commute impacts.

POPULATION IMPACTED Current Little Haiti working adults were the population considered in this analysis. Each household was assumed to have 1.26 working adults, based on the average working adults per household, at the zip-code level.

25 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 26 IMPACTED POPULATION HOME LOCATION

CURRENT SCENARIO We do not know exactly where residents live within their neighborhood. For calculations of commute time, the centroid of the Little Haiti neighborhood boundary was used as individuals “home” location.

DISPLACEMENT SCENARIO Similarly, the exact location of displaced residents’ new homes is unknown. Centroids were created for each potential neighborhood (North Miami, North Miami Beach, and Sweetwater) and these were used as commuters’ “home” location under the displacement scenario.

IMPACTED POPULATION WORK LOCATION

CURRENT SCENARIO Data was collected from OnTheMap, a web-based mapping and reporting application that shows where workers are employed and where they live (LODES data). For each census block, these data identify, by income level, the census blocks where individuals work. This analysis focused on the lowest income bracket (less than $1,275 per month), as that is most likely to represent employment characteristics of those facing displacement. All census blocks in Little Haiti were grouped together and out of this population of workers (those living in Little Haiti in the lowest income bracket) the top three employment locations were selected — these are also at the census block scale. The centroids of those three census block work locations were used as individuals “work” locations.

DISPLACEMENT SCENARIO Under the displacement scenario, working residents of Little Haiti may either keep their same job or find a new job once there are forced to move to a new neighborhood. If keeping their job, the same three census block centroids as those used in the current scenario are assumed to be residents “work” locations. If residents instead get a new job upon moving, we assume that the places they will work correlate with the work locations of current residents in their new neighborhood, again in the lowest income bracket. The

EARTH ECONOMICS | 26 centroids of the top three work census blocks for OPPORTUNITY COST — COMMUTE TIME CALCULATIONS current low-income residents in North Miami, To calculate the difference in opportunity costs of North Miami Beach, and Sweetwater were used commuting between scenarios, the amount of time as “work” locations under the assumption that spent commuting was needed. The time workers spent residents will switch jobs. commuting could also be generated by the Google Maps Platform Distance Matrix API, described above s DIRECT COST — COMMUTE DISTANCE CALCULATION to calculate driving distances. Opportunity costs were In this analysis, direct costs were applied only to the attributed to all commuters, both those driving as well subset of residents who drive to work (86 percent). Costs as those taking public transit. The default mode of are directly proportional to the distance residents drive. transportation used by the Google Maps API is driving. The distance driven was calculated for each scenario to In order to obtain transit commute times, a transit determine the difference in commuting distance. parameter was added. Times are based on average traffic and road conditions for both vehicle and transit CURRENT SCENARIO calculations Using data from the Housing and Transit Home and work locations described above were Affordability Index for Little Haiti census tracts, the used to calculate driving distances. To find the distribution of commuters who drive vs take transit was distance workers drive to each of the top three derived (86 percent driving vs. 14 percent transit). census tracts the Google Maps Platform Distance Matrix API was used. The API returns information CURRENT SCENARIO based on the recommended route between start Home and work locations described above were and end points, as calculated by the Google Maps used to calculate commute times. The breakdown API. between driving and transit was used to generate the average commute time for each work location DISPLACEMENT SCENARIO from Little Haiti. The same Google Map API routing method was applied for home and work locations under the DISPLACEMENT SCENARIO displacement scenario. For each of the predicted The same Google Map API routing method was new neighborhoods (North Miami, North Miami applied for home and work locations under the Beach, and Sweetwater) distances were calculated displacement scenario. For each of the predicted for both residents maintaining their current job new neighborhoods (North Miami, North Miami and assuming residents switch jobs. The average Beach, and Sweetwater) commute times were was calculated for these two options and used to calculated for both residents maintaining their represent the per-person distance for each new current job and assuming residents switch jobs. neighborhood under the displacement scenario. Again, the split between driving and transit was used to generate an average commute time. DIRECT COST OF COMMUTING The method of cost calculation method was the same OPPORTUNITY COST OF COMMUTING for the current and displacement scenarios. Direct costs The value of lost time spent commuting represents the are simply calculated on a per-mile basis. The cost to an opportunity cost considered in this analysis, that time individual driver is the distance driven multiplied by the could have been spent working and earning a wage. The cost of fuel and wear on the vehicle — $0.58 per mile calculation of opportunity costs was the same for current based on USDOT guidance. Additional burden to little and displacement scenarios. The USDOT cost of travel Haiti residents is the difference between current and time for personal travel was used to assess opportunity displacement scenario costs cost, $27.20 per hour or 45 cents per minute. Additional burden to little Haiti residents is the difference between current and displacement scenario costs.

27 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 28 RESULTS APPENDIX E: FLOOD DAMAGES

ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY COST OF COMMUTING AND SOCIAL COST METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW Additional Annual Per-Household, Annual Per-Household, Opportunity Costs Hours Spent Commuting Annual Cost This analysis quantifies the additional risk, in economic terms, Little Haiti residents would be placed under if North Miami 93 $2,536 forced to move to lower elevation neighborhoods with

North Miami Beach 49 $1,334 higher flood risk. First, this analysis identifies likely neighborhoods that Little Haiti residents would be Sweetwater 6 $161 displaced to. Next, flood risk is estimated for residential

Average 49 $1,344 homes within each neighborhood. This process requires the estimation of first floor elevations and flood heights during different flood events (10-, 50-, 100-, and 500- ANNUAL DIRECT COST OF COMMUTING year events). Finally, using a structure’s replacement value and the structure’s annual risk of flooding, an Additional Annual Per-Household, Annual Per-Household, economic value for structural and contents damage Direct Costs Miles Driven Annual Cost was derived. Additionally, this analysis estimates the social cost associated with living in a flood-prone area. North Miami 2,503 $1,452

