11/21/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK 9 6 PA:JE 635 concurrency requirement. This proposed amendment to the capital improvements element would allow the county to apply the state's more flexible concurrency regulations. Although six types of facilities are subject to the state's concurrency mandate, the major focus is on transportation. Statewide, it has been the lack of adequate roads which has delayed or eliminated development projects. This has occurred not only because of the cost of building new roads or widening existing roads, but also because of the long lag time between identification of a roadway level -of -service problem and completing a major roadway improvement.project. For these reasons, the legislature recently modified several provisions of the state concurrency law. Among those changes, the most significant was a modification of when a roadway improvement would have to be in place in order to consider the capacity provided by the improvement available to accommodate the demands of new development. Previously, state law required that a roadway improvement necessary to serve a development project either be in place or be under construction prior to issuance of a development order for a project needing that improvement. Besides those transportation concurrency provisions, state law also allowed issuance of a development permit for a project, where roadways impacted by the project would not maintain adequate service levels, as long as the needed roadway improvements were guaranteed by an enforceable developer's agreement or an executed contract to be under construction within one year of development order approval, or were included within the first three years of the local government's or FDOT's five year capital improvements program with the condition that minimum level of service standards for the roadways be maintained. As amended, the state concurrency law now allows local governments to approve development projects where existing roads are inadequate to accommodate additional development, but necessary roadway improvements will be under construction within three years of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project. The major difference between state law as it was before and as it is now is that previously a local government could approve a development project where adequate roads to serve the project were not in place at the time of development order approval if the local government had requirements in place to ensure that adequate roads would be in* place to accommodate the project's impacts. Under present state law, a local government may approve a development project, where adequate roads to serve the project do not exist, even if the needed roadways will not be under construction until three years after issuance of the development project's certificate of occupancy --with no requirement to maintain minimum acceptable levels of service. To take maximum advantage of the more flexible state concurrency law, the county must amend the concurrency management plan component of its capital improvements element. The principal changes involve modifying the timeframe for commencing construction of a needed roadway facility to be constructed pursuant to a binding contract or a developer's agreement from one year after development order approval to three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project. In addition, the provision to allow issuance of development orders for projects needing roadway improvements reflected in the county's capital improvements plan must be modified. The modification of the portion of the Capital Improvements Element which allows roadway improvements within the county's capital improvement program to be considered in determining roadway capacity available for development projects involves several components. These are that the improvement must be in place or under construction not more than three years from issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a development project needing the improvement; that the capital improvements element include the improvement's estimated date of commencement of actual construction and the estimated date of completion; and that the Capital Improvements Element include a requirement that, if this allowance is used to meet the.concurrency requirement for a project, -then a comprehensive plan amendment will be required if any roadway improvement project needed to maintain levels of service is deferred, delayed, or eliminated. NOVEMBER 21, 1995 32 M M