Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Packet 09-02-2008 Regular
City of Cape Canaveral CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY September 2, 2008 7:00 PM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: PRESENTATION: Tropical Storm Fay Report. BOARD INTERVIEW: Ralph S. Lotspeich, Jr.; Prospective Applicant, Code Enforcement Board. John Bond, Prospective Applicant, Board of Adjustment. REPORTS: City Manager Staff City Council AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD: Comments to be heard on items that do not appear on the agenda of this meeting. Citizens will limit their comments to five (5) minutes. The City Council will not take any action under the "Audience To Be Heard" section of the agenda. The Council may schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of July 15, 2008. 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 • SUNCOM: 982-1220 • FAX: (321) 868-1248 www.myflorida.com/cape • e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com F fCape Canaveral, Florida Council Regular Meeting Agenda September 2, 2008 Page 2 of 2 2. Resolution No. 2008-18; Reappointing Regular Members to the Planning and Zoning Board. (D. Dunn and H. Pearson) CONSIDERATIONS: 3. Motion to Approve: Emergency Stormwater Pumping Services, in the Amount of $49,500. 4. Motion to Approve: Waiver of Permit Fees until 03/02/09 Tropical Storm Fay Related Damage. 5. Motion to Approve: Proposal for the Design of the Southern Section of the Central Blvd. Canal. 6. Motion to Approve: Proposal for Construction Support of the Stormwater Baffle Box Installation at Central Blvd. 7. Motion to Approve: School Resource Officer Agreement with the City of Cocoa Beach. 8. Motion to Approve: Quarterly Treasurer's Report and Budget Transfers for the Quarter Ending June 30, 2008. 9. Motion to Approve: Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning. ORDINANCE: First Public Hearing: 10. Motion to Approve: Ordinance No. 09-2008; Adopting a Public School Facilities Element. DISCUSSION: 11. Cape Canaveral Lessons Learned as a Result of Fay. ADJOURNMENT: Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which recons includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office (868-1221) 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Presentation Item No. AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: PRESENTATION: TROPICAL STORM FAY REPORT DEPT/DIVISION: ADMINISTRATION/CITY MANAGER Requested Action: City Council will be provided a status report on the effects Tropical Storm Fay had on the City. Summary Explanation & Background: Tropical Storm Fay -Fast Facts: 1. City started to receive heavy rain from the East on Monday, August 18', 2. City received heaving rain from the West in the late evening hours of Wednesday, August 20' and the morning hours of Thursday, August 2151. This resulted in 21 inches of rain in Cape Canaveral, 3. Thus far, (80) homes have been damaged by flood waters with an estimated $1,896,000 in reported damage, 4. City staff is still working on storm recovery operations, 5. No reported injuries or loss of life due to this storm event. Exhibits Attached: Map of flooded areas City Mana ice Department Department ADMINISTRATION/CITY MANAGER i - cape- my ocum s\admin\council\meeting\2008\09-02-08\tsfay.doc of W bn ,� 1. o ❑ � o a� 1 L � < t 4 x ��•� II III I� x Y1 oil '*<. t � it ��� p� f «T 44 < � � .. YF �.h .. t � Y. •W ;E9 ILaOT4 `.i .. � � • r z R + § ! ASM ad vp#wf ani i WY of W CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL*��� INTMENT TO CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE tto Section 2171, Cape Canaveral Code • City Code requires prospective -and existing board members to fill out an application. City Code also prohibits a person from serving on a City Board or Committee if that person has been convicted of a felony, unless their civil rights have been restored. Please complete the following in the space provided: A. GENERAL 1. Applicant Name: `J [J 2. Home Address: / _5 tA� �L Uig / #7 Q(o C C 3. 4. 5. 6. B. Home Telephone: _ Occupation: 1EAA Business Telephone: _2 411 l :7 6v / / / u Business Address: LO B wk 2.,��4JJ v ?ATI?Iek ELIGIBILITY The information provided in this section is for purposes of determining whether you are eligible to serve on a City advisory board or committee. 1. Are you duly registered to vote in Brevard County? ml (N) 2. Have you been a resident of the City of Cape Canaveral for 12 months or longer? (Y) (N) 3a. Have you ever been convicted or found guilty, regardless of adjudication, of a felony in any jurisdiction? Any plea of nolo contendere (no contest) shall be considered a conviction for purposes of this question_ (Y) (N)_)� 3b. If yes to 3a, have your civil rights been restored? (Y) (N) 4a. Do you presently serve on any other City of Cape Canaveral advisory board or committee? (Y) (N) 4b. If yes to 4a, please list each: REJUN 3 0 2008 CEIVE D f, S. City ordinance requires that all persons applying for a City advisory board or committee must voluntarily consent to a standard criminal background check before being appointed to a board or committee. Do you voluntarily initials consent to having a standard background check performed on you by the City of Cape Canaveral? (Y) (N) ea. Are you related to a City of Cape Canaveral Council member by blood, adoption or marriage? (Y) (N) —X 5b. If yes to 6a, please provide name(s) of persons) and relationship to you: C. INTERESTSE"ERIENCE 1. Briefly state your interest in serving on a City advisory board or committ I' C90AI M 017, r T'ti AA/ _? /41) t j m.✓ I..Ao-,7j,—k d,«% AZA L, 2. Briefly state any prior experiences in serving on any governmental board or committee: nis AA;P %M N,i1 J d y li '�d'e� Sir � �Y�.P.r/r'�G'`st/.— 'RdAlzz)' ' l- 3. Please list any specialized skills and training (e.g., architect, engineer, general contractor, etc.) that you feel help to qualify you for membership on the desired board or committee: _ 4. In numerical sequence (1 = most interested), please rank which advisory board or committee on which you wish to serve: a. Beautification Board b. Board of Adjustment* C. Business and Cultural Development Board d.Code Enforcement Board* e. Community Appearance Board* f. Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals* g. Library Board h. Planning and Zoning Board* i. Recreation Board j. Other: *Members of these boards are required to complete and file with the Supervisor of Elections a Financial Disclosure Form upon appointment to said board and prior to July f of each year following the initial appointment while still a member of said board. Q CJ.e�- D. STATE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. Section 760.80, Florida Statutes, requires that the City annually submit a report to the Secretary of State disclosing race, gender and physical disabilities of board and committee members. Please check the appropriate boxes: RACE GENUER African-American Male Asian -American Female Hispanic -American Not Known Native American Caucasian DISABILITY Not Known Physically disabled YOU HEREBY REPRESENT TO THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY, THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL HAS THE RIGHT TO RELY ON THAT INFORMATION. YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS [SECTIONS 112.311-.326, FLORIDA STATUTES] AND THE FLORIDA 'SUNSHINE LAW' [SECTION 286.011, FLORIDA STATUTES], WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO YOU IF YOU ARE APPOINTED TO A CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE, AND IF APPOINTED, IT IS YOUR SOLE OBLIGATION AND DUTY TO COMPLY WITH SUCH LAWS. PLEASE NOTE: • Initial appointment to any City board is subject to City Council approval following a brief interview before the City Council at a regularly scheduled meeting. • Your application will remain effective for one year from the date of completion. • If you should have any questions regarding the completion of this application, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (321) 868-1221. Signature: /%t1l Date: t/ �/✓fL d Please return to: City of Cape Canaveral Office of the City Clerk 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 MEMORANDUM TO: Bennett Boucher, City Manger Susan Stills, City Clerk 41ell- FROM: Susan Chapman, Secretary, Board of Adjustment DATE: August 15, 2008 RE: Recommendation to City Council Potential Board Member John Bond At the Board of Adjustment meeting held on August 11, 2008, the Board interviewed Mr. John Bond, as a potential Board member. Following the interview and brief discussion, the Board unanimously recommended that Mr. Bond be appointed to the Board. CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE Pursuant to Section 2-171, Cape Canaveral Code City Code requires prospective and existing board members to fill out an application. City Code also prohibits a person from serving on a City Board or Committee if that person has been convicted of a felony, unless their civil rights have been restored. Please complete the following in the space provided: A. GENERAL 1. Applicant Name: ✓a'w 2. Home Address:City, State, Zip:�iG 3. Home Telephone: 37;r-/ • 79x1 • /7/0 4. Occupation: 5. Business Telephone: �Z/• Z58. ///y� 6. Business Address: B. ELIGIBILITY The information provided in this section is for purposes of determining whether you are eligible to serve on a City advisory board or committee. 1. Are you duly registered to vote in Brevard County? (Y) / (N) 2. Have you been a resident of the City of Cape / Canaveral for 12 months or longer? (Y) `� (N) 3a. Have you ever been convicted or found guilty, regardless of adjudication, of a felony in any jurisdiction? Any plea of nolo contendere (no contest) shall be considered a conviction for purposes of this question. (Y)(N) 3b. If yes to 3a, have your civil rights been restored? (Y) (N) 4a. Do you presently serve on any other City of Cape Canaveral advisory board or committee? (Y) (N) 4b. If yes to 4a, please list each: 5. City ordinance requires that all persons applying for a City advisory board or committee must voluntarily consent to a standard criminal background check before being appointed to a board or committee. Do you voluntarily initials consent to having a standard background check / performed on you by the City of Cape Canaveral? (Y) 1/ (N) 6a. Are you related to a City of Cape Canaveral Council / member by blood, adoption or marriage? (Y) (N) d 6b. If yes to 6a, please provide name(s) of person(s) and relationship to you:, C. INTERESTS/EXPERIENCE 1 WA Brieflv stat or committee: Briefly state any prior experiences in serving on any governmental board or committee: 3. Please list any specialized skills and training (e.g., architect, engineer, general contractor, etc.) that you feel help to qualify you for membership on the desired board or committee: 4. In numerical sequence (1 = most interested), please rank which advisory board or committee on which you wish to serve: a. Beautification Board b. / Board of Adjustment' C. Business and Cultural Development Board d. Code Enforcement Board' e. Community Appearance Board' f. Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals* g. Library Board h. Planning and Zoning Board* i. Recreation Board j. Other: *Members of these boards are required to complete and file with the Supervisor of Elections a Financial Disclosure Form upon appointment to said board and prior to July i of each year following the initial appointment while still a member of said board. D. STATE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. Section 760.80, Florida Statutes, requires that the City annually submit a report to the Secretary of State disclosing race, gender and physical disabilities of board and committee members. Please check the appropriate boxes: RACE GENDER African-American X Male Asian -American Female Hispanic -American Not Known Native American x Caucasian DISABILITY Not Known Physically disabled YOU HEREBY REPRESENT TO THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY, THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL HAS THE RIGHT TO RELY ON THAT INFORMATION. YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS [SECTIONS 112.311-.326, FLORIDA STATUTES] AND THE FLORIDA "SUNSHINE LAW" [SECTION 286.011, FLORIDA STATUTES], WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO YOU IF YOU ARE APPOINTED TO A CITY ADVISORY BOARD OR COMMITTEE, AND IF APPOINTED, IT IS YOUR SOLE OBLIGATION AND DUTY TO COMPLY WITH SUCH LAWS. PLEASE NOTE: • Initial appointment to any City board is subject to City Council approval following a brief interview before the City Council at a regularly scheduled meeting. • Your application will remain effective for one year from the date of completion. • If you should have any questions regarding the completion of this application, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (321) 868-1221. Signature: j - Date: Please return to City of Cape Canaveral Office of the City Clerk 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY July 15, 2008 7:00 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Bob Hoog Council Member Leo Nicholas Council Member Buzz Petsos Mayor Rocky Randels Council Member Shannon Roberts Others Present: City Manager Bennett Boucher City Attorney Anthony Garganese City Clerk Susan Stills Building Official Todd Morley Recreation Director Robert Lefever Public Works Director Walter Bandish Planning and Development Director David Barry Brown PRESENTATION: Phil Laurien, Executive Director, of the East Central Regional Florida Planning Council. Mr. Laurien provided a presentation using the City of Tavares as a model city for redevelopment planning. Mr. Laurien reviewed the challenges and the evolution of the City of Tavares' redevelopment in a waterfront area. Following the presentation, Mr. Nicholas pointed out that the City of Cape Canaveral was not in the same position as the City of Tavares. He stated his impression of what was done in Tavares as a more regional approach to redevelopment which included adjacent communities. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Bruce Collins, Canaveral resident, informed that Mt. Dora, Tavares, and Eustis were all part of what was known as "The Golden Triangle." Ms. Roberts pointed out that Mr. Ray Osborne had collected much of Cape Canaveral's heritage as well as the history of the Space Program. Ms. Roberts also referred to the anticipated events that the Recreation Director was planning for inclusion in the redevelopment effort. Mr. Petsos thanked Mr. Laurien for his presentation, but noted that the City was predominately residential on its ocean and the river borders. Mr. Petsos appreciated Mr. Laurien's comments, however, of a vision for the City in its entirety. Mr. Petsos posed the question of the length of time to establish a Community Redevelopment Agency and the amount of available funding for redevelopment. A resident voiced the need for the City, its residents and the Council to work cooperatively toward redevelopment. She pointed out how the Sea Oats project transformed the aesthetic of the beach. She stated that the City was not a way - station, but a destination. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog expressed his favor with redeveloping Cape Canaveral for shops, restaurants and updating the residential communities. Ms. Roberts mentioned that Mr. Laurien brought out that building height was not the predominate issue; however, the City did need to collectively gain a viewpoint of its desired outcome. Mr. Petsos agreed that height was not the only issue and for all to consider the City's planning from a comprehensive planning standpoint. Ms. Joyce Hamilton asked how Mr. Laurien planned to educate the community. Mr. Laurien explained that he would establish a base line of information about the community and how collective sharing of information would bring about a participatory consensus. Mr. Laurien explained further how identifying the evolving neighborhoods for redevelopment would be the first barrier breaker. He stated how the Visual Preference Survey for the City of Tavares helped the residents to agree on what type of architecture they desired in areas identified for redevelopment. Mr. Laurien concluded by informing how the Regional Planning Committee helped twelve communities change their outlook toward what they had initially planned, and he reminded that the purpose of planning should result in satisfaction while working towards community redevelopment. On a final note, the audience expressed their support for redevelopment for Cape Canaveral. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 3 of 8 REPORTS: City Manager • Mr. Boucher reported that the model Space Shuttle was in final production. He asked where the Council desired to place it. Council Members requested to place the shuttle back in front of City Hall on the State Road Al side of the building. • Mr. Boucher requested for Council Members to turn in their Application Forms to serve on any one or more of the Florida League of Cities committees. Mr. Boucher announced the next City Council Budget Meeting on Wednesday, July 16th at 5:30 P.M. Mr. Petsos informed that he would arrive late for that meeting. STAFF • Mr. Morley informed that he reviewed the Resort Dwelling properties with the Fire Chief. He would make a formal report at the Thursday, August 7th City Council Regular Meeting. CITY COUNCIL Council Members Roberts • Ms. Roberts requested a date for the Council and the audience to hear a presentation by Mr. Ray Osborne on his new book whose subject was Cape Canaveral. Mr. Boucher stated that he would like to schedule Mr. Osborne for a Council Meeting in which there were no other Presentations. Mr. Boucher reminded that he also planned to invite Ms. Laura Canady, Satellite Beach Planning Director, to a future City Council meeting. • Ms. Roberts inquired about the conceptual review process. She emphasized the need for clarity in the process with perhaps an Ordinance modification. Mr. Boucher replied that Mr. Brown was tasked with developing conceptual review policy. • Ms. Roberts inquired about the status of developing the Green Cities Initiative checklist. Mr. Bandish stated that he was following up on this issue. • Ms. Roberts inquired about the completion of the Goals and Objectives Meeting Minutes. Mr. Boucher replied that he was reviewing a draft set of those Minutes. • Ms. Roberts also inquired about the unfunded mandate letter to Senator Haridopolos. Mr. Boucher replied that the letter was in progress and its completion was based on the amount of supporting documents he needed to review. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 4 of 8 • Ms. Roberts inquired about the Gutter/Curb Program on State Road A1A and requested that this could become a priority initiative for the Brevard Metropolitan Planning Organization. • Ms. Roberts pointed out the need for an updated definition of the roles and responsibilities of the City's Boards. Ms. Roberts suggested that the Board Chairs meet to exchange information related to their interrelated projects and discussion matters. Ms. Roberts also suggested that reappointed Board Members return to the City Council to restate their goals and intentions as members of their respective Boards. Attorney Garganese explained how the Boards were unified under the Land Planning Code. He stated that Boards which were recommending bodies were subject to change at the Council's prerogative. After a brief discussion, the City Manager stated that he would obtain Ms. Roberts' information and schedule a meeting to redefine the roles and responsibilities existing Boards. Council Member Nicholas Mr. Nicholas requested an updated list of the Discussion Items that Council has brought out in previous meeting. The City Manager would provide that information. Council Member Petsos • Mr. Petsos inquired about funding for the bus shelters. Mr. Boucher replied that Mr. Ratliff had not yet heard back from Space Coast Area Transit. • Mr. Petsos referred to an E-mail referencing the impact of street lighting on State Road A1A to the sea turtles. City Manager made note to research the validity of this issue. • Mr. Petsos requested that the City's Planning and Development Director provide research from the Winter Springs Redevelopment Plan. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog • Mayor Pro Tem Hoog reported that Mr. Scott Dudley, Florida League of Cities, Senior Legislative Advocate spoke at the Space Coast League of Cities dinner meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog reported on discussion of a Home Rule Resolution. • Mayor Pro Tem Hoog requested again to see action taken on the streets lights on Thurm Blvd. Mayor Randels • Mayor Randels reported that Space Coast Area Transit had obtained $350,000 for the new Cocoa Beach Recreational facilities bus route. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 5 of 8 • Mayor Randels made note of the distributed 2008 General Election Schedule from the City Clerk's Office, especially for those involved in this year's election process. • Mayor Randels related that the Florida Legislature reduced the Florida Department of Transportation Budget by $1.3 billion. • Mayor Randels reported on the new Florida League of Cities Sister City Book noting that Cape Canaveral has four Sister cities: Guidonia Montecelio, Italy; Ithaca, Greece; Kloten, Switzerland; and Sagres, Portugal. • Mayor Randels reported that there were six Life Saver Bracelets available for public use. Mr. Nicholas suggested inquiring with the Condominium Associations toward their use. Mr. Petsos suggested that the Canaveral Precinct also make inquiries with Agencies that could use the Bracelets. • Mayor Randels reported on the new Bicycle Parking Shelter at Cape View Elementary School. • Mayor Randels reported that he was asked to give a presentation to St. John's River Water Management District related to the reclaimed water use reduction. • Mayor Randels noted that he planned to discontinue some of his volunteer work with the following agencies and was willing to offer this opportunity to any other interested Council Member: the Girl Scouts Citrus Council, Small Business Development Center and the National League of Cities. AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD: • Ms. Joyce Hamilton announced that on Saturday, August 2"d from 10 A.M. to 2 P.M., the Recreation Department will hold a Kids Awareness Day. The event included a backpack distributed and filled with school supplies, a bicycle rodeo, and the Kiwanis Club would serve hot dogs and soft drinks. CONSENT AGENDA: City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2008. Mayor Randels acknowledged the corrections to the Meeting Minutes from Ms. Roberts. A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to Approve the City Council Meeting Minutes as Amended. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 6of8 CONSIDERDATIONS: 2. Motion to Approve: Sewer Line Relocation at the Intersection of Central Blvd. and N. Atlantic Avenue. Ms. Roberts asked if any of the vendors that submitted Bids were from Cape Canaveral. Mr. Bandish replied that there was no City business that could perform this type of utility work. Mr. Bandish informed that Brevard County refused to pay for any part of the relocation work. Ms. Roberts stated that the City should seek assistance from the County toward the funding. Ms. Roberts requested a schedule for the Relocation work from the Public Works Director. Mr. Bandish reminded that the project was subject to the weather; however, he would provide any information related to the project. A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to Approve the Sewer Line Relocation at the Intersection of Central Blvd. and N. Atlantic Avenue. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. 