HomeMy WebLinkAbout4114
>
ORDINANCE NO. 2008-4114
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 3079 (CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN)
AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED; REPEALING AND REENACTING
SCHEDULE Q: LEVEL OF SERVICE REQUIREMENTS AND
METHODOLOGIES; REPEALING AND REENACTING SECTION 1.0:
ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS; REPEALING AND
REENACTING SECTION 2.0: METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING
IMPACTS ON AVAILABLE CAPACITY; REENACTING SECTION 3.0:
DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE CAPACITY; REENACTING
SECTION 4.0: TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION
AREA (TCEA); REENACTING SECTION 5.0: PROPORTIONATE FAIR-
SHARE MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ON
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS; PROVIDING FOR THE INCLUSION
OF SECTION 6.0: PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY CONCURRENCY AS
MANDATED BY STATE LAW; PROVIDING FOR ENACTMENT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS;
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1: REPEAL OF SECTION 1.0: ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE
STANDARDS.
Section 1.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Sanford is hereby repealed.
SECTION 2. REENACTMENT OF SECTION 1.0: ADOPTED LEVEL OF
SERVICE STANDARDS.
The new Section 1.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan, is hereby enacted and the said Section 1.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 3. REPEAL OF SECTION 2.0: METHODOLOGY FOR
DETERMINING IMPACTS ON AVAILABLE CAPACITY.
Section 2.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Sanford is hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. REENACTMENT OF SECTION 2.0: METHODOLOGY FOR
DETERMINING IMPACTS ON AVAILABLE CAPACITY.
.
The new Section 2.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan, is hereby enacted and the said Section 2.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 5. REPEAL OF SECTION 3.0: DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE
CAPACITY.
Section 3.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Sanford is hereby repealed.
SECTION 6. REENACTMENT OF SECTION 3.0: DETERMINATION OF
AVAILABLE CAPACITY.
The new Section 3.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan, is hereby enacted and the said Section 3.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 7. REPEAL OF SECTION 4.0: TRANSPORTATION
CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA (TCEA).
Section 4.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Sanford is hereby repealed.
SECTION 8. REENACTMENT OF SECTION 4.0: TRANSPORTATION
CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA (TCEA).
The new Section 4.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan is hereby enacted and the said Section 4.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 9. REPEAL OF SECTION 5.0: PROPORTIONATE FAIR-5HARE
MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ON TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
Section 5.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Sanford is hereby repealed.
SECTION 10. REENACTMENT OF SECTION 5.0: PROPORTIONATE FAIR-
SHARE MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ON TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDORS.
The new Section 5.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan is hereby enacted and the said Section 5.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 11. ENACTING SECTION 6.0: PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY
CONCURRENY.
Ordinance No. 2008-4114
Page 2 of 4
Section 6.0 of Schedule Q of the Land Development Regulations of the
Comprehensive Plan is hereby enacted and the said Section 6.0 of this Ordinance is
hereby incorporated into the text of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
SECTION 12. SEVERABILITY.
If any section or portion of a section of this Ordinance proves to be invalid,
unlawful or unconstitutional, it shall not be held to impair the validity, force or effect or
any other section or part of this Ordinance.
SECTION 13. CONFLICTS.
That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same
are hereby revoked.
SECTION 14. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance and all incorporations therein shall
become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sanford, Florida;
and that the Sections of this Ordinance containing references to Chapters of the
Comprehensive Plan of the City may be renumbered or re-Iettered to accomplish such
intention; that the word "Ordinance," may be changed to "Section," "Article," "Chapter,"
or other appropriate word; provided, however, that Sections 8,9, 10 and 11 shall not be
codified.
SECTION 15. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except as otherwise provided herein, this Ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage and adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2008.
ATTEST: CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SANFORD, FLORIDA
~^.f&c~ r- ~n, M~YO~'
anet R. DOugherty,(2ity Cle Ordinance No. 2008-4114
0",,,.0 ~ nf it
CERTIFICATE
I, Janet R. Dougherty, City Clerk of the City of Sanford, Florida, do hereby certify
that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Ordinance No. 2008-4114, PASSED AND
ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida on the 23rd day of
June, 2008, was posted at the front door of the City Hall in the City of Sanford, Florida,
on the 25th day of June, 2008.
~1iIf<,.~
J et R. Dougherty, . y Cler
Ordinance No. 2008-4114
0",,,.0 it nf it
. .
