The purpose of this article is to describe the requirements and procedures for determination of consistency of proposed development projects with the adopted comprehensive plan of the respective local governments, including meeting the concurrency requirements of the plan.

A development proposal shall be presumed to be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the proposal if found to meet all the requirements of this Code, excepting those aspects of the development addressed by the comprehensive plan, but not covered by this Code.

Notwithstanding the presumption created in section 7.01, all applications for preliminary and final development orders shall demonstrate that specified public facilities will be available at adopted level of service standards concurrent with the impact of the development on those facilities. Determination of compliance with the concurrency requirement shall be through procedures described in section 7.07.

The building inspector, city manager, other local public official or any resident of the city may question the consistency of a proposed development with the comprehensive plan. If a question of consistency is raised, which ever review orga-nization is responsible for approving the issuance of a development permit shall make a determination of consistency prior to approving the request for a development permit. The determination shall be supported with written findings.

The following method of ensuring concurrency shall be known as the system for the management of concurrency (SYMCON). The SYMCON is based upon the city comprehensive plan, especially the respective capital improvements element and adopted level of service standards. The system is designed to ensure that the issuance of a final development order will not result in a degradation of the operating conditions to below adopted level of service standards for specified public facilities and services. The SYMCON also includes a monitoring system for determination of the availability of adequate capacity of public facilities and services to meet the adopted level of service standards.

(a)

General rule.

(1)

All applications for development orders shall demonstrate that the proposed development does not result in degradation of operating conditions below adopted level of service standards in the city.

(2)

The latest point at which concurrency is determined is prior to the approval of an application for a development order or permit which contains a specific site plan for development, including densities or intensities of development.

(b)

Exception.

(1)

Notwithstanding the foregoing, operating conditions may be degraded to below adopted level of service standards during the actual construction of new facilities, if upon completion of the new facilities the adopted level of service standards will be met and maintained.

(2)

With respect to transportation facilities, de minimis impacts shall be exempt from the level of service standards for roadways set forth in the Port St. Joe Comprehensive Plan. A de minimis impact is an impact that would not affect more than one percent of the maximum volume at the adopted level of service of the affected transportation facility as determined by the building inspector. No impact will be de minimis if the sum of existing roadway volumes and the projected volumes from approved projects on a transportation facility would exceed 110 percent of the maximum volume at the adopted level of service of the affected transportation facility; provided however the impact of a single-family home on an existing lot will constitute a de minimus impact on all roadways regardless of the level of the deficiency of the roadway. Further, no impact will be de minimis if it would exceed the adopted level-of-service standard of any affected designated hurricane evacuation route. The building inspector shall maintain sufficient records to ensure that the 110 percent criteria is not exceeded and a summary of these de minimis records shall be submitted annually with the updated capital improvements element.

For purposes of these regulations, the available capacity of a facility shall be determined by:

(1)

Adding together.

a.

The total capacity of existing facilities operating at the adopted level of service standards; and

b.

The total capacity of new facilities, if any, that will become available on or before the date of occupancy of the development. The capacity of new facilities may be counted only if one or more of the following is shown:

1.

Construction of the new facilities is under way at the time of issuance of the final development order or development permit.

2.

A development permit is issued subject to the conditions that the necessary facilities will be in place when the impacts of development occur.

3.

At the time that the development order or permit is issued, the new facilities are guaranteed, by an enforceable development agreement, to be in place when the impacts of development occur. An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development agreements pursuant to F.S. § 163.3220, or an agreement or development order pursuant to F.S. ch. 380. Such facilities shall be consistent with the capital improvements element of the local government comprehensive plan.

4.

For recreation and roads, new facilities may also be counted if the enforceable development agreement requires commencement of construction of the facilities within one year of the issuance of the applicable development permit, or if the facilities are the subject of a binding executed contract which provides for the commencement of construction of the facilities within one year of the issuance of the applicable development permit.

5.

For roads, facility expansion needed to serve the new development can be counted if it is included in the first year of the city's adopted five-year schedule of capital improvements and is scheduled to be in place or under construction not more that one year after issuance of the project's first building permit or it's functional equivalent. For purposes of this section, the city may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first year of the adopted state department of transportation five-year work program.

(2)

Subtracting from that number of the sum of:

a.

The total existing demand for the service or facility as documented in the local government comprehensive plan; and

b.