3. Motion to Approve: Bid Award for Bid No. 08-03, City Oral History Project. Mr. Boucher reported on the three Bid Submittals and their proposed costs. Mr. Boucher introduced Mr. David Stanley of Da/Vid Productions as his recommendation to provide the Oral History video. Mr. Stanley explained that he planned to have Mr. Bill Larsen, a well-known commentator, conduct the interviews. Mr. Stanley had developed the video for the City of Satellite Beach which was a series of interviews threaded into a storyline. Discussion brought out that the Satellite Beach video captured oral histories while the City of Cocoa Beach was a written history. Mr. Nicholas emphasized the need to gain these interviews before the loss of any other prominent Cape Canaveral citizens. Mr. Petsos stated that he desired to have the video specifically capture Cape Canaveral. Mr. Stanley stated that he focused on research prior to any drafts, and he planned to conduct review steps before the final production. Ms. Roberts brought out that courtesy copies of videos were provided to those who participated in the Kennedy Space Center [KSC] Oral History interviews and she hoped that the City would do the same for its interviewees. Ms. Roberts referred to Mr. Stanley's pricing stating that, at the high end, Mr. Stanley's production cost was estimated at $21,000. Mr. Boucher informed that the number of contributing interviews was essential to the pricing. Mr. Stanley explained that the contributing interview times varied. Ms. Roberts brought out City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 7 of 8 how as the project unfolds, cost could increase. Mr. Boucher specified that the number of interviews would need to fit within a 90 -minute timeframe. Ms. Roberts brought out that there were two separate Oral History products: 1) a video history of how the City evolved, and 2) how these individuals came to live in Cape Canaveral. Mr. Petsos asked who would own the originals. Mr. Stanley clarified that the master video belonged to the City. Mr. Ray Osborne informed about his book, "Images of America," Cape Canaveral. Mr. Osborne stated that when he drafted his Proposal, he planned to use serial footage along with the interviews and to obtain a unique song for the City by composer, Chris Kall. Mr. Osborne saw the project as a collective process. Mr. Osborne concluded that he could also seek an interview with former Mayor John Porter whose administration carried an optimistic mood of City volunteerism. Mr. Boucher asked Mr. Osborne if he ever actually produced a video. Mr. Osborne clarified that he had shot video clips. Mr. Petsos questioned Mr. Thomas Funk's purpose. Mr. Osborne explained the Mr. Funk was a high-school teacher who could assist with a proposed, archeological dig, as outlined in his proposal, with the property owner's permission. Mr. Boucher stated that when he reviewed the Oral History Proposals he sought those firms which had the technical and professional experience. Mr. Stanley stated that the City of Satellite Beach did not seek a cost proposal; therefore, he included an hourly rate in order to address any unforeseen cost that Cape Canaveral may encounter. Mr. Stanley explained that the City of Satellite Beach's project increased significantly based on some additional factors such as a premiere which included projector, screen, and other video amenities. Ms. Laura Foley, a resident, advised that the Council come to technical decisions early in the process in order to determine a cost. She recommended that the Council narrow the scope of their interviewees. A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to extend the Meeting Until 10:15 P.M. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. Ms. Roberts asked if Mr. Osborne could provide consultation to the awarded project; however, it was advised that this was not feasible. Ms. Roberts clarified that Mr. Stanley had the technical experience in video production; however, Mr. Osborne had the historical perspective of the City. Mr. Boucher emphasized how the City Council could control the number of interviews and thereby control the cost. Mr. John Johanson stated that the Council needed to identify who they desired to interview. Ms. Valerie Tenson, Da/Vid Productions scriptwriter, explained the evolving script writing process and City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Regular Meeting July 15, 2008 Page 8 of 8 she stated that an upfront script was more costly than an evolving script. However, Mr. Chuck Briggs pointed that the Council was attempting to vote on a cost without a company to perform the job. A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Award Bid No. 08-03 to David Stanley, of Da/Vid Productions, Inc. The vote on the motion carried 4-1 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, Against; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 10:15 P.M. Rocky Randels, MAYOR Susan Stills, CMC, City Clerk Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Consent Item 2 No. Resolution No. 2008-18 AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2008-18 REAPPOINTING REGULAR MEMBERS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE Requested Action: City Council consider the adoption of Resolution No. 2008-18, reappointing Donald Dunn and Harry Pearson as regular members of the Planning and Zoning Board. Summary Explanation & Background: Terms will expire 09-15-2011. Exhibits Attached: Resolution No. 2008-18 City Manages Office-, Department LEGISLATIVE �ents\a i it'\meeting\2008\09-02-08\2008-18 doc RESOLUTION NO. 2008-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA; REAPPOINTING REGULAR MEMBERS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, has by City Code Section 58-26 has created a Board known as the Planning and Zoning Board; and WHEREAS, it is now incumbent upon the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral to re -appoint Regular Members to said Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, as follows: SECTION 1. Donald Dunn and Harry Pearson are hereby re -appointed as Regular Members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, with terms to expire on September 15, 