North Miami Beach 1673 $970 IDENTIFYING DISPLACEMENT AREAS

Sweetwater 511 $297 It was hypothesized that residential homes in the Little Haiti neighborhood have a lower flood risk than homes Average 1562 $906 in the neighborhoods that Little Haiti residents are likely being displaced to. To estimate the net change in DATA INPUTS risk, flood risk in the displacement neighborhoods was compared against flood risk in Little Haiti. North Miami, U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). LEHD Origin-Destination North Miami Beach, and Sweetwater were identified as Employment Statistics (2002-2015). Washington, DC: “displacement zones”, i.e. areas to which Little Haiti U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal-Employer Household households are moving, due to displacement.g While in Dynamics Program, accessed on April 20, 2019 at https:// reality households may be moving to a broader range onthemap.ces.census.gov. LODES 7.3 of areas, this analysis was limited to modeling impacts associated with these three areas only. Flood risk was Google Developers. (2019). Google Maps Platform assessed in Little Haiti, and then compared to assessed Distance Matrix API (2018). Available at: https:// flood risk in North Miami, North Miami Beach, and developers.google.com/maps/documentation/distance- Sweetwater. matrix/start [Accessed 05 May 2019].

g Center for Neighborhood Technology Housing + Anecdotal evidence collected by Community Justice Staff suggests that Little Haiti residents are moving to North Miami, North Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index. (2019). Miami Beach, and Broward County (though Broward County was Available at: https://htaindex.cnt.org/ excluded from the analysis due to data limitations). Sweetwater was identified as a potential area to which Little Haiti residents may move, based on news coverage (Miami Herald, December 19, 2018, Climate gentrification: is sea level rise turning Miami high ground into a hot commodity? Accessed April 7, 2019).

EARTH ECONOMICS | 28 IDENTIFYING HOME STRUCTURES Within each neighborhood, residential structures were identified using property boundaries (Property Boundary View) and building footprint datasets from Miami GIS Open Data (2017).

29 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 30 CALCULATING FLOOD RISK Average residential home profiles were then created for each neighborhood based on the average 100-year To calculate flood risk for homes in Little Haiti versus flood depth. each of the displacement destinations (North Miami, North Miami Beach, and Sweetwater), the following CALCULATING FLOOD DAMAGES steps were taken: To calculate flood damages, the building replacement 1. IDENTIFYING BUILDINGS IN THE FLOODPLAIN: value was estimated. The building replacement To identify buildings within the floodplain, the value is the current cost per square foot for similar residential structures identified in the previous construction, multiplied by the square footage, and step were overlaid onto the National Flood Hazard the contents value, assumed to be 50 percent of Layer (NFHL) from FEMA (2015). Zones AE, AH, AND the building replacement value. Replacement costs VE were used to designated floodplains as they are per square foot were determined through the 2017 considered “high risk areas” in the NFHL. Buildings National Building Cost Manual, using good/standard that fell within zones AE, AH, and VE were identified quality residential home values. For square footage, as buildings in the floodplain. the results are presented as five different one-story residential home prototypes: 1,000, 1,500, 2,000, 2. ESTIMATING FIRST FLOOR ELEVATIONS. To 2,500, and 3,000 sq. ft. residential homes. Structure calculate flood risk of residential structures sizes were then multiplied by a building replacement 2 2 within the four neighborhoods, the elevation of value (ranging between $123/ft for 1,000 ft homes, 2 the first finished floor (i.e. the elevation at which and $97/ft for 3,000 homes) to yield a total building measurable flood damage begins to occur to a replacement value. Contents value is assumed to be 50 structure) was estimated. To do this, the ground percent of the building replacement value. elevation was estimated using the 10ft bare- Finally, this data was inputted into FEMA’s BCA Toolkit earth DEM (Miami Dade County GIS Open Data, Version 5.3.0. The results below show the annualized 2019) at the centroid of the building footprint for damages and represents the risk residents are being all residential footprints. To derive the first-floor subjected to on a yearly basis. For example, a North elevation, an additional 6.7 inches was added Miami resident in a North Miami Resident in a 1,000 ft2 to the ground elevation. This additional height home can expect $4,363 in annualized damage to the was estimated through examination of homes building and contents. Annualized damages can also in the four neighborhoods using Google street be communicated in estimated damages over a period view, a FEMA accepted approach. Through this of time, such as a 30-year mortgage. Continuing on process, it was found that most structures within the North Miami example, $4,363 in annual damages a neighborhood have a similar first finished floor over the period of 30 years will result in damages that elevation. For that reason, all structures within the generally can be expected to be in the neighborhood neighborhoods are assumed to have a consistent of $54,142. first finished floor elevation. CALCULATING THE SOCIAL COSTS OF FLOODING 3. ESTIMATING FLOOD ELEVATIONS. Next, flood Social costs of flooding include mental stress and elevations within the neighborhoods were anxiety, and loss of productivity. Both of these values recorded using Miami-Wade County’s FEMA Flood are derived from FEMA’s BCA toolkit Version 5.3.0. To Insurance Study (i.e., flood elevations for the 10-, calculate the avoidance of mental stress and anxiety, 50-, 100-, and 500-year events were recorded). Due FEMA’s standard value of $2,443 per-person is used. This to the nature of Miami’s relatively flat topography, cost is applied to all full-time occupants of a residential flood elevations are assumed to be consistent structure. It is assumed each structure has an average throughout the neighborhoods. of 2.88 residents per household (US Census). Loss of productivity is also derived from FEMA’s BCA toolkit 4. COMPARING FFE AND FLOOD ELEVATION. Once Version 5.3.0, but is only applied to full-time wage flood elevations were estimated for residential earners living in a residential structure. It is assumed homes in each neighborhood, a comparison was that each home has 1.28 workers per household (US done of the first flood elevations (FFE) and the flood Census). elevation calculated above. If the flood elevation was lower than the FFE, it is assumed that the home These values were then annualized by multiplying the will not have flood damage. social cost values by the annual probability of a flood

