It is the intent of this Article to establish minimum criteria for the concurrency management system and authorize the preparation of an administrative procedure for determining that public facilities and services meet or exceed the adopted level of service standards set forth in the City of Brooksville Comprehensive Plan.

(a)

Available capacity review.

(1)

In order to determine if an application for a rezoning, Special Use or Special Exception is consistent with the provisions of the comprehensive plan, an available capacity review may be conducted by the City. This procedure is a review and does not constitute a binding determination by the City.

(2)

The following public facilities will be reviewed for adequacy to serve the subject site: potable water, sewage treatment, drainage, solid waste, parks and recreation facilities, public schools and transportation:

a.

For potable water, sewage treatment, drainage, solid waste, parks and recreation facilities, and transportation, where capacity will not be available to serve the property seeking a development permit and alternative mitigation is not available or agreeable, then the City may use the lack of such infrastructure capacity as a basis for denial of the development permit.

b.

For public schools, where capacity will not be available to serve students from the residential property seeking a development permit and alternative mitigation is not available or agreeable, then the City may use the lack of school capacity as a basis for denial of the development permit.

(3)

Available capacity review is not a concurrency determination and does not relieve the applicant from applying for a concurrency determination.

(4)

Any person may request an available capacity review at any time for the public facilities identified in this Article.

(5)

A nonrefundable available capacity review fee will be established by resolution of the City Council.

(b)

Certificate of concurrency.

(1)

A valid certificate of concurrency must be issued to a property owner or his designated representative prior to the issuance of the following development orders or approvals, as applicable:

a.

Zoning permit.

b.

Building permit.

c.

Preliminary subdivision plat approval.

d.

Final subdivision plat approval.

e.

Development orders for developments of regional impact (DRIs). At the written request of the school district, the concurrency determination for public school facilities may be made at a later point in time pursuant to a separate agreement between the developer and the school district, and which agreement shall be incorporated by reference in the DRI development order.

f.

Construction drawing approval.

g.

Development agreements. At the written request of the school district, the concurrency determination for public school facilities may be made at a later point in time pursuant to a separate agreement between the developer and the school district, and which agreement shall be incorporated by reference in the development order.

(2)

The property owner or his designated representative shall apply for a certificate of concurrency by filing a technically complete sworn application and application fee with the Community Development Department upon a form to be provided by the department.

(3)

The City Council shall establish an appropriate fee structure by resolution and such fees shall be filed with the application for a certificate of concurrency.

(4)

If the proposed development is to be developed in different Parts, stages or phases, then the certificate of concurrency shall only apply to that specific part, stage or phase for which a concurrency determination is sought.

(5)

If the application is deemed concurrent, a certificate of concurrency will be issued by the City.

(6)

If the application is deemed not to be concurrent, the applicant will be notified in writing by the City.

(7)

The burden of meeting the concurrency test shall be upon the applicant. The City will direct the applicant to the appropriate staff to assist in the preparation of the necessary documentation and information for inclusion into their application.

(8)

It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application for a certificate of concurrency is complete and sufficient and all required information has been provided to the City and, for public school facilities, the Hernando County School Board.

(9)

Application process.

a.

Within ten working days of receipt of a complete school concurrency application, the City will transmit said application to the school district for a determination of whether there is adequate school capacity, for each level of school, to accommodate the proposed development, based on the level of service (LOS) standards, concurrency service areas, and other standards set forth in this Article.

b.

Within 30 days of receipt of the initial transmittal from the City, the school district will review the school concurrency application and, based on the standards set forth in this Article, report in writing to the City:

i.

Whether adequate school capacity exists for each level of school, based on the standards set forth in this Article and its adopted comprehensive plan; or

ii.

If adequate capacity does not exist, whether appropriate mitigation can be accepted, and if so, acceptable options for mitigation, consistent with this Article.

(c)

Concurrency certificate validity.

(1)

An application for a certificate of concurrency shall be applied for at the time an application is made for any development order or approval referenced in the preceding Section.

(2)

A certificate of concurrency shall expire simultaneously with the development order or approval it accompanied including any extensions or renewals thereof unless a different expiration period is provided in a valid development agreement between the property owner and the City or in a DRI development order issued by the City pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(15). Furthermore and notwithstanding anything in this Article to the contrary, no person may claim any vested or grandfather rights to concurrency absent either:

a.

A valid and current written certificate of concurrency;

b.

A valid and current development agreement between the property owner and the City as approved by the City Council and signed by the mayor; or

c.

A valid DRI development order issued by the City pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(15).

(3)

The certificate of concurrency shall apply to the land and is therefore transferable from owner to owner of the subject parcel(s) for the specific project upon which the certificate of concurrency was issued; however, in no event may the certificate of concurrency be transferred off-site or to any other project or parcel(s).

(4)

Any alteration in scope, density, magnitude, location, project traffic circulation and/or distribution for the subject property must be reported to and approved by the City for certificate re-evaluation. If such alterations are not reported, the certificate of concurrency will be subject to revocation.