2011. SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this day of 2008. ATTEST: RgCky Randels, MAYOR Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Susan Stills, CITY CLERK Buzz Petsos Rocky Randels Shannon Roberts APPROVED AS TO FORM: Anthony Garganese, CITY ATTORNEY FOR AGAINST ivn . vcn izau Uu1 n I 8702 Hibiscus Court Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Dear Mr. Dunn: City of Cape Canaveral j D AUG i •i 2008 j Your term on the Planning and Zoning Board expires on September 15, 2008. Please check the box that indicates your desire to continue to serve on the Board for another 3 -year term and return this notice immediately to your Board secretary or the City Clerk. The resolution to re -appoint you as a Board member is scheduled to appear on the City Council Agenda of Tuesday, August 19, 2008. Thank you. 4 1 DO wish to be considered for reappointment. I DO NOT wis to be considered for reappointment. (Signature) Donald Dunn, Board Member Sincerely, a Mia Goforth, Administr ive Assistant City Clerk's Office Cc: Susan Chapman Secretary, Planning & Zoning Board 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 • SUNCOM: 982-1220 • FAX: (321) 868-1248 www.myflorida.com/cape • e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com City of Cape Canaveral CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL Mr. Harry Pearson 8703 Camelia Court Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Dear Mr. Pearson: Your term on the Planning and Zoning Board expires on September 15, 2008. Please check the box that indicates your desire to continue to serve on the Board for another 3 -year term and return this notice immediately to your Board secretary or the City Clerk. The resolution to re -appoint you as a Board member is scheduled to appear on the City Council Agenda of Tuesday, August 19, 2008. Thank you. a DO wish to be considered for reappointment. ❑ 1 DO NOT wish to be considered for reappointment. (Signature) Harry Pearson oa mber Sincerely, Mia Goforth, Adrninistra a Assistant City Clerk's Office Cc: Susan Chapman Secretary, Planning & Zoning Board 105 Polk Avenue- - Post Office Box 326 - Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 - SUNCOM: 982-1220 - FAX: (321) 868-1248 wwwmyflorida.com/cape - e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Consideration Item 3 No. Exhibits Attached: AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY STORMWATER PUMPING SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,500 DEPT/DIVISION: PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER Requested Action: City Council consider approval of emergency stormwater pumping services in the amount of $49,500 to Atlantic Development of Cocoa, Inc. as recommended by the assistant public works director. Summary Explanation & Background: See attached memo. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: Public Works Director's Memo dated 08-28-08 City Mana a •' ice /', Department PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER x capeim\myd cum admin\c eeting\2008\09-02-08\pumping.doc To: Bennett Boucher — City Manager Through: Walter Bandish — Public Works Director From: Jeff Ratliff — Assistant Public Works Director Date: August 28, 2008 Re: Agenda Item for September 2, 2008 Council Meeting Contractor Fees - Tropical Storm Fay Due to the excessive amount of rainfall from Tropical Storm Fay, the City of Cape Canaveral (City) contracted with Atlantic Development of Cocoa, Inc., for the following activities: • Pumping of stormwater from the Central Drainage Basin (Harbor Heights, Ocean Woods, etc.) — stormwater pumped into the Central Ditch; and • Pumping of stormwater from the Solana/Shorewood communities — stormwater pumped through Port Canaveral into the ship channel. The contracted activities, which included pump rentals, fuel charges, and contractor personnel fees, were initiated on Thursday, August 21 immediately following the storm. The initial activities included the pumping of stormwater from the City's stormwater pipe located at the Central Ditch baffle box — this pumping was continued for approximately 24 hours to assist in the removal of stormwater from the Central Drainage Basin. Upon the completion of these activities, the City initiated the pumping of stormwater from the Solana/Shorewood communities, which experienced extensive street flooding. This pumping was initiated on Friday, August 22 and will continue through Monday, September 1. Based upon (1) future observations of the water levels in the wet detention ponds at the Solana/ Shorewood communities and (2) projected tracks of hurricanes, these pumping activities may be resumed to draw down the water levels in the Solana/Shorewood communities. Expenses from Thursday, August 21 through Monday, September 1 are estimated at $49,500. Recommendation: Recommend the approval of funds ($49,500) to Atlantic Development of Cocoa, Inc., for costs associated with the pumping of stormwater from the Central Drainage Basin and the Solana/Shorewood communities (Tropical Storm Fay). The exact amount due is yet to be determined and will be based upon any required future activities. Funds were not included in the City's budget for these activities — funds are available from the City's Stormwater Fund — Contingency (403-018-538-990000). Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date 09-02-08 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA Heading Considerations Item 4 No. Exhibits Attached: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: WAIVER OF PERMIT FEES UNTIL 03-02-09 FOR TROPICAL STORM FAY RELATED DAMAGE DEPT./DIVISION: BUILDING DEPARTMENT Requested Action: City Council consider the waiver of building permit fees until 03-02-09 for Tropical Storm Fay related damage. Summary Explanation & Background: The City Council has waived permit fees for past storm events. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: N/A City Manager' -5 O �' Department BUILDING DEPARTMENT ca \ki \m cuments\admin\c 1\ ounce meeting\2008\09-02-09\permits.doc Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Consideration Item 5 No. The scope of the project includes the following: AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: PROPOSAL FOR THE DESIGN, PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTION OF THE CENTRAL BLVD. CANAL DEPT/DIVISION: PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER Requested Action: City Council consider the approval of the proposal from Stottler, Stagg & Associates for the design, permitting and construction support services of the southern section of the Central Blvd. Canal in the amount. of $20,900 as recommended by the assistant public works director. Summary Explanation & Background: See attached memo and proposal. The scope of the project includes the following: • Clearing and demucking of major north/south reaches of the drainage way, • Sloping of the eastern banks of the drainage way, • Protect the sanitary sewer main on the eastern bank. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: Public Works Memo/Proposal City Mana s ffice Department PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER ca - kim\ ydocu s\admin\council\meeting\2008\09-02-08\canal.doc To: Bennett Boucher — City Manager "Through: Walter Bandish — Public Works Director From: Jeff Ratliff — Assistant Public Works Director Date: August 25, 2008 Re: Agenda Item for September 2, 2008 Council Meeting Engineering Fees Central Ditch Stormwater Improvement Project South Portion The City of Cape Canaveral (City) has received a Stormwater Management Project Cost - Sharing Grant ($115,000) from the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) to fund stormwater improvements to the South Central Ditch. This is a 50150 grant match — a project budget summary and a project activity summary are attached. This portion of the Central Ditch is located from West Central Boulevard south to State Road AIA; however, due to the limited amount of funds, work will be concentrated in the vicinity of West Central Boulevard and immediately south (see attached map). The project is scheduled for completion in early -2009. Stottler Stagg & Associates (SSA) has submitted a cost estimate for $20,900 to provide (1) design engineering drawings, (2) environmental permit applications, (3) construction bid documents, (4) construction monitoring services, and (5) certification of the completed project. Recommendation: Recommend the approval of funds ($20,900) to SSA for completion of engineering tasks for the Central Ditch Stormwater Improvement Project — South Portion. Funds have been budgeted under the City's Stormwater Fund (403-018-538-631001). August 7, 2008 SSA Jeff Ratliff City of Cape Canaveral 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 RE: SSA Fee Proposal for Design of Central Avenue — South Ditch Dear Jeff: Per your request, Stottler Stagg & Associates, Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc. (SSA) is pleased to present our engineering proposal for preparation of construction design drawings and permit applications of the southern segment of the Canaveral drainage way. Specifically this canal segment begins at Central Ave and discharges into the box culverts at SR A1A. As this canal improvement has shared grant monies involved, the following design criteria will be considered: ■ Clearing and demucking of major north/south reaches of drainage way ■ Sloping of eastern banks of drainage way ■ Prgtect sewer line SSA will use recent topographic surveys of the drainage way for design and this work will be proposed within the existing drainage easements. SSA's specific scope of work will be as follows: SSA SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1 — Regulatory and City Coordination SSA will coordinate with the St Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and the Army Co., -ns of Engineers (ACOE) to determine permit application criteria and environmental concerns. (It is anticipated that both manatees and wood storks may have to be addressed in the applications.) SSA will also meet with the City's project manager to review the existing project database and special criteria associated with the project. Task 2 — Environmental Evaluation SSA will prepare an environmental evaluation regarding impacts on manatees in the drainage way and proposed improvements. Task 3 — !preliminary Design Drawings SSA will pFepare preliminary construction drawings that will provide the following: • Cover and location map • Drainage way Cross Section sheets • Plan and Profile sheets • Typical Sections • NPDES Plan STOTTLER STAGG & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS, INC. 8680 North Atlantic Avenue P. 0. Box 1630 Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 Tel 321-7831320 Fax 321-783.7065 *ileserverlusersWc_=, SottorivalCIVIL1Projects\PROPOSAL'�City of C14FL'dnavAJr� oposalslp-JEfFAW7Msign central a094WWoc Mr. Jeff Ratcliff August 7,; 2008 Page 2 SSA Fee Proposal of Central Ave — South Ditch Task 4 - Preparation of Regulatory Applications SSA will prepare construction permit applications for the SJRWMD, ACOE and NPDES. All agency processing fees will be paid for by the City. The ACOE will require 81/2" x 11" drawings with dredge and fill quantities calculated. SSA will include one request for additional information (RAI) for each agency. If further requests are made, SSA will treat this as an additional service under our City contract. Task 5 — Final Drawings / Bid Documents Based on regulatory permit responses (and City review) SSA will finalize the construction drawings. Technical specifications will be prepared for inclusion to City bid documents. Task 6 —Construction Support SSA will support this project by providing the following limited construction services: ■ Attend pre -construction meeting with Contractor and City. ■ Provide limited onsite support through for site observations of the work. ■ Provide project certification using contractor supplied record drawings. SCHEDULES AND FEES Schedules: Upon receipt