EARTH ECONOMICS | 30 event occurring. For example, a structure in the 50-year floodplain has a 2 percent chance in any given year of being flooded. If two people live in a household, the annual cost of mental stress and anxiety is $49 per person, per year ($2,443 × .02). The annual cost of lost productivity is even greater, at $175 per person, per year ($8,736 × .02). In contrast, living in the 500-year floodplain causes $5 in mental stress and anxiety ($2,443 × .002), and $18 in lost productivity per person, per year ($8,736 × .002). The difference in social costs between the neighborhoods is calculated to arrive at a final annual social cost of displacement to a higher hazard neighborhood.

RESULTS

FLOOD DAMAGES RESULTS Table A summarizes the annual flood damages by home prototype: 1000 feet, 1500 feet, 2000 feet, 2500 feet, and 3000 feet. To estimate the marginal increase in annual flood damages for a displaced household moving from Little Haiti to any one of the three displacement zones, the average cost of flooding was taken for all Little Haiti home prototypes, and compared to the average cost of flooding across home prototypes, across the three displacement zones. Table B summarizes the additional flood damages per year for one displaced household (assuming an equal number of households move to each of the three displacement zones).

ANNUAL FLOOD DAMAGES BY HOME PROTOTYPE

Home Size Location 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Little Haiti $ 634 $ 852 $ 1,066 $ 1,279 $ 1,491

North Miami $ 4,363 $ 5,871 $ 7,344 $ 8,809 $ 10,278 North Miami $ 2,486 $ 3,345 $ 4,184 $ 5,019 $ 5,856 Beach Sweetwater $ 3,223 $ 4,337 $ 5,425 $ 6,507 $ 7,592

ADDITIONAL FLOOD DAMAGES PER YEAR, FOR ONE DISPLACED HOUSEHOLD

Annual Average Flood Damages, by Additional Flood Pre-Displacement Average Annual Flood Displacement Zone Damages Per Year for Damages, Across North Miami One Displaced Cost Category Little Haiti North Miami Sweetwater Displacement Zones Beach Household

Flood damages to homes due to 10, 50, 100, and $ 1,064 $ 7,333 $ 4,178 $ 5,417 $ 5,643 $ 4,578 500 year flood events

31 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 32 SOCIAL COST OF FLOODING RESULTS Table C summarizes the annual costs of a) mental stress and anxiety, and b) lost productivity, associated with flooding events, across each of the four neighborhoods of interest. Table D shows the average marginal increase in flooding-related social costs for one household moving from Little Haiti to any one of the three displacement zones (assuming an equal number of households move to each of the three displacement zones).

ANNUAL MENTAL STRESS/ANXIETY AND LOST PRODUCTIVITY COSTS, BY NEIGHBORHOOD

Annual Cost of Mental Annual Cost of Lost Total Annual Neighborhood Stress and Anxiety Productivity Social Costs

Little Haiti $1 $2 $3

North Miami $132 $206 $337

Sweetwater $132 $206 $337

AVERAGE MARGINAL INCREASE IN FLOODING SOCIAL COSTS PER YEAR, FOR ONE HOUSEHOLD

Annual Cost of Mental Annual Cost of Total Annual Stress and Anxiety Lost Productivity Social Costs

North Miami marginal increase $130 $204 $334

North Miami beach marginal increase $39 $61 $99

Sweetwater marginal increase $130 $204 $334

Average marginal increase in costs per year, $100 $156 $256 for one displaced houseold

DATA INPUTS U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (2002-2015). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program, Accessed on April 20, 2019 from https:// onthemap.ces.census.gov. LODES 7.3 U.S. Census Bureau (2019). Selected housing characteristics, American Community Survey 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates. Accessed on May 23, 2019. http://factfinder.census.gov Miami-Dade County GIS Open Data. (2019). Building Footprints 2D (2017). Accessed April 20, 2019. Miami-Dade County, FL. https://gis-mdc.opendata.arcgis.com/ Miami-Dade County GIS Open Data. (2019). Municipal Boundaries (2017). Accessed April 20, 2019. Miami-Dade County, FL. https://gis-mdc.opendata.arcgis.com/ Miami-Dade County GIS Open Data. (2019). Property Boundary View, (2019). Accessed April 20, 2019. Miami-Dade County, FL. https://gis-mdc.opendata.arcgis.com/ Miami-Dade County GIS Open Data. (2019). Bare-earth DEM 10ft (2019). Accessed April 20, 2019. Miami-Dade County, FL. https://gis-mdc.opendata.arcgis.com/ FEMA. (2015). National Flood Hazard Layer (2015). Accessed April 20, 2019 https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home FEMA. (2009). Flood Insurance Study: Miami-Dade County, Florida and Incorporated Areas. (2009). Accessed April 20, 2019