(5)

Public facilities must serve land development in accordance with the adopted level of service standards contained within the City Comprehensive Plan. This certificate of concurrency when issued by the City verifies adequate capacity until its stated expiration date as provided in sub-paragraph (b) above. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a certificate of concurrency offers no other assurance, does not approve any development order, and does not grant any development rights.

(d)

Exemption from adequate public facilities review and concurrency review.

(1)

The purpose of the concurrency review is to determine a project's impact on the provision of public facilities/services. The following will be exempt from the concurrency review for potable water, sewage treatment, drainage, solid waste, parks and recreation facilities and transportation:

a.

Single-family home or duplex; and

b.

Non-residential projects consisting of less than 1,500 square feet of floor space, generating less than 20 average daily trips (ADT), and using less than 500 gallons of water per day.

(2)

The following shall be exempt from the requirements of public school concurrency:

a.

Single-family lots of record established prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

b.

Duplex lots of record established prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

c.

Amendments to any residential development approval which do not increase the number of residential units or change the type of residential units proposed.

d.

Any residential development that has a current and valid certificate of concurrency issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

e.

A project or any portion of a project that is age restricted and subject to deed restrictions prohibiting the permanent occupancy of a resident under the age of 55, or is restricted to affordable housing as defined in F.S. § 420.5095, as such statues may be amended or renumbered from time to time. The City shall require a separate development agreement with the applicant and/or evidence of recordable deed restrictions ensuring such commitment to provide senior or age restricted housing, affordable housing, and/or workforce housing.

f.

Any residential development which has been determined exempt by the Hernando County School District.

g.

All non-residential uses.

h.

Residential development that generates less than one student (The applicable student multipliers in effect at the time of submittal shall be utilized).

A development order will be issued only if the proposed development does not lower the existing level of service of a facility/service below the adopted level of service in the City Comprehensive Plan or provides mitigation in accordance with the terms of the concurrency management requirements. The minimum criteria to satisfy concurrency requirements are as follows:

(a)

For potable water, sewer, solid waste and drainage the following standards must be met, at a minimum, to satisfy the concurrency requirement:

(1)

The necessary facilities and services are in place at the time a development permit is issued; or

(2)

A development permit is issued subject to the condition that the necessary facilities and services will be in place when the impacts of the development occur; or

(3)

The necessary facilities are under construction at the time a permit is issued; or

(4)

The necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement. The agreement must guarantee that the necessary facilities and services will be in place when the impacts of the development occur.

(b)

For parks and recreation facilities, the criteria under subsection (a) above may be applied or the following minimum standards may be applied:

(1)

At the time the development permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed contract which provides for the commencement of actual construction of the required facilities or the provision of services within one year of the issuance of the development permit; or,

(2)

The necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement which requires commencement of actual construction of the facilities or the provision of services within one year of the issuance of the applicable development permit. An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development agreements pursuant to F.S. ch. 163, or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to F.S. ch. 380.

(c)

Transportation.

(1)

Transportation supply (capacity) shall be determined in accordance with the requirements of the City's comprehensive plan and the terms of this Article. capacity will be based either on FDOT's generalized capacity tables or individual capacity studies utilizing professionally accepted standards and methodologies approved by the City Community Development and Public Works Departments' Directors.

(2)

Transportation supply is as follows:

a.

The segment's existing peak hour, peak season, peak direction capacity; or

b.

The segment's new roadway capacity if facility expansion for the segment is proposed and if:

i.

At the time the development order or permit is issued, the facility expansion is under construction; or

ii.

A development order or permit is issued subject to a condition that the facility expansion needed to serve the new development is included in the City's or county's adopted five-year schedule of capital improvements and is scheduled to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of the project's first building permit or its functional equivalent. For purposes of this section, the City may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first three years of the adopted Florida Department of Transportation five-year work program. In order to apply this provision to a facility expansion project, the capital improvements element (CIE) must include the following policies:

1.

The estimated date of commencement of actual project construction and the estimated date of project completion, and

2.

A provision that a plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer, or delay construction of any road which is needed to maintain the adopted level of service standard and which is listed in the five-year schedule of capital improvements of the City's or county's adopted comprehensive plans; or

iii.

At the time a development order or permit is issued, the facility is the subject of a binding executed agreement which requires the facility to be in place or under actual construction no more than three years after the issuance of the project's first building permit or its functional equivalent; the agreement may assign all or a portion of the created capacity; or

iv.

At the time a development order or permit is issued, the facility is guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to F.S. ch. 163, or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to F.S. ch. 380, to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a building permit or its functional equivalent; the agreement may assign all or a portion of the created capacity; or

v.

The segment is the subject of a proportionate fair-share agreement. In such case, the segment capacity increase reflected in the proportionate fair share agreement shall be available only to the Parties to a proportionate fair share agreement.

(d)

For public school facilities the following standards must be met, at a minimum, to satisfy the concurrency requirement:

(1)

All new residential development shall be subject to public school facilities concurrency unless exempted herein.

(2)

Concurrency service areas (CSAs):

a.

CSAs will be developed based upon school attendance zones so that there is school capacity in each concurrency service area or contiguous concurrency service area to meet the adopted level of service standard within the five-year time frame contained in the school board's adopted five-year work program (as such work program is updated annually by the school board) and incorporated by reference into the City's capital improvement element.

b.