,
SCHEDULE Q
LEVEL OF SERVICE REQUIREMENTS AND METHODOLOGIES
SECTION 1.0: ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
Level of service standards for those public facilities for which concurrency is required are set forth
below:
Concurrency Facilitv City of Sanford Adopted Level of Service
Sanitary Sewer +41132 gal/capita/day
Potable Water Ml 144 gal/capita/day
Fire Flow Residential: 600 gpm/20 psi
Non-residential: 1200 gpm/20 psi
Drainage Facilities
By Facility Type Facility Type Level of Service/Storm
Event(l)
RetentionlDetention for
parcels with positive outfall: 25 Year, 24 Hour
Retention for parcels
without positive outfall: 25 Year, 96 Hour
Closed drainage for urban
streets with piped drainage: 10 Year, 24 Hour
Open drainage for rural
streets with swales: 10 Year, 24 Hour
Canals, ditches, culverts, and
other off-the-premises facilities: 25 Year, 24 Hour
Bridges and major highway
crossmgs: 100 Year, 24 Hr.
(I) The design frequency may be increased if deemed
necessary the Administrative Official.
Q-l
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
. .
LOS Standard for Water Quality and Pollution Abatement
Pollution Abatement The City shall maintain the LOS standards included in the City's
current Land Development Regulations, Schedule 0:
Retention Facilities, pursuant to Schedule 0, Section 2.1, which are
as follows:
Retention of the First Half-Inch Runoff - Provide for either of the
following:
1. Off-line retention of the first one half (1/2) inch of runoff or
1.25 inches of runoff from the impervious area, whichever is
greater, or
2. On-line retention of an additional one half (1/2) inch of
runoff over that volume specified in subparagraph (1.) above.
Wet Detention Facilities, pursuant to Schedule 0, Section 2.2, which
are as follows:
Retention of Runoff - Pollution abatement shall be accomplished by
providing a treatment volume of the greater of the following:
1. First one-inch runoff; or
2. 2.5 inches of runoff from the impervious area.
Water Quality All storm water treatment and disposal facilities shall be required to
meet the design and performance standards established in Chapter
17-25, Section 17-25.025, F.A.C.
Treatment of the first inch of run-off on-site to meet water quality
standards required by Chapter 17-3, Section 17-3.051, F.A.C.
Stormwater discharge facilities must be designed so as not to
degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions
necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of
its classification as established in Chapter 17-3, F.A.C. Where a
conflict exists between two or more LOS standards, the more
restrictive shall be enforced.
Q-2
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
Recreation Areas LOS Standards for Recreation Areas:
Parks: 4 acres per 1,000 population
Solid Waste Solid Waste Disposal Level of Service
by Land Use and Landfill Facility
Land Use Facilities Level of Service
(pounds/capita/day)
Residential Osceola Landfill 1.88
GEL Landfill .15
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Res'l LOS: = 2.03
Non-
Residential Osceola Land Fill: = 2.46
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Citywide LOS: = 4.64
Note: Discontinuance of the Art Lane Landfill will result in increasing the LOS for disposal to the Osceola
Landfill by .15 pounds/capita/day.
Traffic Circulation The following peak-hour LOS standards shall apply:
Limited Access Facilities - 1-4 shall be at LOS "E". The Greeneway
shall be LOS "D".
State Principal Arterial Facilities (Not Classified as Backlogged) -
All State principal arterial facilities that are not classified as
backlogged or constrained shall operate at LOS "D" or better.
County Collector and Minor Arterial Facilities Not Within a County
Designated Urban Center - All County collector and minor arterial
facilities that are not within a County designated urban center shall
operate at LOS "D" or better.
City Collector Facilities - All City collector facilities shall operate at
LOS "D" or better.
All County collector and minor arterial facilities located within an
area designated as 1-4 High Intensity, Westside Industry and
Commerce and Airport Industry and Commerce on the Future Land
Use Map shall operate at LOS "E" or better.
Q-3
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
Public Schools To financially achieve the desired LOS standard, the following
tiered LOS standard is established for Concurrency Service Areas
as follows:
Percentage of Permanent FISH
Capacity
School Type 2008 - 2012 Beginning 2013
Elementary & Middle
CSAs 100% 100%
High School CSA 110% 100%
SECTION 2.0: METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING IMP ACTS ON
AVAILABLE CAPACITY
A. Roadways. In determining impacts on available capacity for roadways, the following
criteria shall be used:
1. Residential Development. For proposed residential development consisting of less
than fifty (50) dwelling units occurring in residential land use categories (excepting
planned developments), the following trip generation rates shall be used to calculate
the impact of the proposed development:
Land Use Type Trips Per Day
Single Family 10
Multiple Family 8
Mobile Homes 4.814
2. Non-Residential Development and Mixed-Use Planned Development (PD). For
all other development categories allowed within the Future Land Use Element, the
impacts of development shall be based on the peak-hour, peak direction trips
associated with the land use designation in which the proposed development shall
occur, using the most recent published edition of the Institute of Transportation
Engineers' Trip Generation manual, or as may be subsequently updated. Internal
capture rates may be considered in determining traffic volumes for mixed use
developments; however, the applicant shall bear the burden of demonstrating any
internal capture rates upon five (5) percent of the total nonresidential trips.
Roads analyzed shall include all links impacted by more than ten percent (10%) of
the project traffic or receiving five hundred (500) trips per day, whichever is greater.