EARTH ECONOMICS | 32 APPENDIX F: JOB LOSS, ABSENTEEISM, would face job loss within the analysis scenario. It was assumed that each working adult facing job loss would AND COSTS OF HOMELESSNESS be unemployed for 22.9 weeks (the national mean duration of unemployment, per the U.S. Bureau of Labor OVERVIEW Statistics). The lost wages per week of unemployment was estimated based on average household income of Studies examining impacts to displaced households $24,800. show that some portion of households facing involuntary displacement will experience a period of homelessness. SCHOOL ABSENTEEISM. School absenteeism was Homelessness can result in a number of long-lasting based on the expected median days of homelessness in negative impacts to families, including mental and Miami-Dade County (86 days) (Miami-Dade County). The physical health impacts, job loss, long-term difficulty to standard definition of school absenteeism as missing find employment, and school absenteeism. Moreover, more than 15 days of the school year was utilized (U.S. homelessness also generates a cost to local government Department of Education), or approximately 8.3 percent in the form of homelessness-related services. Among of school days. It was assumed that youth experiencing these many known impacts of homelessness, this homelessness qualifying as chronically absent would analysis modeled a) costs associated with temporary job miss 8.3 percent of school days during the period of loss, b) school absenteeism among children of displaced homelessness (86 days). A daily value associated with families who go on to experience homelessness, one day of education was derived from the per pupil- and c) costs to Miami-Dade County associated with hour value utilized in the upfront relocation costs homelessness. Due to lack of data on impacts among analysis (see appendix B). The daily value of education is families experiencing homelessness, other impacts $31.93, assuming students attend school for an average were not valued in this analysis. of 6.23 hours per day in Miami-Dade County (this school day duration is averaged across all school grades). These impacts were not added into the total estimated cost of displacement for a Little Haiti Household, as COST TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT. The cost per percentage of displaced households who would likely homeless household incurred by Miami-Dade County experience homelessness (and homelessness-related was derived from county-level data about the total consequences such as job loss and/or absenteeism) is FY18/19 homelessness-related services expenditure unknown. budget ($60,834,000) and the total number of homeless households in 2018 (2,971). The total number of homeless METHODS households was derived by summing the total number of single homeless individuals with the total number JOB LOSS. To value the cost associated with job loss of homeless “family units.” An average daily spending for one Little Haiti household, it was assumed that a per homeless household was estimated ($56.10), and single household makes on average $24,800 per year, multiplied with the median days of homelessness (86). and that each wage-earning adult within a household

33 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 34 RESULTS DATA

The following table summarizes cost per household The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, associated with housing insecurity and homelessness 2018. Protect tenants, prevent homelessness. related consequences, including job loss, school http://nlchp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ absenteeism, and costs to local government. ProtectTenants2018.pdf (accessed 5.20.19)

COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH EVICTION U.S. Census. American Community Survey 5-Year AND HOMELESSNESS-RELATED IMPACTS Estimate. US Fact Finder. Average Children Per Household in zip code 33127. Cost Per Cost Category Household National Center for Homeless Education. 2017. In School Lost wages associated with post- Every Day: Addressing Chronic Absenteeism Among $10,569 displacement job loss Students Experiencing Homelessness. Lost educational value associated with $255 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Average (Mean) Duration post-displacement homelessness of Unemployment [UEMPMEAN], retrieved from FRED, Cost of homelessness incurred by one Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed. $4,824 displaced household, to the county org/series/UEMPMEAN, June 6, 2019.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2018. System performance measures data since FY 2015. Available from https://www.hudexchange.info/ resource/5691/system-performance-measures-data- since-fy-2015/ (accessed 5.22.19)

EARTH ECONOMICS | 34 APPENDIX G: BENEFIT TRANSFER • CONTINGENT VALUATION: Estimates derived from surveys of the values assigned to certain ecosystem METHOD DESCRIPTION services (e.g., willingness-to-pay to protect water AND LIMITATIONS quality). The valuation of most ecosystem services is PRIMARY VALUATION METHODS well-understood and straightforward. However, In the same way that economists can determine the forecosystem services that are difficult to quantify or value of real estate as a private asset, economists can value, benefits are often better described qualitatively. also determine the contribution of ecosystem goods and services as public assets. For instance, although BENEFIT TRANSFER METHODOLOGY timber is bought and sold in markets, those prices To value ecosystem goods and services, Earth Economics usually ignore the contribution that trees provide to employs the benefit transfer method (BTM), in which nearby communities, such as water filtration, wildlife estimates of economic value are based on primary and pollinator habitat, or flood risk reduction. Such valuation studies of similar goods or services produced economic contributions are known as non-market in comparable conditions (e.g., climate, terrain, soils, benefits. Because the full benefits of a given resource species). BTM is often the only practical, cost-effective are not always included in market prices, economic option for producing reasonable estimates of the wide value must sometimes be assessed indirectly, using a range of services provided by ecosystems. range of valuation techniques. These include: The application of BTM begins by identifying critical • REPLACEMENT COST: The cost to replace services attributes of a landscape that determine ecological provided by functioning ecosystems with man-made productivity and expected benefits. Primary valuations infrastructure (e.g. levees and dams to replace of similar ecosystems, geographies, and communities natural floodplain protection). are then identified and assessed for their comparability with land cover types within the Hale Parkway study • AVOIDED COST: The losses which would be incurred area. Estimates from primary studies are then if a natural ecosystem were removed or its function standardized (i.e., adjusted to common units, correcting were significantly impaired (e.g. flood extent for any inflation between the period of research and reduced by wetlands and riparian buffers). the present) to ensure “apples-to-apples” comparisons. In this sense, BTM is similar to a property appraisal, • PRODUCTION APPROACHES: Ecosystem services in which the features and pricing of similar properties which enhance market outputs (e.g. moderate, nearby are used to estimate value prior to a sale. While regular rainfall can increase crop productivity). each process has its limitations, they are rapid and efficient approaches to generating reasonable values • TRAVEL COST: Where benefiting from natural for making investment and policy decisions. ecosystems requires travel, the willingness to incur Interest in certain ecosystem services and land cover such costs implies the level at which those services types has generated a substantial body of research. are valued (e.g., recreation and tourism). Therefore, multiple estimates can be found for given • HEDONIC PRICING: Property values vary by combinations of land cover types and ecosystem proximity to certain ecosystem services (e.g. homes services. In these instances, both low and high per-acre with water views often sell for higher prices than value estimates are reported. Other ecosystem services similar homes without such views). and land cover types are less well-researched. For cases