CSAs shall be subsequently modified to maximize available school capacity and make efficient use of new and existing public school facilities in accordance with the adopted LOS standards, and taking into account policies which:

i.

Minimize transportation costs;

ii.

Limit maximum student travel times;

iii.

Affect desegregation plans;

iv.

Achieve socio-economic, racial and cultural diversity objectives;

v.

Recognize capacity commitments resulting from the development approvals by the City for the CSA; and

vi.

Recognize capacity commitments resulting from development approvals by the City for contiguous CSAs.

c.

All CSAs will be described geographically and appropriately mapped.

(e)

Calculation of capacity. The school district will determine whether adequate school capacity exists for a proposed residential development based on the adopted LOS as follows:

(1)

Calculate total public school facilities by adding the capacity provided by existing public school facilities, except magnet/lottery schools, to the capacity of any planned school facilities.

(2)

Calculate available public school capacity by subtracting from the total public school facilities the sum of:

a.

Used capacity;

b.

The portion of reserved capacity projected to be developed within three years;

c.

The portion of previously approved development projected to be developed within three years; and

d.

The demand on public schools created by the proposed development.

(f)

Determination of sufficient school capacity for residential development:

(1)

In determining whether there is sufficient school capacity to accommodate a proposed residential development, the school district will consider:

a.

Subject CSA. Available capacity will be determined based upon permanent FISH capacity of existing and planned facilities at each public school type (i.e. elementary, middle and high); and,

b.

Contiguous CSA. If the projected student growth from a residential development causes the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the subject CSA, then each contiguous CSA will be reviewed for available capacity pursuant to this Article and shall take into account:

i.

Travel time and distance (school bus route from the school to the site of the proposed development should not exceed 50 minutes);

ii.

Where school capacity is reserved for a specific academic or magnet program(s) at a particular school or for establishing student diversity, then such capacity cannot be claimed in a contiguous concurrency service area for purposes of determining available capacity; and,

iii.

Where two CSAs are separated or divided by the Withlacoochee State Forest, then they shall not be deemed contiguous for purposes of determining available capacity.

c.

In conducting the contiguity review, the school district shall first use the contiguous CSA with the most available capacity to evaluate projected enrollment and, if necessary, shall continue to the CSA with the next most available capacity until all contiguous CSAs have been evaluated or the available capacity has been identified to allow a determination letter approving school concurrency to be issued. If a contiguous CSA is identified having available capacity, then the actual development impacts shall be shifted to that CSA having available capacity (this shift shall be accomplished in accordance with school board policy and which may include, without limitation, appropriate boundary changes or shifting future student assignments).

(g)

Issuance of residential development orders predicated on sufficient public school facility capacity:

(1)

The issuance of development orders for new residential units shall be predicated on the availability of public school capacity.

(2)

Whether there is adequate public school capacity to accommodate students generated by the proposed development for each type of public school within the affected CSA consistent with the adopted LOS standard will take into consideration that:

a.

Adequate public school facilities will be in place or under actual construction within three years after the issuance of the subdivision approval or site plan (or functional equivalent); or,

b.

Adequate public school facilities are available in an adjacent CSA and the impacts of development can be shifted to that area; or,

c.

The developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand for public school facilities to be created by the actual development of the property subject to the subdivision approval or site plan (or functional equivalent) pursuant to this Article.

(3)

If the impact of the proposed development will not occur until years two or three of the school board's work plan, then any relevant programmed improvements in those years shall be considered available capacity for the project and factored into the level of service analysis. If the impact of the project will not occur until years four or five of the work plan, then any relevant programmed improvements shall not be considered available capacity for the project unless funding of the improvements is assured through school board funding to accelerate the project, through proportionate share mitigation, or some other means.

(4)

If the school district determines that adequate capacity does not exist but that the developer's proffered proportionate share mitigation agreement is an acceptable alternative, the development application will remain active pending the conclusion of the mitigation negotiation period.

(5)

The City will issue a certificate of concurrency for public schools only upon:

a.

The school district's written determination that adequate school capacity will be in place or under actual construction within three years after the issuance of subdivision approval or site plan approval (or functional equivalent) for each level of school without mitigation; or,

b.

The execution of a legally binding mitigation agreement between the applicant, the school board and the City.

(h)

In determining the availability of services or facilities, a developer may propose and the City may approve developments in stages or phases so that the facilities and services needed for each phase will be available concurrent with the impacts of the proposed development.

(a)

The following calculations shall be used to determine the projected demand of the proposed project described in an application for a development permit on the public facilities and services. The information necessary to enable the City to perform the facility/service demand calculations in the following shall be provided by the applicant to the City.

(1)

Potable water: Adopted LOS = 250 gal./day/equivalent residential unit (ERU) 250 gal × _______ ERU's = demand

(2)

Sewage treatment: Adopted LOS = 200 gal./day/ERU. 200 gal × _______ ERU's = demand

(3)

Drainage: Adopted LOS is equivalent to and no less than the regulations of the Southwest Florida Water Management District for closed basins, as provided for in the Florida Administrative Codes 40D-4 and 40D-40.