Methodologies used to determine transportation concurrency shall be consistent
with methodologies established in the FDOT LOS Guideline.
3. Optional Methods and Procedures. If the preliminary level of service information
indicates a deficiency in capacity based on adopted level of service (LOS) standards
(reference Section 1.0 for adopted LOS standards for roadways), the developer has
Q-4
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
two alternatives:
a. Accept the level of service information as set forth in the comprehensive
plan;
b. Prepare a more detailed alternative Highway Capacity Analysis as outlined
in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board,
National Research Councilor travel time and delay study following the
procedures outlined by the Florida Department of Transportation, Traffic
Engineering Office in its Manual for Uniform Traffic Studies.
4. Alternative Methodologies. If the applicant chooses to do a more detailed analysis,
the applicant shall provide an acceptable methodology for preparing an alternative
analysis which has been approved by a professional competent in transportation
planning and/or engineering. Such an alternative methodology must be presented to
and approved by the Administrative Official.
If the alternative methodology, after review and acceptance by the Administrative
Official, indicates no deficiency in the capacity based on the adopted level of service
standard, whereas the comprehensive plan indicates a deficiency in capacity based
on the adopted level of service standard, the alternative methodology will be used.
However, the City shall, at its discretion, reserve the option to have the methodology
reviewed by a professional registered engineer or professional transportation planner
prior to accepting the methodology. The cost for such review shall be born by the
applicant after due notice from the City.
The trip distribution shall be consistent with the presets of the approved trip
generation model, i.e.: the Seminole County Trip Generation model, the Orlando
Urban Area Transportation Study (OUA TS) model, or another distribution model
approved by the City.
The impact area shall include adjacent roadway segments as determined by the
Administrative Official. The applicant may seek alternative trip allocations together
with a statement of trip allocation methodology consistent with professional
standards established in one (1) or more of the following documents:
a. Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, National
Research Council, 2000.
b. Florida Highway System Plan, "Traffic Analysis Procedures," Florida
Department of Transportation, Bureau of Multi-Modal Systems Planning,
most recent edition.
c. Florida Highway System Plan, "Level of Service Standards and Guidelines
Manual," Florida Department of Transportation, most recent edition.
d. Trip Generation, 6th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Q-5
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
e. Transportation and Land Development, Stover, Virgil G., Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 1988.
5. Traffic Analysis Required Where 500 or More Trips Are Generated Trips. All
new developments which are anticipated to generate five hundred (500) or more
trips per day shall be required to submit a traffic analysis prepared by a traffic
engineer licensed in the State of Florida which identifies the development's impact
on the City's transportation system. The City Administrative Official may also
require the submission of a traffic analysis for developments that generate less the
500 trips per day if the site location, anticipated total trip generation, circulation
patterns or other such factors warrant a more extensive review of traffic impacts.
The traffic analysis shall include the following:
1. Total projected peak-hour trips for the proposed development.
. pass-by capture rate (commercial land uses only);
. internal capture rate (planned development only);
. peak-hour external trips based on ITE Trip Generation Manual most
recent Edition; and
. peak-hour directional projected vehicle trips on all segments of the
arterial and collector street system which are adjacent to the
development project or as determined necessary by the
Administrative Official.
11. Design capacity of the accessed road(s).
111. Analysis of traffic distribution on the road network including all
links impacted by more than ten percent (10%) of proj ect traffic or
five hundred (500) trips per day, whichever is greater.
IV. Necessary operational improvements to the City, County, or State
maintained transportation system in order to maintain the appropriate
level-of-service for the roadway.
v. Other related information as required by the City.
VI. Justification, including appropriate references, for the use of any trip
generation rates, adjustments factors or traffic assignment methods
not previously approved by the City.
V11. The latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Trip Generation Manual shall be used to calculate these estimates.
Adjustments to these estimates may be made, based on special trip
generation information supplied by the applicant.
B. Other Facilities. The level of service standards for all concurrency facilities, except
Q-6
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
roadways and drainage, are based on population (or equivalent units of population)
served. Therefore, the applicant shall provide the Administrative Official with the
projected population to be served by the proposed development and describe how
surface water management criteria shall be met. The demand on concurrency
facilities generated by the applicant's development shall be determined as cited
below.
1. Solid Waste. The demand for solid waste collection and disposal capacity
shall be determined by multiplying the City's solid waste level of service
standard times the population (or equivalent units of population). Following
is the City's solid waste level of service standard:
Land Use Solid Waste
Pounds per Unit of Population
Residential 2.18
Non-Residential 2.46
2. Potable Water. The demand for potable water shall be determined by
multiplying the City's potable water level of service standard (i.e., 161
gallons per capita per day) times the population (or equivalent units of
population). In addition, the applicant shall ensure that the City's fire flow
requirements (cited in Section 1.0 of this Schedule) shall be met.