The demand for the service or facility created by the anticipated completion of other approved developments, redevelopment or other development activity.

(3)

Action upon failure to show available capacity. Where available capacity cannot be shown, the following methods may be used to maintain adopted level of service;

a.

The project owner or developer may provide the necessary improvements to maintain adopted level of service standards. These improvements shall be concurrent with the impacts of development. In such cases, the application shall include appropriate plans for improvements, documentation that such improvements are designed to provide the capacity necessary to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service standards, and recordable instruments guaranteeing the construction, consistent with calculations of capacity above.

b.

The proposed project may be altered such that the projected level of service is no less than the adopted level of service.

c.

The transportation impacts generated by the proposed development may be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors through the proportionate fair-share mitigation program described in section 7.13.

The burden of showing compliance with these level of service requirements shall be upon the developer. In order to be approvable, applications for development approval shall provide sufficient information showing compliance with these standards.

The initial determination of concurrency occurs during the review of the preliminary development plan, and shall include compliance with the level of service standards adopted by the city and reflected in section 7.11, Table 1 below.

(a)

Contents. By December 2009, the city shall prepare an annual report on the SYMCON that includes:

(1)

A summary of actual development activity, including a summary of certificates of occupancy, indicating quantity of development represented by type and square footage.

(2)

A summary of building permit activity, indicating:

a.

Those that expired without commencing construction;

b.

Those that are active at the time of the report; and

c.

The quantity of development represented by the outstanding building permits.

(3)

A summary of final development orders approved, indicating:

a.

Those that expired without subsequent building permits;

b.

Those that were completed during the reporting period;

c.

Those that are valid at the time of the report and have associated building permits or construction activity; and

d.

The phases and quantity of development represented by the outstanding final development orders.

(4)

An evaluation of each facility and service indicating:

a.

The capacity available for each at the beginning of the reporting period and the end of the reporting period;

b.

The portion of the available capacity held for valid preliminary and final development orders;

c.

A comparison of the actual capacity to calculated capacity resulting from approved preliminary development orders and final development orders;

d.

A comparison of actual capacity and levels of service to adopted levels of service from the city comprehensive plan; and

e.

A forecast of the capacity for each based upon the most recently updated schedule of capital improvements in the capital improvements element of the respective local government comprehensive plan.

(b)

Use of the annual report. For the purpose of issuing development orders, the SYMCON annual report shall constitute prima facie evidence of the public facility capacity available at the beginning of the 12-month period following completion of the annual report. Demand for facilities shall be subtracted from available capacity incrementally as individual developments are permitted throughout the year.

(a)

Infrastructure (sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater management, potable water, transportation, recreation, hurricane evacuation and public school facilities).

(b)

Development activity shall not be approved unless there is sufficient available capacity to sustain the following levels of service for sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater management, potable water, transportation, recreation, hurricane evacuation and public school facilities. Levels of service for these portions of local infrastructure are shown in Table 1 as established in the comprehensive plan of the city.

_____

Table 1. Adopted Level of Service Standards

_____

(a)

Level of service. Development activities shall not be approved unless there is sufficient available capacity to sustain the adopted levels of service for roadways listed in Table 1 as established in the traffic circulation element of the local government comprehensive plan.

The design and construction of roads and/or roadway improvements shall comply with accepted engineering standards and practices.

(b)

Determination of project impact. The impact of proposed development activity on available capacity shall be determined as follows:

(1)

For proposed minor developments, the building inspector shall determine the project impact area, the number of trips assigned to each impacted roadway based on the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, and the post-development level of service.

(2)

For proposed major developments, the developer shall be responsible for conducting a traffic impact analysis. The project impact area shall include all roadways where project trips are five percent or more of the maximum service volume for the adopted LOS or ten trips, whichever is less. The analysis shall include the number of trips assigned to each impacted roadway based on the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual and the post-development level of service. All assumptions used in the assignment of traffic shall be stated.

(a)

Applicability. The proportionate fair-share program shall apply to all developments in the City of Port St. Joe that have been notified of a lack of capacity to satisfy transportation concurrency requirements. The proportionate fair-share program does not apply to developments of regional impact (DRIs) using proportionate fair-share under F.S. § 163.3180(12), or to developments exempted from concurrency as provided in section 7.06.