(4)

Solid waste: Adopted LOS = 6.2 lbs./day/person (non-residential uses are included in the City's comprehensive plan adopted LOS). Solid waste will be calculated on a City-wide basis at regular intervals. Current estimate is 6.2 lbs. per capita. Population × 6.2 lbs. per day = Demand.

(5)

Parks and recreation facilities:

(6)

Transportation:

a.

Level of service standards. The LOS requirement shall be as provided for in the City Comprehensive Plan.

b.

Traffic study requirements. The purpose of the traffic study or assessment is to identify the potential impacts of new development on the City and county roadway network. Such a study or assessment shall provide information for making a concurrency determination on each impacted segment of the road network. The study or assessment shall identify traffic volumes on each impacted roadway, identify where the adopted level of service is exceeded, and recommend potential solutions or improvements. The study or assessment will include segment and intersection analysis where appropriate or otherwise required.

i.

Land Development Traffic Assessment ("LDTA") shall refer to a traffic study which has been prepared in accordance with the standards and methodology set forth in "Hernando County Traffic Study Procedures," by Tindale-Oliver & Associates (January 2008), as may be updated from time to time. The LDTA may be classified as "Minor" or "Major."

ii.

Determine the number of average daily trips generated by the proposed project using the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual (most current edition). No traffic study will be required for developments generating less than 100 average daily trips according to the ITE Trip Generation manual (most current edition). Trips will be assigned by the county to determine if adequate capacity is available on the road network in the impacted area. If the adopted level of service on the impacted roadway is exceeded, the applicant, at its expense, will be required to submit a Minor LDTA in accordance with the adopted study criteria.

iii.

If the project is calculated to generate more than 100, but less than 1,000 average daily trips according to the ITE Trip Generation manual (most current edition), a Minor LDTA shall be submitted by the applicant.

iv.

If the project is calculated to generate more than 1,000, average daily trips, according to the ITE Trip Generation manual, current edition, a Major LDTA shall be submitted by the applicant.

v.

Comprehensive plan amendment. For applications that involve large scale plan amendments (i.e. ten acres or more of land), and for small scale plan amendments that generate over 1,000 average daily trips according to the ITE Trip Generation manual (most current edition), a comprehensive plan amendment traffic study meeting LDTA standards and requirements shall be submitted by the applicant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the plan amendment encompasses ten acres or more of land but generates less than 1,000 average daily trips, then the applicant may perform a five-year concurrency analysis in lieu of the foregoing if approved in advance by the City.

vi.

Development of regional impact. For all applications which involve a development of regional impact (DRI), the applicant's traffic study shall include data and analysis relative to the Application for Development Approval (for the DRI) prepared in accordance with F.S. ch. 380.06, as may be amended or renumbered from time to time.

vii.

Signed and sealed by engineer. All traffic studies and assessments required under this section shall be prepared, signed, and sealed by a professional engineer registered and practicing in the State of Florida, qualified to perform traffic studies and assessments, and in accordance with professionally recognized industry standards.

viii.

If a land development traffic assessment (LDTA), a comprehensive plan amendment traffic study, or a development of regional impact traffic study pursuant to this section is required, it shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant at the applicant's expense.

(7)

Public schools:

a.

Level of service (LOS) standards contained herein shall be used to determine whether sufficient public school capacity exists to accommodate future development projects, and evaluate the sufficiency of the five-year schedule of capital improvements. The five-year schedule of capital improvements shall be reviewed, updated, and adopted annually thus ensuring those projects necessary to address existing deficiencies, and to meet future needs based upon the adopted level of service standards. The annual update to the five-year schedule of capital improvements shall ensure the level of service standards will continue to be achieved and maintained.

b.

The level of service standards shall be applied consistently on a district-wide basis to all schools of the same type (i.e. elementary schools, middle schools, high schools).

c.

The LOS standards to for schools shall be calculated as a percentage of FISH capacity as follows:

i.

Elementary: 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Permanent Student Stations, and 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Core Facilities (whichever is the greater number will be used for calculating student capacities for LOS).

ii.

Middle School: 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Permanent Student Stations, and 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Core Facilities (whichever is the greater number will be used for calculating student capacities for LOS).

iii.

High School: 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Permanent Student Stations, and 100 percent of Permanent FISH capacity for Core Facilities (whichever is the greater number will be used for calculating student capacities for LOS).

iv.

Magnet schools will maintain the level of service standard for the type of school for which it is constructed whether an elementary, middle, or high.

v.

For purposes of this subsection, "Core Facilities" shall mean "Permanent Cafeteria capacity" based on FISH standards.

(b)

Alternative demand calculations. If the applicant claims the standards provided in the demand calculations are not applicable to the proposed project, the applicant shall submit appropriate documentation based on professionally accepted methodology and practices supporting the proposed alternative demand calculation to the City. Any alternative calculation standard shall be subject to approval of the City and, if related to the determination of demands on public school facilities, the Hernando County School Board.