3. Sanitary Sewer. The demand for sanitary sewer collection and treatment
capacity shall be determined by multiplying the City's sanitary sewer level of
service standard of 147 gallons per capita per day by the population (or
equivalent units of population).
4. Drainage. The applicant shall provide evidence demonstrating that the
proposed project shall meet the City's adopted level of service standards for
drainage cited in Section 1.0 of this Schedule.
5. Recreation Area. The demand for recreation area shall be determined by
multiplying the City's recreation area level of service standard of 4 acres per
1000 population or .004 acres by each person served by the development.
6. See Section 6.0 for determination of impacts on public school capacities.
SECTION 3.0: DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE CAPACITY
For purposes of these regulations the available capacity of a facility shall be determined by adding
the cumulative total supply for each public facility component as cited below in subsections 3.0(A)
and (B) and subtracting cumulative total demand for each infrastructure component as cited below
in subsection 3.0(C).
Q-7
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
A. Indicators of Available Facility Capacity (Add):
1. Capacity of Existing Facility. The total capacity of existing facilities operating at the
required level of service; and
2. Capacity of Committed New Facility, Excluding Roadways. The total capacity of
committed new facilities, if any, that will become available on or before the date a
certificate of occupancy is issued for the development. The capacity of concurrency
facilities may be counted and deemed concurrent only if the following standards are met:
a. The necessary facilities and services are in place at the time a development permit is
issued; or
b. The development permit is issued subject to the condition that the necessary facilities
and services will be in place concurrent with the impacts of development; or
c. The necessary public facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable
development agreement to be in place concurrent with the impacts of development. An
enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development
agreements pursuant to Section. 163.3220, Florida Statutes, or an agreement or
development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. The agreement
must guarantee that the necessary facilities and services will be in place when the
impacts of the development occur.
3. Capacity of New Roadways. The total capacity of new roadways, if any, that will become
available on or before the date a certificate of occupancy is issued for the development. The
capacity of new roadways may be counted and deemed concurrent only if the standards of
Subsection 3.0(A)(2)(a-c) are met. In addition, roadway facilities will be deemed
concurrent based on the adopted Five-Year Capital Improvements program and schedule
which, as a minimum, satisfy the following criteria:
a. The Five-Year Capital Improvements Program must include improvements necessary to
correct any identified facility deficiencies and maintain adopted levels of service for
existing and permitted development; and
b. The Five-Year Capital Improvements Program must be a realistic, financially feasible
program based on currently available revenue sources; and development orders will
only be issued if the public facilities necessary to serve the development are
programmed to commence and become available within the first three years of the five-
year schedule of capital improvements.
c. The Five-Year Capital Improvements Program must identify whether funding is for
design, engineering, consultant fees, or construction and indicates, by funded year, how
the dollars will be allocated; and
d. The Five-Year Capital Improvements Program must identify both the year in which
actual construction of the roadway project will commence together with the anticipated
Q-8
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
.
fiscal year at which time construction will be finalized and functional operation of the
roadway facility begins. Actual construction and functional operation of the roadway
facility must commence on or before the third year of the Five-Year Schedule of Capital
Improvements; and
In the situation where scheduled projects occur in phases that become functionally
operational at the completion of each separate individual phase, the commencement and
completion dates for each independent phase will be identified in the Five-Year
Schedule of Capital Improvements; and
e. A plan amendment will be required in order to eliminate, defer or delay construction of
any roadway facility or service which is needed to maintain the adopted level of service
standard; and
B. Indicators of Cumulative Demand on Facility Capacities (Subtract):
1. Existing Demand Based on Existing Development. The demand for service or facility
created by existing development as provided by the Administrative Official or as
documented in the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan.
2. Demand to be Generated by Incomplete Approved Development. The demand for the
service or facility created by the anticipated completion of other approved developments.
SECTION 4.0 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA (TCEA).
The following regulations apply to development located within the Transportation Concurrency
Exception Area:
A. Purpose. The Transportation Concurrency Exception Area is established for the purpose of
downtown revitalization where the enforcement of the concurrency management system
will potentially conflict with revitalization of the Sanford downtown area. Transportation
programs and improvements within the TCEA shall emphasize pedestrian and transit modes
of transportation.
B. Applicability . The Transportation Concurrency Exception Area is hereby established
within the geographical area depicted in Map II-8 of the 2001 City of Sanford
Comprehensive Plan. Only areas located within the Central Business District, as delineated
on the Future Land Use Map, may be incorporated into the TCEA.
C. Transportation Concurrency Exemption. Transportation concurrency requirements shall
not apply to development or redevelopment within the TCEA.
D. Transportation Demand Management Programs. The purpose of the Transportation
Demand Management Program is to reduce the number of peak-period vehicle trips
generated in association with development; promote and encourage the use of alternative
transportation modes, such as ride sharing, carpools, vanpools, public transit, bicycles and
walking; and provide those facilities that support such alternate modes.