(b)

General requirements.

(1)

An applicant may choose to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements of the city 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.

b.

The five-year schedule of capital improvements in the city CIE includes a transportation improvement(s) that, upon completion, will satisfy the requirements of the city transportation CMS. The provisions of section 7.13(b)(2) may apply if a project or projects needed to satisfy concurrency are not presently contained within the city.

(2)

The city may choose to allow an applicant to satisfy transportation concurrency through the proportionate fair-share program by contributing to an improvement that, upon completion, will satisfy the requirements of the city transportation CMS, but is not contained in the five-year schedule of capital improvements in the CIE, where the following apply:

a.

The city adopts, by ordinance, a commitment to add the improvement to the five-year schedule of capital improvements in the CIE no later than the next regularly scheduled update. To qualify for consideration under this section, the proposed improvement must be reviewed by the board of city commissioners, and determined to be financially feasible pursuant to F.S. § 163.3180(16)(b)1, consistent with the comprehensive plan, and in compliance with the provisions of this Code. Financial feasibility for this section means that additional contributions, payments or funding sources are reasonably anticipated during a period not to exceed ten years to fully mitigate impacts on the transportation facilities.

b.

If the funds allocated for the five-year schedule of capital improvements in the city CIE are insufficient to fully fund construction of a transportation improvement required by the CMS, the city may still 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 governmental entity or entities maintaining the transportation facilities, significantly benefit the impacted transportation system.

The improvement or improvements funded by the proportionate fair-share component must be adopted into the five-year capital improvements schedule of the comprehensive plan at the next annual capital improvements element update.

(3)

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

(c)

Intergovernmental coordination. Pursuant to policies in the intergovernmental coordination element of the city comprehensive plan, the city shall coordinate with affected jurisdictions, including FDOT, regarding mitigation to impacted facilities not under the jurisdiction of the local government receiving the application for proportionate fair-share mitigation. An interlocal agreement may be established with other affected jurisdictions for this purpose.

(d)

Application process.

(1)

Upon notification of a lack of capacity to satisfy transportation concurrency, the applicant shall also be notified in writing of the opportunity to satisfy transportation concurrency through the proportionate fair-share program pursuant to the requirements of section 7.07.

(2)

Prior to submitting an application for a proportionate fair-share agreement, a pre-application meeting shall be held 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 FDOT will be notified and invited to participate in the pre-application meeting.

(3)

Eligible applicants shall submit an application to the City that includes an application fee of $500.00 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); and

g.

Copy of concurrency application;

h.

Copy of traffic impact analysis; and

i.

Location map depicting the site and impacted roadway network.

(4)

The city manager shall review the application and certify that the application is sufficient and complete within ten business days. If an application is determined to be insufficient, incomplete or inconsistent with the general requirements of the proportionate fair-share program as indicated in section 7.13(b), then the applicant will 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 will be deemed abandoned. The board of city commissioners 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. § 163.3180(16)(e), proposed proportionate fair-share mitigation for development impacts to facilities on the SIS requires the concurrency of the FDOT. 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, the applicant shall be advised in writing and 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 SIS facility, no later than 60 days from the date at which the applicant received the notification of a sufficient application and no fewer than 14 days prior to the board of city commissioners meeting when the agreement will be considered.

(7)

The city shall notify the applicant regarding the date of the board of city commissioners meeting when the agreement will be considered for final approval. No proportionate fair-share agreement will be effective until approved by the board of city commissioners, or pursuant to planning and development review board approval for agreements below $150,000.00.

(e)

Determining proportionate fair-share obligation.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share mitigation for concurrency impacts may include, without limitation, 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. § 163.3180(12), as follows:

"The cumulative number of trips from the proposed development expected to reach roadways during peak hours from the complete build out of a stage or phase being approved, divided by the change in the peak hour maximum service volume (MSV) of roadways resulting from construction of an improvement necessary to maintain the adopted LOS, multiplied by the construction cost, at the time of developer payment, of the improvement necessary to maintain the adopted LOS."

OR
Proportionate Fair-Share = [(Development Trips "i")/(SV Increase "i")] × Cost "i"

Where:

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 CMS;

SV Increase "i" = Service volume increase provided by the eligible improvement to roadway segment "i" per section E;

Cost "i" = Adjusted cost of the improvement to segment "i". Cost shall include all improvements and associated costs, such as design, right-of-way acquisition, planning, engineering, inspection, and physical development costs directly associated with construction at the anticipated cost in the year it will be incurred.