(c)

Appellate procedures. Any appeal of a denial of a certificate of concurrency for potable water, sewage treatment, drainage, solid waste, parks and recreation facilities and transportation shall be to the City Council within 30 days of receipt of written notification of denial. The notification of denial shall be provided via certified mail. Pursuant to Hernando County School District Policy 8.54., any appeal of a finding of no available school capacity by the school district for public schools shall be to the school district within 30 days of the issuance of the determination.

(a)

Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to establish a method whereby the impacts of development on transportation facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors, to be known as the proportionate fair-share program, in a manner consistent with F.S. § 163.3180.

(b)

Findings. The City Council finds and determines that transportation capacity is a commodity that has a value to both the public and private sectors and that the City proportionate fair-share program:

(1)

Provides a method by which the impacts of development on transportation facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative and creative efforts of the public and private sectors;

(2)

Allows developers to proceed under certain conditions, notwithstanding the failure of transportation concurrency, by contributing their proportionate fair share of the cost of expanding or improving a transportation facility;

(3)

Contributes to the provision of adequate public facilities for future growth and promotes a strong commitment to comprehensive facilities planning, thereby reducing the potential for moratoria or unacceptable levels of traffic congestion; and

(4)

Maximizes the use of public funds for adequate transportation facilities to serve future growth, and may, in certain circumstances, allow the City to expedite transportation improvements by supplementing funds currently allocated for transportation improvements in the capital improvements element.

(c)

Applicability. The proportionate fair-share program shall apply to any development project in the City where the project's traffic impact study or the City's community development or public works directors determine that there is insufficient capacity on one or more segments to satisfy the development project's transportation concurrency requirements. The proportionate fair-share program does not apply to developments exempted from concurrency as provided in this Article.

(d)

General requirements.

(1)

An applicant whose project meets the criteria of this section may choose to satisfy transportation concurrency requirements by making a proportionate fair share contribution, pursuant to the following requirements:

a.

The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land development regulations, and

b.

The five-year schedule of capital improvements in the City or county capital improvements element (CIE) includes one or more transportation improvements that, upon completion, will provide sufficient capacity for the deficient segments to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development.

(2)

The City may choose to allow an applicant to satisfy transportation concurrency for a deficient segment, through the proportionate fair-share program, by the developer contributing to an improvement that, upon completion, will create additional capacity on the deficient segment sufficient to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the applicant's proposed development even if the improvement project for the deficient segment is not contained in the five-year schedule of capital improvements in the CIE where:

a.

The City Council holds an advertised public hearing to consider the proportionate share agreement and corresponding future changes to the five-year CIE, and

b.

The City adopts, by ordinance or resolution, a commitment to add the improvement to the five-year CIE. To qualify for consideration under this section, the proposed schedule of capital improvements in the CIE must be reviewed by the City Council.

(3)

If the funds allocated for the five-year schedule of capital improvements are insufficient to fully fund construction of a transportation improvement required by the concurrency management system, the City may enter into a binding proportionate fair-share agreement with the applicant authorizing construction of that amount of development on which the proportionate fair share is calculated if the proportionate fair share amount in such agreement is sufficient to pay for one or more improvements which will, in the opinion of the government entity or entities maintaining the transportation facilities, significantly benefit the impacted transportation system.

(4)

Improvements funded by the proportionate fair-share component must be adopted into the five-year capital improvements schedule at the next annual capital improvements update.

(5)

Any improvement project proposed to meet a developer's fair-share obligation must meet design standards of the City or county for locally maintained roadways in their jurisdiction and those of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the state highway system.

(e)

Application process.

(1)

Upon identification of a lack of capacity to satisfy transportation concurrency, an applicant may choose to satisfy transportation concurrency through the proportionate fair-share program pursuant to the requirements of this section.

(2)

Prior to submitting an application for a proportionate fair-share agreement, the applicant shall attend a pre-application meeting with appropriate staff to discuss eligibility, application submittal requirements, potential mitigation options, and related issues. If the impacted facility is on the strategic intermodal system (SIS), then the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will be notified and invited to Participate in the preapplication meeting.

(3)

Eligible applicants shall submit an application to the City that includes nonrefundable application fee as established by resolution, and the following:

a.

Name, address, and phone number of owner(s), developer and agent;

b.

Property location, including parcel identification numbers;

c.

Legal description and survey of property;

d.

Project description, including type, intensity, and amount of development;

e.

Phasing schedule, if applicable;

f.

Description of requested proportionate fair-share mitigation method(s);

g.

Copy of concurrency application;

h.

Copy of the project's traffic impact statement (TIS) or traffic impact analysis (TIA); and

i.

Location map depicting the site and affected road network.

(4)

Within ten business days, the Chief Administrative Officer shall review the application and certify that the application is sufficient and complete. If an application is determined to be insufficient, incomplete, or inconsistent with the general requirements of the proportionate fair-share program as indicated in this section, then the applicant shall be notified in writing of the reasons for such deficiencies within ten business days of submittal of the application. If such deficiencies are not remedied by the applicant within 30 days of receipt of the written notification, then the application shall be deemed abandoned. The City Council may, in its discretion, grant an extension of time not to exceed 60 days to cure such deficiencies, provided that the applicant has shown good cause for the extension and has taken reasonable steps to effect a cure.