Q-9
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
Prior to the issuance of any approval for development or redevelopment in the TCEA, all
new employers in the TCEA with fifty (50) or more employees shall establish employer-
based transportation demand management programs. All programs shall be approved by the
Administrative Official and set forth in a recorded development order or agreement.
All Transportation Demand Management Programs shall include, at a minimum, any
combination of the following methods which together achieve the purposes of the program:
1. Alternative work schedules/flex time;
2. Preferential parking for carpool and vanpool vehicles;
3. Bicycle parking, locker and/or shower facilities;
4. Information center for transportation alternatives including, but not limited to, current
maps, routes, schedules for public transit, rideshare match lists; bicycle routes to the
workplace;
5. Bus stop improvements;
6. On-site child care facilities;
7. Facilities and equipment to encourage tele-commuting;
8. Local transportation management and roadway improvements;
9. Transit incentives for employees such as subsidy of bus passes, additional pay for car-
poolers, flexible work times, etc.
10. Plans for delivery of goods at off-peak hours; and
11. Plans and facilities for centralized deliveries of goods for multitenant facilities.
E. Transit Facility Evaluation. Prior to the issuance of any development approval for
property within the TCEA, all applications for development or redevelopment which exceed
twenty thousand (20,000) gross square feet shall submit proof of coordination with Lynx
regarding transit facilities necessary to serve the development. The developer/property
owner shall install improvements requested by Lynx unless otherwise waived by the
Administrative Official.
F. Watercraft Access. All retail commercial developments located adjacent to the waterfront
and proposing boat dock facilities shall provide temporary public docking facilities for their
customers.
G. Traffic Impact Monitoring. All applications for development or redevelopment located in
the TCEA which meet the criteria of Section 2.A.5 of this Schedule shall submit a traffic
impact analysis report pursuant to Article VIII of the Land Development Regulations.
H. Design Standards for Development located within the TCEA. The following design
standards shall apply to all development and redevelopment within the TCEA:
1. Building Orientation: The primary customer entrance of all commercial buildings shall
be oriented to face a public right-of-way unless it can be shown that there are
compelling site conditions that necessitate a different orientation.
2. Pedestrian Circulation. Direct pedestrian linkages shall be provided from all building
Q-1O
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
entrances to the surrounding streets, external sidewalks, transit stops and out parcels.
Pedestrian ways shall be lighted throughout the site in a consistent and coordinated
manner which provides safety and enhances the visual impact of the project on the
community. Lighting shall be designed so as to prevent direct glare, light spillage and
hazardous interference with automotive traffic on adjacent streets and all adjacent
properties.
3. Bicycle Parking Facilities. All site plans for the development or redevelopment of a
parcel of land located within the TCEA shall provide bicycle racks or other bicycle
parking facilities for customers and employees unless it can be show that there are
compelling site conditions that prevent the installation of such facilities.
4. Streetscape Design. All landscape and streetscape designs shall be compatible with
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Landscaping shall not interfere with the
convenient access of pedestrians and cyclists to the parcel proposed for development or
redevelopment and, to the greatest extent practical, the design of a site shall integrate
pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems within landscaping plans.
5. Transit Easements. All new development located within the TCEA shall be required to
dedicate an easement to the City of Sanford or to Lynx necessary to allow the eventual
provision of transit facilities including, but not limited to, benches, shelters, signage and
bus turnouts if requested by Lynx and if a rational nexus is found relative to the impacts
of the development and the easement is roughly proportional to those impacts.
I. Land Use Activities Prohibited. Within the TCEA, the following automobile-based land
uses shall be prohibited:
1. Drive-through facilities including restaurants and banks;
2. Automobile repair, service and sales;
3. Distribution centers;
4. Gas and service stations;
5. Car Washes.
SECTION 5.0 PROPORTIONATE FAIR-SHARE MITIGATION OF
DEVELOPMENT IMP ACTS ON TRANSPORT A TION
CORRIDORS
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 "City of Sanford Proportionate Fair-Share Program" or
"PFSP", as required by and in a manner consistent with S 163 .3180(16), F. S.
B. Legislative Findings
Q-ll
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
1. Transportation capacity is a commodity that has a value to both the public and private
sectors and the City.
2. Transportation capacity is an integral part of the PFSP.
3. The PFSP provides a method by which the impacts of development on transportation
facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors.
4. The PFSP allows developers to proceed under certain conditions, notwithstanding the
failure of transportation concurrency, by contributing their proportionate fair-share of
the cost of a transportation facility.
5. The PFSP 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;
6. The PFSP 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 (CIE).
C. Applicability
The PFSP shall apply to all developments in the City that have been notified of a lack of
capacity to satisfy transportation concurrency on a transportation facility in the City's
Concurrency Management System (CMS), including transportation facilities maintained
by FDOT or another jurisdiction that are relied upon for concurrency determinations,
pursuant to the requirements of Subsection F.