(4)

For the purposes of determining proportionate fair-share obligations, the city shall determine improvement costs based upon the actual cost of the improvement as obtained from the CIE or the FDOT work program. Where such information is not available, improvement cost shall be determined using one of the following methods:

a.

An analysis by the city of costs by cross section type that incorporates data from recent projects and is updated annually and approved by the board of city commissioners; or

b.

The most recent issue of FDOT transportation costs, as adjusted based upon the type of cross-section (urban or rural); locally available data from recent projects on acquisition, drainage and utility costs; and significant changes in the cost of materials due to unforeseeable events. Cost estimates for state road improvements not included in the adopted FDOT work program shall be determined using this method in coordination with the FDOT district.

(5)

In order to accommodate increases in construction material costs, project costs, as determined by the Florida DOT or local agency construction cost estimates, shall be adjusted based on the following formula:

Cost "n" = Cost "0" × (Cost_growth3yr) ³

Where:
Cost "n" = the cost of improvement in year n
Cost "0" = the cost of the improvement in the current year
Cost_growth3yr = the growth rate of costs over the last three years
N = the number of years until the improvement is constructed

The three-year growth rate is determined by the following formula:

Cost_growth3yr = [Cost_growth-1 + Cost_growth-2 = Cost_growth_3]/3

Where:
Cost_growth3yr = the growth rate of costs over the last three years
Cost_growth-1 = the growth rate of costs in the previous year
Cost_growth-2 = the growth rate of costs two years prior
Cost_growth-3 = the growth rate of costs three years prior

_____

(6)

If the city has accepted an improvement project proposed by the applicant, then the value of the improvement shall be determined using one of the methods provided in this section.

(7)

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 115 percent of the most recent assessed value by the city property appraiser or, at the option of the applicant, by fair market value established by an independent appraisal approved by the city and at no expense to the city. 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 is less than the city estimated total proportionate fair-share obligation for that development, then the applicant must also pay the difference. Prior to purchase or acquisition of any real estate or acceptance of donations of real estate intended to be used for the proportionate fair-share, public or private partners should contact the FDOT for essential information about compliance with federal law and regulations.

(f)

Proportionate fair-share agreements.

(1)

Upon execution of a proportionate fair-share agreement (agreement) the applicant shall receive a city certificate of concurrency approval. Should the applicant fail to apply for a development permit within [12 months or timeframe provided in the local CMS of the execution of the agreement], then the agreement shall be considered null and void, and the applicant shall be required to reapply.

(2)

Payment of the proportionate fair-share contribution is due in full prior to issuance of the final development order or recording of the final plat and shall be nonrefundable. If the payment is submitted more than 12 months from the date of execution of the agreement, then the proportionate fair-share cost shall be recalculated at the time of payment based on the best estimate of the construction cost of the required improvement at the time of payment, pursuant to section 7.13(f) and adjusted accordingly.

(3)

All developer improvements authorized under this Code must be completed prior to issuance of a development permit, or as otherwise established in a binding agreement that is accompanied by a security instrument that is sufficient to ensure the completion of all required improvements. It is the intent of this section that any required improvements be completed before issuance of building permits or certificates of occupancy.

(4)

Dedication of necessary right-of-way for facility improvements pursuant to a proportionate fair-share agreement must be completed prior to issuance of the final development order or recording of the final plat.

(5)

Any requested change to a development project subsequent to a development order may be subject to additional proportionate fair-share contributions to the extent the change would generate additional traffic that would require mitigation.

(6)

Applicants may submit a letter to withdraw from the 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 will be non refundable.

(g)

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 CIE, or as otherwise established in the terms of the proportionate fair-share agreement. At the discretion of the local government, proportionate fair-share revenues may be used for operational improvements prior to construction of the capacity project from which the proportionate fair-share revenues were derived. 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 CIE, then the revenues collected for its construction may be applied toward the construction of another improvement within that same corridor or sector that would mitigate the impacts of development pursuant to the requirements of section 7.13.(b)(2)b.