35 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 36 where a study suitable for transfer to the Miami context to construct a realistic demand curve or estimate a could not be identified, a value was not provided. It demand function. is important to understand that this decision simply reflects the limitations of valuation research, not that • The prior studies upon which calculations are based those natural assets provide no value. encompass a wide variety of time periods, geographic areas, investigators, and analytic methods. Many of To apply BTM for a full set of ecosystem service/land them provide a range of estimated values rather cover type combinations, this analysis used Earth than single-point estimates. The present study Economics’ Ecosystem Service Valuation Toolkit (EVT). preserves this variance; no studies were removed Studies within EVT have gone through multiple reviews from the database because their estimated values and are standardized for use in BTM. Our analysts used were deemed too high or too low. In addition, only several criteria to select appropriate primary studies for limited sensitivity analyses were performed. This the Miami urban context, including geographic location approach is similar to determining an asking price and the ecological and demographic characteristics of for a piece of land based on the prices of comparable the original primary study sites. parcels (“comps”): Even though the property being sold is unique, realtors and lenders feel justified in LIMITATIONS following this procedure to the extent of publicizing The benefit transfer method (BTM), used in this study a single asking price rather than a price range. to value ecosystem services, has limitations. Yet, these limitations should not detract from the core finding • In response to the study by Costanza et al. 1997h that ecosystems produce significant economic value of the value of all of the world’s ecosystems, critics for society. Some limitations include: objected to the absence of imaginary exchange transactions. However, including exchange transactions is not necessary if one recognizes the • Every ecosystem is unique; per-acre values derived purpose of valuation at this scale—a purpose that is from another location may be of limited relevance more analogous to national income accounting than i to the ecosystems under analysis. to estimating exchange values. This report displays study results in a way that allows • Even within a single ecosystem, the value per acre one to appreciate the range of values and their depends on the size of the ecosystem; in most cases, distribution. It is clear from viewing the tables that the as the size decreases, the per-acre value is expected final estimates are not precise. However, they are much to increase, and vice versa. (In technical terms, the better estimates than the alternative of assuming that marginal cost per acre is generally expected to ecosystem services have zero value, or, alternatively, increase as the quantity supplied decreases; a single of assuming they have infinite value. Pragmatically, in average value is not the same as a range of marginal estimating the value of ecosystem services, it is better values). to be approximately right than precisely wrong.

• Gathering all the information needed to estimate the h Costanza, R. et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services specific value for every ecosystem within the study and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-260. area is not currently feasible. Therefore, the full value of all of the shrubland, grassland, et cetera in a i Howarth, R., and Farber, S. 2002. Accounting for the Value of large geographic area cannot yet be ascertained. In Ecosystem Services. Ecological Economics 41(3), 421-429. technical terms, far too few data points are available

EARTH ECONOMICS | 36 APPENDIX H: BENEFIT TRANSFER STUDIES

Barbier, E. B., Strand, I. 1998. Valuing Mangrove-Fishery Linkages: A Case Study of Campeche, Mexico. Conference of European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics.

Bauer, D. M., Cyr, N. E., Swallow, S. K. 2004. Public Preferences for Compensatory Mitigation of Salt Marsh Losses: a Contingent Choice of Alternatives. Conservation Biology 18(2):

Bell, J. J. 1997. The economic valuation of saltwater marsh supporting marine recreational fishing in the southeastern United States. Ecological Economics 21(3): 243-254.

Bell, J. J., Bell, F. W. 1989. Application of Wetland Valuation Theory to Florida Fisheries. Florida Sea Grant College.

Cabrera, M. A., Seijo, J. C., Euan, J., Perez, E. 1998. Economic Values of Ecological Services from a Mangrove Ecosystem. Intercoast Network 32: 1-2.

Chmura, C., Anisfeld, S.C., Cahoon, D.R., Lynch, J.C. 2003. Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Global biogeochemical cycles 17(4).

Clarke, C., Canto, M., Rosado, S. 2013. Belize Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan. Belize Coastal Zone Management Authority and Institute.

Cooper, E., Burke, L., Bood, N. 2009. Coastal Capital: Belize. The Economic Contribution of Belize’s Coral Reefs and Mangroves. World Resources Institute.

Costanza, R., Pérez-Maqueo, O., Martinez, M. L., Sutton, P., Anderson, S. J., Mulder, K. 2008. The Value of Coastal Wetlands for Hurricane Protection. Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment 37(4): 241-248.

Davies, Z.G., Edmondson, J.L., Heinemeyer, A., Leake, J.R., Gaston, K.J. 2011. Mapping an urban ecosystem service: quantifying above-ground carbon storage at a city-wide scale. Journal of applied ecology 48: 1125-1134

Duarte, C.M., Middelburg, J.J., Caraco, N. 2005. Major role of marine vegetation on the oceanic carbon cycle. Biogeosciences 2: 1-8.

Farber, S. C. 1996. Welfare loss of wetlands disintegration: A Louisiana study. Contemporary Economic Policy 14: 92- 106.

Garrard, S., Beaumont, N. 2014. The effect of ocean acidification on carbon storage and sequestration in seagrass beds; a global and UK context. Marine Pollution Bulletin 86: 138-146.

Gosselink, J. G., Odum, E. P., & Pope, R. M. (1974). The value of the tidal marsh (Vol. 3). Baton Rouge: Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University.

Goulden, M.L., Munger, J.W., Fan, S.M., Daube, B.C., Wofsy, S.C. 1996. Exchange of carbon dioxide by a deciduous forest: response to interannual climate variaility. Science 271(5255): 1576-1578.