The PFSP does not apply to developments of regional impact (DRIs) using proportionate
fair-share under 9163.3180(12), F.S., or to developments exempted from concurrency as
provided in the City's Comprehensive Plan Objective 2-1.8: Transportation Concurrency
Exception Area and Objective 8-1.4 Concurrency Management.
D. 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 City's Comprehensive
Plan and all applicable land development regulations.
b. The City's five-year capital improvement program (CIP) or the long-term
schedule of capital improvements for an adopted long-term CMS includes
a transportation improvement(s) that, upon completion, will accommodate
additional traffic generated by the proposed development.
Q-12
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
,-
2. The City may allow an applicant to satisfy transportation concurrency through the
PFSP by contributing to an improvement that, upon completion, will
accommodate additional traffic generated by the proposed development but is not
contained in the CMS where one of the following apply:
a. The City adopts by resolution a commitment to add the improvement to
the five-year CIP in the CIE of the City's Comprehensive Plan or the
long-term schedule of capital improvements for an adopted long-term
CMS no later than the next regular update. To qualify for consideration
under this Subsection, the proposed improvement must be reviewed by the
City Commission or its designee and must be determined to be financially
feasible consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and in compliance
with the provisions of this Section. Financial feasibility means that
additional contributions, payments or funding sources are reasonably
anticipated during a period not to exceed ten (10) years to fully mitigate
impacts on the transportation facilities.
b. If the funds in the adopted five-year CIP are insufficient to fully fund
construction of a transportation improvement required by the CMS, the
City may reqmre a proportionate fair-share payment for another
improvement which will, the City determines will significantly benefit the
impacted transportation system. The improvement or improvements
funded by the proportionate fair-share component must be adopted into the
five-year CIP of the City's Comprehensive Plan at the next annual CIE
update.
3. Any improvement project proposed to meet a developer's fair-share obligation
must meet generally accepted design standards of the jurisdiction that has
responsibility for the construction and maintenance of the transportation facility.
E. Application Process
1. Upon notification of a failure to satisfY transportation concurrency, the
Administrative Official shall notify the applicant in writing of the opportunity to
satisfy transportation concurrency through the PFSP.
2. Prior to submitting an application for a proportionate fair-share agreement, a pre-
application meeting shall be held between the City and the developer 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. If the impacted facility is maintained by another
jurisdiction, then that jurisdiction will be notified and invited to participate.
3. Eligible applicants shall submit an application to the City that includes, at a
minimum and in addition to an application fee established by resolution of the
City Commission, the following:
Q-13
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
a. Name, address, and phone number of owner, developer and agent;
b. Property location, including parcel identification numbers;
c. Legal description and survey of the property;
d. project description, including type, intensity and amount of development;
e. Phasing schedule, if applicable;
f. Description of requested proportionate fair-share mitigation methods.
g. If applicable, evidence of an agreement between the applicant and the
FDOT if the facility is an SIS roadway or evidence of an agreement with
the jurisdiction responsible for the maintenance of the roadway.
h. A proposed proportionate fair-share agreement prepared by the applicant
including, but not be limited to, the amount of payment, description of
work and timing of payment.
4. The application for a proportionate fair-share agreement shall be processed in
conjunction with the development's application for development approval. The
City Attorney shall also review the proportionate fair-share agreement.
F. 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 SI63.3180(12), F .S., as follows:
Proportionate Fair Share = L[ [(Development Tripsj)/ (SV Increasei)] x Costi]
Where:
Development Tripsi = 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. (Only those
trips that trigger a deficiency are included.)
SV Increasej = Service volume mcrease provided by the eligible
improvement to roadway segment "i" per Subsection F.
CoSti = Adjusted cost of the improvement to segment "i". Cost shall include
all improvements and associated costs, such as design,
right-of-way acquisition, planning, engmeenng,
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 share obligations, the City shall
determine improvement costs based upon the actual cost of the improvement as
Q-14
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
,
obtained from the CIP, FDOT Work Plan or from the FDOT Transportation Costs
manual. For State road improvements not included in the adopted FDOT Work
Program, cost estimates shall be determined by the FDOT .
5. Improvement costs shall be escalated by the following formula:
Costn = Costo X (1 + Cost _growth 3yrt
Where:
Costn = The cost of the improvements in year n;
Costo = The cost of the improvement in the current year;
Cost_growth3yr = The cost over the last three (3) years;
n= The number of years until the improvement is constructed.
The three-year growth rate shall be determined by the following formula:
Cost_growth3yr = [Cost_growthl + Cost_growth2 + Cost_growth3]/3
Where:
Cost_growth3yr = The growth rate of costs over the last three (3) years;
Cost_growth_l = The growth rate of costs in the previous year;
Cost_growth_2 = The growth rate of costs two (2) years prior;
Cost_growth_3 = The growth rate of costs three (3) years prior.
6. If the City has accepted right-of-way dedication for all or a portion of 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 by the fair market value
established by an independent appraisal from an appraiser with MAl designation
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.