(5)

Pursuant to F.S. ch. 163.3180, proposed proportionate fair-share mitigation for development impacts to facilities on the strategic intermodal system requires consultation with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). If an SIS facility is proposed for proportionate share mitigation, the applicant shall submit evidence of an agreement between the applicant and the FDOT for inclusion in the proportionate fair-share agreement.

(6)

When an application is deemed sufficient, complete, and eligible, a proposed proportionate fair-share obligation and binding agreement will be prepared by the City or the applicant with direction from the City and delivered to the appropriate Parties for review, including a copy to the FDOT for any proposed proportionate fair-share mitigation on a strategic intermodal system (SIS) facility, no later than 60 days from the date at which the application was determined to be sufficient and no fewer than 14 days prior to the City Council meeting when the agreement will be considered.

(7)

The City shall notify the applicant regarding the date of the City Council meeting at which the agreement will be considered for final approval. No proportionate fair-share agreement will be effective until approved by the City Council.

(f)

Determining proportionate fair-share obligation.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share mitigation for concurrency impacts may include, separately or collectively, private funds, contributions of land, and construction and contribution of facilities.

(2)

A development shall not be required to pay more than its proportionate fair share. The fair market value of the proportionate fair-share mitigation for the impacted facilities shall not differ regardless of the method of mitigation.

(3)

The methodology used to calculate an applicant's proportionate fair-share obligation shall be as provided for in F.S. ch. 163 as follows:

The cumulative number of peak hour, peak direction trips from the complete build out of the proposed development, or build out of the stage or phase being approved, that are assigned to the proportionate share program segment divided by the change in the peak hour directional maximum service volume (MSV) of the proportionate share program segment resulting from construction of the proportionate share program improvement, multiplied by the anticipated construction cost of the proportionate share project in the year that construction will occur.

This methodology is expressed by the following formula:

Proportionate fair share = Σ[[(Development Trips _i ) ÷ (SV Increase _i )] × Cost _i ]

(Note: In the context of the formula, the term "cumulative" does not include a previously approved stage or phase of a development.)

Where:

Σ= Sum of all deficient links proposed for proportionate fair-share mitigation for a project.

Development Trips _i = Those trips from the stage or phase of development under review that are assigned to roadway segment "i" and have triggered a deficiency per the concurrency management system.

SV Increase _i = Service volume increase provided by the eligible improvement to roadway segment "i".

Cost _i = Adjusted cost of the improvement to segment "i". Cost shall consist of all improvements and associated costs, including design, right-of-way acquisition, planning, engineering, inspection, and physical development costs, directly associated with construction at the anticipated cost in the year that construction will occur.

In using the proportionate-share formula provided herein, the applicant, in its traffic analysis, shall identify those roads or facilities that have a transportation deficiency in accordance with the transportation deficiency as defined below. The proportionate-share formula provided in this subsection shall be applied only to those facilities that are determined to be significantly impacted by the project traffic under review. If any road is determined to be transportation deficient without the project traffic under review, the costs of correcting that deficiency shall be removed from the project's proportionate-share calculation and the necessary transportation improvements to correct that deficiency shall be considered to be in place for purposes of the proportionate-share calculation. The improvement necessary to correct the transportation deficiency is the funding responsibility of the entity that has maintenance responsibility for the facility. The development's proportionate share shall be calculated only for the needed transportation improvements that are greater than the identified deficiency.

When the provisions of this subsection have been satisfied for a particular stage or phase of development, all transportation impacts from that stage or phase for which mitigation was required and provided shall be deemed fully mitigated in any transportation analysis for a subsequent stage or phase of development. Trips from a previous stage or phase that did not result in impacts for which mitigation was required or provided may be cumulatively analyzed with trips from a subsequent stage or phase to determine whether an impact requires mitigation for the subsequent stage or phase. In projecting the number of trips to be generated by the development under review, any trips assigned to a toll-financed facility shall be eliminated from the analysis.

As used in this subsection, the term "transportation deficiency" means a facility or facilities on which the adopted level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing, committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected background trips from any source other than the development project under review, and trips that are forecast by established traffic standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research medium population projections. Additional projected background trips are to be coincident with the particular stage or phase of development under review.

(4)

For purposes of determining proportionate fair-share obligations, the City shall determine improvement costs based upon the actual and/or anticipated costs of the improvement in the year that construction will occur. These costs will be determined by the City's Public Works Department. Accepted sources for determining improvement costs may include, but not be limited to, the most recent issue of FDOT transportation costs, as adjusted, based upon the type of cross-section, and locally available data from recent projects.

(5)

If the City has accepted an improvement project proposed by the applicant, then the value of the improvement shall be based on an engineer's certified cost estimate provided by the applicant and approved by the City's public works director or other method approved by the City's public works director.