Where an impacted regional facility has been designated as a regionally significant transportation facility in an adopted regional transportation plan as provided in F.S. § 339.155, and then the city may coordinate with other impacted jurisdictions and agencies to apply proportionate fair-share contributions and public contributions to seek funding for improving the impacted regional facility under the FDOT TRIP. Such coordination shall be ratified by the city through an interlocal agreement that establishes a procedure for earmarking of the developer contributions for this purpose.

(h)

Cross jurisdictional impacts.

(1)

In the interest of intergovernmental coordination and to reflect the shared responsibilities for managing development and concurrency, the city may enter into an agreement with one or more adjacent local governments to address cross jurisdictional impacts of development on regional transportation facilities. The agreement shall provide for application of the methodology in this section to address the cross jurisdictional transportation impacts of development.

(2)

A development application submitted to the city subject to a transportation concurrency determination meeting all of the following criteria shall be subject to this section:

a.

All or part of the proposed development is located within one mile of the area which is under the jurisdiction, for transportation concurrency, of an adjacent local government; and

b.

Using its own concurrency analysis procedures, the city concludes that the additional traffic from the proposed development would use [five percent or more of the adopted peak hour LOS maximum service volume] of a regional transportation facility within the concurrency jurisdiction of the adjacent local government ("impacted regional facility"); and

c.

The impacted regional facility is projected to be operating below the level of service standard, adopted by the adjacent local government, when the traffic from the proposed development is included.

(3)

Upon identification of an impacted regional facility pursuant to subsections (2)a.—c., the city shall notify the applicant and the affected adjacent local government in writing of the opportunity to derive an additional proportionate fair-share contribution, based on the projected impacts of the proposed development on the impacted adjacent facility.

a.

The adjacent local government shall have up to 90 days in which to notify the city of a proposed specific proportionate fair-share obligation, and the intended use of the funds when received. The adjacent local government must provide reasonable justification that both the amount of the payment and its intended use comply with the requirements of F.S. § 163.3180(16). Should the adjacent local government decline proportionate fair-share mitigation under this section, then the provisions of this section would not apply and the applicant would be subject only to the proportionate fair share requirements of the city.

b.

If the subject application is subsequently approved by the city, the approval shall include a condition that the applicant provides, prior to the issuance of any building permit covered by that application, evidence that the proportionate fair-share obligation to the adjacent local government has been satisfied. The city may require the adjacent local government to declare, in a resolution, ordinance, or equivalent document, its intent for the use of the concurrency funds to be paid by the applicant.

Development activities shall not be approved unless there is sufficient available capacity to sustain a level of service of five acres per 1,000 people for recreations facilities listed in section 7.11, Table 1, as established in the recreation and open space elements of the city comprehensive plan.

(a)

Future land use map amendments and development shall meet and maintain the adopted level of service as identified in section 7.11, Table 1, and shall be supported by adequate and relevant data and analysis demonstrating that the adopted hurricane evacuation level of service for the Category 5 evacuation area is maintained.

(b)

If the analysis indicates that the evacuation time level of service will not be achieved, then mitigation can be approved to the extent that it will maintain the adopted level of service.

(c)

Appropriate mitigation includes, without limitation, payment of money, contribution of land, and construction of hurricane shelters and transportation facilities. The data and analysis demonstrating adequate mitigation shall include identification of the type of improvement, the cost of the improvement and the timing of the improvement, and a binding agreement between the local government and the developer identifying the mitigation plan in terms of type of project(s), cost of project(s), and timing of project(s). Mitigation measures requiring publicly funded capital improvements to construct facilities shall be incorporated into the city five-year capital improvements schedule. Mitigation measures requiring privately funded capital improvements may be included in the capital improvements schedule, but need not be publicly funded.

(a)

Development activities shall not be approved unless there is sufficient available capacity to maintain the adopted level of service listed in section 7.11, Table 1, for public schools facilities.

(b)

The city will review development proposals in coordination with the school board to determine if the student capacity is available to support the development's impacts on the applicable LOS standard for each concurrency service area.

(c)

Developments will be required to have a concurrency clearance letter based on the short term and long term current five-year planning period from the school board before approval by the local governments.

(d)

Developments that can not get a public schools concurrency clearance letter will have the opportunity to pursue the proportionate share mitigation options referenced in the comprehensive plan, which include contribution of land, actual construction or expansion of school facilities, or contribution into a mitigation bank consistent with the interlocal agreement for public school facility planning.