G. Impact Fee Credit for Proportionate Fair-Share Mitigation
1. Proportionate fair-share contributions shall be applied as a credit against impact
fees if the proposed improvement is included in the City's CIP and is on the list of
approved projects for arterial roads in the northern impact fee district in the most
recent County Impact Fee Ordinance and Technical Report. Credits will be given
for that portion of the impact fees that would have been used to fund the
improvements on which the proportionate fair-share contribution is calculated.
The City shall coordinate with Seminole County to determine the amount of the
credit and the eligibility of the project.
2. Any road impact fee credit based upon proportionate fair-share contributions for a
proposed development cannot be transferred to any other parcel or parcels of real
property within the City or otherwise.
Q-15
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
.
H. Appropriation of Fair-Share Revenues
1. Proportionate fair-share revenues shall be placed in the appropriate account for
funding of scheduled improvements or transferred to the jurisdiction having
responsibility for the transportation facility improvements.
2. In the event a facility improvement is removed from the CIP, then the revenues
collected for its construction may be applied toward the construction of another
improvement within that same corridor that would mitigate the impacts of
development pursuant to the requirements of Subsection D 2. b.
3. The City shall coordinate with other impacted jurisdictions and agencies to apply
proportionate fair-share contributions and public contributions to seek funding for
improving impacted regional facilities under the FDOT Transportation Regional
Incentive Program. Such coordination shall be ratified by the City through an
interlocal agreement that establishes procedures for earmarking a developer's
contribution for this purpose.
I. Intergovernmental Coordination
Pursuant to policies in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the City's
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 if the
proposed development is located within one (1) mile of an area which is under the
jurisdiction, for transportation concurrency, of an adjacent local government. An
interlocal agreement may be entered with other affected jurisdictions for this purpose.
SECTION 6.0: PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY CONCURRENCY
A. The following terms are used in discussing level of service standards for public schools:
Permanent Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH): meaning the permanent facilities
within the inventory of land. buildings and rooms in public educational facilities used by
the Florida Department of Education. Office of Educational Facilities: and
Concurrency Service Area (CSA): A geographic unit promulgated by the School Board
and adopted by local governments within which the level of service is measured when an
application for residential development is reviewed for school concurrency purposes. The
CSA coincides with groupings of school attendance zones within each school type based
on adjacency.
Level of Service (LOS) standard: A standard established to measure utilization of
capacity within a Concurrency Service Area (CSA). Current LOS within a CSA is
determined by dividing: the full-time equivalent student count (FTE) for the Fall Semester
at the same type of schools by the permanent FISH capacity of the same type of schools.
Q-16
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
"
Proiected or future LOS is determined by the dividing the proiected enrolled students at
the same type of schools within a CSA by the planned permanent FISH capacity of the
same type of schools.
B. Use of Concurrency Service Area (CSA) Boundaries. The City shall apply school
concurrency using CSA boundaries adopted by the School Board. The CSAs are
described geographically in Maps 1-3 of the support documents of the Comprehensive
Plan and may be updated from time to time by the School Board.
c. CSAs for Each Type of School. The CSA boundaries established by the School Board
will be based on clustered attendance zones for each school type (elementary, middle and
high school) based on adiacency and will be re-evaluated by the School Board, as needed.
D. Development Review Process. The city shall withhold or condition the approval of any
site plan, final subdivision, or functional equivalent for new residential units not
exempted from concurrency until a school capacity availability letter determination
(SCALD) has been issued by the school board to the city indicating that adequate school
facilities exist or until a mitigation agreement has been reached, pursuant to the
availability standard specified in section 163 .3180( 13 )( e ), Florida statutes.
E. Notification of Submittal of Residential Applications. The City shall notify the School
Board within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of any land use or development
application having a residential component and will transmit submitted subdivision plans
and site plans to the school board for their review.
F. Timin2 of Concurrency Review. The City shall require that all new residential
development be reviewed for school concurrency prior to the issuance of development
approval of a site plan, a final subdivision plan or the functional equivalent.
G. Residential Uses Exempt from the Requirements of School Concurrency. The
following residential uses shall be exempt from the requirements of school concurrency:
1. All single family lots of record at the time the school concurrency implementing
ordinance became effective on January 1. 2008.
2. Any new residential development that has a preliminary plat or site plan approval
or the functional equivalent for a site specific development order prior to the
commencement date of the School Concurrency Program on January 1,2008.
3. Any amendment to a previously approved residential development which does not
increase the number of dwelling units or change the type of dwelling units.
4. Any age-restricted community with no permanent residents under the age of 18 (a
restrictive covenant limiting the age of residents to 18 and older shall be required).
H. Results of Concurrency Review. The City shall not deny development approval due to
failure to achieve the adopted LOS for public school facilities when the following occurs:
1. Adequate school facilities are planned and will be in place or under construction
within three (3) years of the development approval.
Q-17
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
,
2. The developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation
proportionate to the demand for public school facilities consistent with the
methodology below.