(6)

If the City has accepted right-of-way dedication for the proportionate fair share payment, credit for the dedication of the non-site related right-of-way shall be valued on the date of the dedication at 120 percent of the most recent assessed value by the county property appraiser or, at the option of the applicant, by fair market value established by an independent appraisal approved by the City and will be at no expense to the City. Said appraisal shall assume no approved development plan for the site. The applicant shall supply a drawing and legal description of the land and a certificate of title or title search of the land to the City at no expense to the City. If the estimated value of the right-of-way dedication proposed by the applicant (based on a City-approved appraisal) is less than the City estimated total proportionate fair-share obligation for that development, then the applicant must also pay the difference. If the estimated value of the right-of-way dedication proposed by the applicant (based on a City-approved appraisal) is more than the City estimated total proportionate fair-share obligation for the development, then the City will give the applicant roads impact fee credit for the difference.

(g)

Impact fee credit for proportionate fair-share mitigation.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share mitigation payments for a development project shall be applied as a credit toward the roads impact fees assessed to that development project to the extent that all or a portion of the proportionate fair-share mitigation is used to address the same capital infrastructure improvements contemplated by the applicable impact fee ordinance.

(2)

Impact fee credits for a proportionate fair-share contribution will be determined when the roads impact fee obligation is calculated for the proposed development. If the applicant's proportionate fair-share obligation is less than the development's anticipated roads impact fee for the specific stage or phase of development under review, then the applicant must pay the remaining impact fee amount.

(3)

A proportionate fair-share contribution is intended to mitigate the transportation impacts of a proposed development at a specific location. As a result, any roads impact fee credit based upon proportionate fair-share contributions for a proposed development may not be transferred to any other location.

(4)

The amount of roads impact fee (RIF) credit for a proportionate fair-share contribution may be up to but shall not exceed the project's proportionate fair share amount.

(5)

A proportionate fair share impact fee credit shall be applied consistent with the following formula:

Applicant payment = [(Total project roads impact fees assessed) + (Proportionate Share Payment)] - (RIF CREDIT)

(h)

Proportionate fair-share agreements.

(1)

Upon executing a proportionate fair-share agreement (agreement) and satisfying other concurrency requirements, an applicant shall receive a City certificate of concurrency approval. Should the applicant fail to apply for building permits within the time frame provided for in the City concurrency certificate, then the project's concurrency vesting shall expire, and the applicant shall be required to reapply. Once a proportionate share payment for a project is made and other impact fees for the project are paid, no refunds shall be given. All payments, however, shall run with the land.

(2)

Payment of the proportionate fair-share contribution for a project and payment of other impact fees assessed to that project shall be due and must be paid prior to the effective date of the proportionate fair share agreement. The effective date shall be specified in the agreement and shall be the date the agreement is approved by the City Council.

(3)

All developer improvements accepted as proportionate fair share contributions must be completed within three years of the issuance of the first building permit for the project which is the subject of the proportionate fair share agreement and be accompanied by a security instrument that is sufficient to ensure the completion of all required improvements. The security instrument shall conform to the subdivision construction security requirements utilized by the City Community Development Department. It is the intent of this Article that any required improvements be completed within three years of the issuance of the first building permit for the project which is the subject of the proportionate fair share agreement.

(4)

Dedication of necessary right-of-way for facility improvements pursuant to a proportionate fair-share agreement must occur prior to the effective date of the proportionate fair share agreement.

(5)

Any requested change to a development project subsequent to issuance of a development order shall be subject to additional proportionate fair-share contributions to the extent the change would increase project costs or generate additional traffic that would require mitigation.

(6)

Applicants may withdraw from a proportionate fair-share agreement at any time prior to the execution of the agreement. The application fee and any associated advertising costs to the City are nonrefundable.

(7)

The City may enter into proportionate fair-share agreements for selected corridor improvements to facilitate collaboration among multiple applicants on improvements to a shared transportation facility.

(i)

Appropriation of fair-share revenues.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share revenues shall be placed in the appropriate project account for funding of scheduled improvements in the City capital improvements element, or as otherwise established in the terms of the proportionate fair-share agreement. Proportionate fair-share revenues may also be used as the 50 percent local match for funding under the FDOT Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP).

(2)

In the event a scheduled facility improvement is removed from the capital improvements element (CIE), then the proportionate fair share revenues collected for its construction may be applied toward the construction of alternative improvements within that same corridor or sector where the alternative improvement will mitigate the impacts of the development project on the congested roadway(s) for which the original proportionate fair share contribution was made.

(a)

Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to establish a method whereby the impacts of proposed residential development on public school facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors, to be known as the proportionate fair-share program, as required by and in a manner consistent with F.S. § 163.3180. It is acknowledged that State Statutes and standards may change and, given such, that the school district may identify alternatives to the mitigation methods provided in this section. The City shall therefore recognize a certificate of concurrency issued by the school district that utilizes mitigation methods not identified in this section.