Grabowski, J. H., Brumbaugh, R. D., Conrad, R. F., Keeler, A. G., Opaluch, J. J., Peterson, C. H., Piehler, M. F., Powers, S. P., Smyth, A. R. 2012. Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services Provided by Oyster Reefs. BioScience 62(10): 900-909.

Gupta, T. R., Foster, J. H. 1975. Economic criteria for freshwater wetland policy in Massachusetts. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 57(1): 40-45.

Heath, L.S., Smith, J.E., Birdsey, R.A. 2003. Carbon Trends in U.S. forestlands: a context for the role of soils in forest carbon sequestration. The Potential of U.S. Forest Soils to Sequester Carbon. Chapter 3 in: Kimble, J M., Heath, Linda S., Richard A. Birdsey, and Rattan Lal, editors. 2003. “The Potential of US Forest Soils to Sequester Carbon and Mitigate the Greenhouse Effect”, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. P. 35-45

37 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 38 Hutcheson, W., Hoagland, P., Jin, D., 2018. Valuing environmental education as a cultural ecosystem service at Hudson River Park. Ecosystem Services 31, 387-394.

Johns, G. M., Kiefer, J., Blacklocke, S., & Sayers, D.2008. Indian River Lagoon Economic Assessment and Analysis Update.

Johnston, R. J., Opaluch, J. J., Grigalunas, T. A., Mazzotta, M. J. 2001. Estimating Amenity Benefits of Coastal Farmland. Growth and Change 32(3): 305-325.

Ko, J. 2007. The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by the Galveston Bay/Estuary System. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Laffoley, D., Grimsditch, G. (eds). 2009. The management of natural coastal carbon sinks. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 53 pp.

Lavery, P., Mateo, M., Serrano, O., Rozaimi, M. 2013. Variability in the Carbon Storage of Seagrass Habitats and Its Implications for Global Estimates of Blue Carbon Ecosystem Service. PLoS ONE 8(9): 1-12.

Mazzotta, M. J. 1996. Measuring Public Values and Priorities for Natural Resources: an Application to the Peconic Estuary System.

McPherson, E Gregory,Simpson, R David. A Comparison of Municipal Forest Benefits and Costs in Modesto and Santa Monica, California, USA, (2002)

Milesi, C., Elvidge, C.D., Dietz, J.B., Tuttle, B.T., Nemani, R.R., Running, S.W. 2005. A strategy for mapping and modeling the ecological effects of US lawns. Proceedings of the ISPRS Joint Conference.

Nowak, David J,Hoehn, E,Crane, Daniel E,Stevens, C,Walton, T. Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values, (2007)

Piehler, M. F., Smyth, A. R. 2011. Habitat-specific distinctions in estuarine denitrification affect both ecosystem function and services . Ecosphere 2(1): 1-16.

Polunin, N., Roberts, C. M. 1993. Greater biomass and value of target coral reef fishes in two small Caribbean marine reserves. Marine Ecology Progress Series 100: 167-176.

Smith, J.E., Heath, L.S., Skog, K.E., Birdsey, R.A. 2006. Methods for calculating forest ecosystem and harvested carbon with standard estimates for forest types of the United States. USDA Forest Service Northeastern Research Station, General technical report NE-343.

Thibodeau, F. R., Ostro, B. D. 1981. An economic analysis of wetland protection. Journal of Environmental Management 12: 19-30.

Trust for Public Land. The Economic Benefits and Fiscal Impact of Parks and Open Space in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, New York, (2010)

Wilson, K., Smith, E. 2015. Marsh Carbon Storage in the National Estuarine Research Reserves, USA: A Comparison of Methodologies and Coastal Regions. Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Montreal, Canada, 67 pp.

Xu, B. 2007. An Hedonic Analysis of Southwestern Louisiana Wetland Prices Using GIS. Louisiana State University.

EARTH ECONOMICS | 38 WORKS CITED

1 Viglucci, A., Flechas, J., 2019. Massive Little Haiti project and $31M aid get initial OK — but not a green light yet. The Miami Herald, March 29, 2019. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/ article228537454.html (accessed 5.20.19).

2 US Army Corps of Engineers. n.d. Sea-Level Change Curve Calculator Version 2019.21 (accessed 5.22.2019).

3 Keenan, J.M., Hill, T., Gumber, A., 2018. Climate gentrification: from theory to empiricism in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Environmental Research Letters 13(5). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabb32

4 Shimberg Center for Housing Studies, 2019. Little Haiti Neighborhood Data Update. University of Florida.

5 Kasdin, N.O., March 9, 2019. Letter of Intent. RE: Application for the Magic City Innovation District Special Area Plan.

6 Miami 21, 2018. Miami 21 Code, Volume 1. Section 3.9, Special Area Plans. Available at http://www.miami21.org/ finalcode.asp

7 Magic City Innovation District SAP Regulating Plan. Draft. Feburary 22, 2019.

8 The Miami Herald, March 29, 2019. Developers win initial approval for Magic City project in Little Haiti. https:// www.miaminewtimes.com/news/developers-win-initial-approval-for-magic-city-innovation-district-in-little-haiti- miami-11133152 (accessed June 10, 2019)

9 Miami Today, April 2, 2019. Town meetings set on Magic City Innovation District. https://www.miamitodaynews. com/2019/04/02/town-meetings-set-on-magic-city-innovation-district/ (accessed June 10, 2019)

10 EPA, 2016. What climate change means for Florida. EPA 430-F-16-011. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ files/2016-08/documents/climate-change-fl.pdf (accessed 5.22.19).