I. Proportionate Share Miti!mtion. In the event there is not available school capacity to
support a development, the School Board may entertain proportionate share mitigation
options and, if accepted, shall enter into an enforceable and binding agreement with the
developer to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional
school capacity. Proportionate share mitigation allows a developer to pay that portion of
the cost of providing capacity in a school facility that is necessary to serve that particular
development or redevelopment proiect.
.L When the anticipated student impacts from a proposed development cause the
adopted LOS to be exceeded, the developer's proportionate share will be based on
the number of additional student stations necessary to achieve the established
LOS. The amount to be paid will be calculated by the cost per student station for
elementary, middle and high school as determined and published by the State of
Florida.
2. The methodology used to calculate a developer's proportionate share mitigation
shall be as follows:
Proportionate Share = (lDevelopment students - Available Capacity) x 2Total
Cost per student station
Where:
IDevelopment students = those students from the development that are assigned to
a CSA and have triggered a deficiency ofthe available capacity.
2Total Cost = the cost per student station as determined and published by the State
of Florida.
~ The applicant shall be allowed to enter a 90-day negotiation period with the School
Board in an effort to mitigate the impact from the development through the
creation of additional capacity. Upon identification and acceptance of a mitigation
option deemed financially feasible by the School Board, the developer shall enter
into a binding and enforceable development agreement with the School Board.
a. A mitigation contribution provided by a developer to offset the impact of a
residential development must be directed by the School Board toward a
school capacity proiect identified in the School Board's Five-Year Capital
Improvement Plan. Capacity enhancing proiects identified within the first
three (3) years of the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan shall be
considered as committed.
b. If capacity proiects are planned in years four (4) or five (5) of the School
Board's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan within the same CSA as the
proposed residential development. the developer may pay his
proportionate share to mitigate the proposed development.
c. If a capacity proiect does not exist in the Capital Improvement Plan, the
School Board will add a capacity proiect to satisfy the impacts from a
Q-18
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
.
,
proposed residential development, if it is funded through the developer's
proportionate share mitigation contributions. Mitigation options may
include. but are not limited to:
1. Contribution of land or payment for land acquisition suitable for
and in coni unction with. the provision of additional school
capacity; or
11. Mitigation banking based on the construction of a educational
facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits; or
111. Provide modular or permanent student stations acceptable for use
as an educational facilities; or
IV. Provide additional student stations through the remodeling of
existing buildings acceptable for use as an educational facility; or
v. Construction or expansion of permanent student stations at the
impacted school within the CSA; or
VI. Construction of a educational facility in advance of the time set
forth in the School Board's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan.
4. For mitigation measures (a) thru (f) above. the estimated cost to construct the
mitigating capacity will reflect the estimated future construction costs at the time
of the anticipated construction. Improvements contributed by the developer shall
receive school impact fee credit.
5. Developer shall receive an impact fee credit for the proportionate share
mitigation. Credits will be given for that portion of the impact fees that would
have been used to fund the improvements on which the proportionate fair share
contribution was calculated. The portion of impact fees available for the credit
will be based on the historic distribution of impact fee funds to the school type
(elementary. middle. high) in the appropriate CSA. Impact fee credits shall be
calculated at the same time as the applicant's proportionate share obligation is
calculated. Any school impact fee credit based on proportionate fair share
contributions for a proposed development cannot be transferred to any other
parcel or parcels of real property within the CSA.
6. A proportionate share mitigation contribution shall not be subsequently amended
or refunded after final site plan or plat approval to reflect a reduction in planned or
constructed residential density.
7. Impact fees shall be credited against the proportionate share mitigation total.
8. Any proportionate share mitigation must be directed by the School Board toward a
school capacity improvement identified in the School Board's Five-Year Capital
Improvement Plan.
9. Upon conclusion of the negotiation period. a second Determination Letter shall be
issued. If mitigation is agreed to. the School Board shall issue a new
Determination Letter approving the development subiect to those mitigation
measures agreed to by the local government, developer and the School Board.
Prior to. site plan approval. final subdivision approval or the functional
Q-19
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006
... .
.'
equivalent. the mitigation measures shall be memorialized in an enforceable and
binding agreement with the local government. the School Board and the
Developer that specifically details mitigation provisions to be paid for by the
developer and the relevant terms and conditions. If mitigation is not agreed to. the
Determination Letter shall detail why any mitigation proposals were reiected and
why the development is not in compliance with school concurrency requirements.
A SCALD indicating either that adequate capacity is available. or that there is not
a negotiated proportionate share mitigation settlement following the ninety (90)
day negotiation period constitutes final agency action by the School Board for
purposes of Chapter 120. F.S.
J. Appeal Process. A person substantially affected by a School Board's adequate capacity
determination made as a part of the School Concurrency Process may appeal such
determination through the process provided in Chapter 120. F.S.
Q-20
Ord. 4030 Nov.27, 2006