(b)

Findings. The Brooksville City Council finds and determines that public school facilities capacity is a commodity that has a value to both the public and private sectors and that the City proportionate fair-share program:

(1)

Provides a method by which the impacts of development on public school facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative and creative efforts of the public and private sectors;

(2)

Allows developers to proceed under certain conditions, notwithstanding the failure of public school facilities concurrency, by contributing their proportionate fair share of the cost of expanding or improving a public school facility;

(3)

Contributes to the provision of adequate public facilities for future growth and promotes a strong commitment to comprehensive facilities planning, thereby reducing the potential for moratoria or unacceptable levels of overcrowding at public school facilities; and

(4)

Maximizes the use of public funds for adequate public school facilities to serve future growth, and may, in certain circumstances, allow the school board to expedite public school facilities improvements by supplementing funds currently allocated for public school facilities improvements in the capital improvements element.

(c)

Applicability. The proportionate fair-share program shall apply to any residential development project in the City of Brooksville where the project's impact indicates that there is insufficient capacity to satisfy the development project's public school facilities concurrency requirements. The proportionate fair-share program does not apply to developments exempted from concurrency as provided in this Article.

(d)

General requirements. An applicant whose project meets the criteria of this section may choose to satisfy public schools facilities concurrency requirements by making a proportionate fair share contribution, pursuant to the following requirements:

(1)

The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land development regulations, and

(2)

The school district determines that adequate capacity does not exist but that mitigation is an acceptable alternative, and the developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation acceptable to the school district proportionate to the demand for public school facilities created by the actual development project.

(e)

Mitigation alternatives.

(1)

In the event the proposed project meets the requirements for proportionate fair share contribution, the following procedure shall be used.

a.

The applicant shall initiate in writing a mitigation negotiation period with the school board in order to establish an acceptable form of mitigation.

b.

Acceptable forms of mitigation may include:

i.

The donation, construction, or funding of school facilities sufficient to offset the demand for public school facilities to be created by the proposed development.

ii.

Construction of a charter school that complies with the requirements of F.S. § 1002.33(18).

iii.

The creation of mitigation banking based on the developer's construction and/or financing of a public school facility in exchange for the right to sell excess capacity credits (the selling of excess credits shall be limited to that area within the subject CSA or any abutting CSA) and as may be further limited by this Article.

(2)

The following standards apply to any proportionate share mitigation agreement:

a.

Relocatable classrooms will not be accepted as mitigation.

b.

Mitigation shall be directed to projects on the school board's five-year work plan that the school district agrees will satisfy the demand created by that development approval, and shall be assured by a legally binding development agreement between the school board, the City and the applicant. The development agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of the applicable subdivision plat, site plan or functional equivalent in the development review process.

c.

The student generation formula used for calculating mitigation shall be as follows:

Number of Student Stations (by school type) = Number of Dwelling units (by housing type) × Student Generation Multiplier (by housing type and school type)*

* Student Generation Multipliers shall be based upon the best available data and professionally accepted methodology as presented in the supporting data and analysis of the comprehensive plan public school facilities element.

d.

For purposes of this Article, cost per student station estimates shall include, at a minimum, all costs of providing instructional and core capacity including land, site improvements, design, buildings, equipment, furniture, and costs of financing (if applicable). The capital costs associated with transportation of students shall not be included in the cost per student station estimate used for mitigation.

e.

The proportionate mitigation share amount shall be calculated as follows:

Proportionate Share Amount = Number of Student Stations (by school type) × Cost per Student Station (by school type)**

** The above formula shall be calculated for each housing type within the proposed development and for each school type (elementary, middle, high) for which a capacity deficiency has been identified. The sum of these calculations shall be the proportionate share amount for the development under review.

f.

If the school district agrees to the mitigation, the school district must commit to adding the improvement required for mitigation to its work plan and the City shall amend its capital improvements element/capital improvements schedule to adopt the school board's revised work program.

(3)

The applicant's total proportionate-share mitigation obligation to resolve a capacity deficiency shall be based on the following formula, for each public school type (elementary, middle, high, magnet):

a.

Multiply the number of new student stations required to serve the new development by the cost per student station (as estimated pursuant to subsection (2) above).

b.

The applicant's proportionate-share mitigation obligation will be credited toward any other impact fee or exaction imposed by local ordinance for the same need.

(4)

Mitigation negotiation period.

a.

If within 90 days of the date the applicant initiates the mitigation negotiation period, the applicant and the school district are able to agree to an acceptable form of mitigation, a legally binding mitigation agreement shall be executed by the applicant and the school district (together with the City) which sets forth the terms of the mitigation, including such issues as the amount, nature, and timing of donations, construction, or funding to be provided by the developer, and any other matters necessary to effectuate mitigation in accordance with the City's comprehensive plan and this Article. The mitigation agreement shall specify the amount and timing of any impact fee credits or reimbursements, if any, that the developer expects to receive in connection with its mitigation payment/donation under said agreement.

b.

If, after 90 days, the applicant and the school district are unable to agree to an acceptable form of mitigation, the school district will report an impasse to the City, in writing and the City will not issue a finding of adequate school capacity and associated certificate of school concurrency for the proposed development.

c.

The school district may grant up to two 90-day extensions to the mitigation negotiation period.

(5)

To the extent required under Florida law, mitigation must be proportionate to the demand for public school facilities to be created by the actual development of the property.

TABLE 6-2
Summary of Concurrency Evaluation and Proportionate Share Mitigation