11 Roy, A.H. et al. 2014. How much is enough? Minimal responses of water quality and stream biota to partial retrofit stormwater management in a suburban neighborhood. Public Library of Science, 9, e85011.

12 Fletcher, T. D., Shuster, W., Hunt, W. F., Ashley, R., Butler, D., Arthur, S., & Viklander, M. 2015. SUDS, LID, BMPs: WSUD and more – The evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban drainage. Urban Water Journal, 12, 525–542.

13 Berland, A., Shiflett, S.A., Shuster, W.D., Garmestani, A.S., Goddard, H.C., Herrmann, D.L., Hopton, M.E., 2017. The role of trees in urban stormwater management. Landsc Urban Plan 162, 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. landurbplan.2017.02.017

14 Center for Neighborhood Technology. 2010. The value of green infrastructure: A guide to recognizing its economic, environmental and social benefits.

15 Federal Highway Administration, n.d. Traffic congestion and reliability: trends and advanced strategies for congestion mitigation. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion_report/chapter2.htm (accessed 5.20.19).

16 Reed, T., Kidd, J., 2019. Global traffic scorecard, pg. 2. INRIX Research. Available from http://inrix.com/scorecard/

17 Sartori, D., Catalano, G., Genco, M., Pancotti, C., Sirtori, E., Vignetti, S., Del Bo, C., 2015. Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects: Economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020. European Commission, pg. 90. Brussels, Belgium. doi:10.2776/97516

18 Zimberlin, C., Shrivastava, R., 2015. NYSDOT SPR project no. C-10-20: Wayne County, NY, municipal vehicle retrofit project—final report. https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/technical-services/trans-r-and-d- repository/C-10-20%20-%20Final%20Report_8-2015.pdf (accessed 5.21.19)

19 Hooper, A., 2018. Cost of congestion to the trucking industry: 2018 update. https://atri-online.org/wp-content/ uploads/2018/10/ATRI-Cost-of-Congestion-to-the-Trucking-Industry-2018-Update-10-2018.pdf (accessed 5.20.19)

20 EPA, n.d. Technical overview of volatile organic compounds. https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/technical-

39 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 40 overview-volatile-organic-compounds (accessed 5.20.19)

21 EPA, n.d. Introduction, ambient concentrations of particulate matter. Report on the environment (ROE) indicators. https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator.cfm?i=9 (accessed 5.20.19)

22 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2018. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Analysis for Submittal to the City of Miami. Page 27.

23 Florida Department of Transportation, 2013. FDOT quality/level of service handbook, table 1—generalized annual average daily volumes for Florida’s urbanized areas. https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/ default-source/content/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/2013_qlos_handbook.pdf?sfvrsn=22690bd2_0 (accessed 5.22.19)

24 Florida Department of Transportation, 2013. FDOT quality/level of service handbook, table 1—generalized annual average daily volumes for Florida’s urbanized areas. https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/ default-source/content/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/2013_qlos_handbook.pdf?sfvrsn=22690bd2_0 (accessed 5.22.19)

25 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2018. Estimated National Average Vehicle Emissions Rates per Vehicle by Vehicle Type Using Gasoline and Diesel. https://www.bts.gov/content/estimated-national-average-vehicle- emissions-rates-vehicle-vehicle-type-using-gasoline-and (accessed 5.20.19).

26 TRIP, 2018. Bumpy road ahead: America’s roughest rides and strategies to make our roads smoother. http://www. tripnet.org/docs/Urban_Roads_TRIP_Report_October_2018.pdf (accessed 5.20.19).

27 EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality. (n.d.) Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Gasoline-Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. Accessed from https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100EVXP. PDF?Dockey=P100EVXP.PDF

28 AEA Technology Environment (2005), Damages Per Tonne Emission of PM2.5, NH3, SO2, NOx and VOCs From Each EU25 Member State, Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) Programme, European Commission

29 Levy, J. et al. 2010. Evaluation of the public health impacts of traffic congestion: a health risk assessment. Environmental Health 9(65).

30 Navarro, M., 2012. City’s law tracking energy use yields some surprises. New York Times. https://www.nytimes. com/2012/12/25/science/earth/new-york-citys-effort-to-track-energy-efficiency-yields-some-surprises.html (accessed 5.16.19).

31 Condon, P., 2012. A city that runs on itself. United Nations University. https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/a-city-that- runs-on-itself (accessed 5.16.19)

32 Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W.D., Slosberg, R.B., 2006. Mitigating New York City’s heat island with urban forestry, living roofs, and light surfaces. New York City Regional Heat Island Initiative, Final Report. NYSERDA Report 06-06.

33 Mills, S., Bachand, A., 2018. High rise buildings can be sustainable. Ramboll. https://ramboll.com/ingenuity/high- rise-buildings-are-sustainable (accessed 6.7.19)

34 LEED, n.d. https://new.usgbc.org/leed (accessed 6.7.19)

35 Vardoulakis, S., Fisher, B.E.A., Pericleous, K., Gonzalez-Flesca, N., 2003. Modelling air quality in street canyons: a review. Atmospheric Environment, 37(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(02)00857-9

36 Kessler, R., 2013. Green Walls Could Cut Street-Canyon Air Pollution. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.121-a14

37 Farrell, W.J., Cavellin, L.D., Weichenthal, S., Goldberg, M., Hatzopoulou, M., 2015. Capturing the urban canyon effect on particle number concentrations across a large road network using spatial analysis tools. Building and Environment, 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.05.004

38 Davidson, M. and Lees, Loretta. 2005. New-Build Gentrification and London’s Riverside Renaissance. Environmental

EARTH ECONOMICS | 40 and Planning A: Economy and Space. 37(7): 1165-1190. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3739

39 Davidson, M., and Lees, Loretta. 2010. New-Build Gentrification: It’s Histories, Trajectories, and Critical Geographies. Population, Space, and Place. 16, 395-411. DOI: 10.1002/psp.584

40 The Miami Herald. December 18, 2018. Climate gentrification: is sea level rise turning Miami high ground into a hot commodity? https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article222547640.html (accessed April 8, 2019).

41 Marcus, J., Zuk, M., 2017. Displacement in San Mateo County, California: Consequences for housing, neighborhoods, quality of life, and health. IGS Research Brief.

42 Atkinson, R. et al. 2011. Gentrification and Displacement: the Household Impacts of Neighborhood Change. Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

43 Causa Justa Just Cause. 2014. Development Without Displacement: Resisting Gentrification in the Bay Area.

44 Desmond, M. and Gershenson, C. 2016. Housing and Employment Insecurity among the Working Poor. Social Problems, 0: 1-22.

45 “7 ways to avoid losing your security deposit.” Forbes, February 6, 2015. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ trulia/2015/02/06/7-ways-to-avoid-losing-your-security-deposit/#8c9a6a33f924 (accessed 5.22.19)

46 Center for Neighborhood Technology. Housing + Transportation (H+T™) Index. Accessed on May 20, 2019. https:// htaindex.cnt.org/download/data.php; May 2019.

47 U.S. Department of Transportation. (n.d.). Housing and Transportation Affordability. Accessed from https://www. transportation.gov/mission/health/housing-and-transportation-affordability

48 City of Seattle Office of Planning and Community Development. 2016. Growth and Equity: Analyzing Impacts on Displacement and Opportunity Related to Seattle’s Growth Strategy.

49 Enterprise Community Partners. 2014. Impact of Affordable Housing on Families and Communities: A Review of the Evidence Base. http://homeforallsmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Impact-of-Affordable-Housing-on- Familiesand-Communities.pdf

50 Waller, M. 2005. High cost or high opportunity cost? Transportation and family economic success. Center on Children & Families Policy Brief No. 35. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

51 FEMA, 2019. Coping with disaster. https://www.fema.gov/coping-disaster (accessed 5.22.19)

52 Gardheere, U. and Craig, L. 2015. Southeast Seattle Emerging Equitable Development Coalitions Community Report. Puget Sound Sage.

53 U.S. Census Bureau; 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; accessed from https://statisticalatlas. com/neighborhood/Florida/Miami/Little-Haiti/Household-Income.

54 City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability. 2018. Gentrification and Displacement Neighborhood Typology Assessment. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/700970

55 U.S. Census Bureau; 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; generated by Rebecca Page; using American FactFinder; http://factfinder.census.gov; May 2019.

56 US Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2018. Displacement of Lower-Income Families in Urban Areas.

57 Gibbons, R. and Katz, L. 1991. Layoffs and Lemons. Journal of Labor Economics 9:351–80.

58 Farber, H. 2005. What Do We Know about Job Loss in the United States? Evidence from the Displaced Workers Survey, 1984–2004. Economic Perspectives 2:13–28.

59 Desmond, M. and Kimbro, R. 2015. Eviction’s Fallout: Housing, Hardship, and Health. Social Forces 94:295–324.

41 | EARTH ECONOMICS EARTH ECONOMICS | 42 60 Walton, D., Dastrup, S., Khadduri, J. 2018.Employment of Families Experiencing Homelessness. Homeless Families Research Brief. Abt Associates.

61 Erb-Downward, J. and Watt, P. 2018. Missing School, Missing a Home: The Link Between Chronic Absenteeism, Economic Instability, and Homelessness in Michigan.

62 National Center for Homeless Education. 2017. In School Every Day: Addressing Chronic Absenteeism Among Students Experiencing Homelessness.

63 National Association for Latino Community Asset Builders. (n.d.) Understanding the Impacts of Neighborhood Change on Small Business.

64 Zukin, S. 2009. New Retail Capital and Neighborhood Change: Boutiques and Gentrification in New York City. City and Community, 8(1).

65 Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust. FY2018-19 Adopted Budget and Multi-Year Capital Plan.

66 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2018. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Analysis for Submittal to the City of Miami. Page 27.

67 Florida Department of Transportation, 2013. FDOT quality/level of service handbook, table 1—generalized annual average daily volumes for Florida’s urbanized areas. https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/ default-source/content/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/2013_qlos_handbook.pdf?sfvrsn=22690bd2_0 (accessed 5.22.19)

68 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2018. Estimated National Average Vehicle Emissions Rates per Vehicle by Vehicle Type Using Gasoline and Diesel. https://www.bts.gov/content/estimated-national-average-vehicle- emissions-rates-vehicle-vehicle-type-using-gasoline-and (accessed 5.20.19).

69 TRIP, 2018. Bumpy road ahead: America’s roughest rides and strategies to make our roads smoother. http://www. tripnet.org/docs/Urban_Roads_TRIP_Report_October_2018.pdf (accessed 5.20.19).

70 Reinhart, R., 2018. Snapshot: Who uses ride-sharing services in the U.S.? https://news.gallup.com/poll/237965/ snapshot-uses-ride-sharing-services.aspx (accessed 5.20.19).

71 Reed, T., Kidd, J., 2019. Global traffic scorecard. INRIX Research. Available from http://inrix.com/scorecard/

72 Bliss, L., 2018. To measure the ‘Uber effect,’ cities get creative. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/01/ to-measure-the-uber-effect-cities-get-creative/550295/ (accessed 5.20.18).

EARTH ECONOMICS | 42 Earth Economics is a leader in ecological economics and has provided innovative analysis and recommendations to governments, tribes, organizations, private firms, and communities around the world.

eartheconomics.org | [email protected]

© 2019 Earth Economics. All rights reserved.