of a City Purchase Order SSA will complete Tasks 1 — 3 in forty five (45) working days. This time will allow environmental inputs to be obtained and reviewed with the City. Final schedules will be determined following inputs from the regulatory groups. Fees: SSA's fee for Tasks 1 thru 6 will be Lump Sum Fees of $20,900. This fee will be invoiced monthly based on a percentage of work completed and payment will be due within fifteen (15) days of receipt. Printing for agency permit applications and five (5) sets of final drawings for the City are included in this fee. Additional work authorized in writing by the City that is not specifically included in this proposal will be deemed as additional services upon City's written authorization to proceed and will be billed at SSA's standard hourly rates or negotiated as a lump sum prior to beginning work. Out- of-pocket expenses for hourly work and additional printing will be billed with a fifteen percent (15%) mark-up. Compensation rates are based on ordinances, regulations and procedures in force on the execution date of this Agreement by the appropriate governing bodies having jurisdiction over the project. Any significant modification in these ordinance, regulations, procedures, etc. shall be justification for re -negotiation for the compensation due to the Consultant for the work involved. It is understood that any and all professional liabilities incurred by SSA throughout the course of rendering professional services on this project shall be limited to a maximum of the net fee received by SSA, not including reimbursable expenses and sub -consultants, for all services Uileserveftsers\Joan Sotto6va\CIVIL\Projects\PROPOSAL1City of Cape Canavera0008 Proposalslp-JEFF RATLIFF design central ave - south ditch.doc Mr. Jeff Ratcliff August 7, 2008 SSA Fee Proposal Page 3 Design of Central Ave — South Ditch rendered on the project. Should it become necessary to obtain a third party to collect our fees for services, the City hereby agrees to pay all costs of such collections including Attorney's fees. The City and SSA respectively bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representative to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants to this Agreement. Neither the City nor SSA shall assign, sublet or transfer any interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. The terms and conditions of this proposal are effective through September 15, 2008. Acceptance after this date may necessitate increased fees or altered conditions. Jeff, your authorization of this proposal can be accomplished by the appropriate City signature below and our receipt of both a signed copy and a City Purchase Order. SSA is looking forward to working with the City on this project in Cape Canaveral. Sincerely, Stottler Stagg & Associates Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc. John A Pekar, PE Senior Vice President JAP/cs ACCEPTANCE: TITLE: DATE: \\Fileservehusers\Joan Solforiva\CIVIL\Projects\PROPOSALICity of Cape Canaveral\2008 Proposals\p-JEFF RATLIFF design central ave - south dilch.doc $$0$ 08 $o0 0008 0 00 0000 marcs a�a_' �i o o0oc o a o a m N N H N H N H M H M r2 o a i n a s o S «mo g g U " w M H M N N= O O N N O O o N m H N H M O O a V N b O J = O O O a m 00 0 $ $ $ $ S m n $ S $$$ g o 0 e U lo 2 O O 1O m m N H 1. S $ 8 $$$ 0 0 0 « O o b b Y b N M Y O 1- Jb H N N a` 3= mrc c W H N M O w= O O O O O 8S $$$S $S 81818 Y « m 6 6 0« C � W aC x H M o H M 0 o H N N m v 0 0'0 N e 00 o 0 $S o d $$000 c c o d $S o 0 000S o a 1. H N H N H N Q x N N m H $ S C $ S 6 o a K O H M D w M H M H M N L a N Y 1� M Y 1� f Y N b Y 19 Y IW � L N Y� j o f `o c co 3 0 o Q U U E in o a Z c F _ oo a O f - o a q C ° U W eUW o a w m Iol- m `r'r=¢z anaoa �=o ra N Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 r AGENDA Heading Consideration Item Summary Explanation & Background: No. I recommend approval. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: PROPOSAL FOR CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT OF THE STORMWATER BAFFLE BOX INSTALLATION AT CENTRAL BLVD. DEPT/DIVISION: PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER Requested Action: City Council consider the approval of the proposal from Stottler, Stagg & Associates to provide construction support services for the installation of the stormwater baffle box located at Central Blvd. in the amount of $13,200 as recommended by the assistant public works director. Summary Explanation & Background: See attached memo and proposal. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: Public Works Memo/Proposal City Mana a•' ffic Department PUBLIC WORKS/STORMWATER c kit ents\admin\council\meeting\2008\09-02-08\bafflebox.doc To: Bennett Boucher — City Manager Through: Walter Bandish — Acting Public Works Director From: Jeff Ratliff — Stormwater Administrator Date: August 25, 2008 Re: Agenda Item for September 2, 2008 Council Meeting Construction/Project Certification Services Central Ditch Stormwater Improvement Project — North Portion The City of Cape Canaveral (City) has received a Section 319 grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) in the amount of $314,770 to fund stormwater improvements to the North Central Ditch. This is a 60/40 grant match — a project budget summary and a project activity summary are attached. This portion of the Central Ditch is located from West Central Boulevard northward to Port Canaveral; however, this work will be concentrated immediately north of West Central Boulevard. The project is scheduled to begin in approximately 60 days (waiting on construction of the nutrient - separating baffle boxes). Stottler Stagg & Associates (SSA) has submitted a cost estimate for $13,200 to provide (1) construction monitoring services and (2) certification of the completed work. Recommendation: Recommend the approval of funds ($13,200) to SSA for completion of construction monitoring/project certification services for the Central Ditch Stormwater Improvement Project — North portion. Funds have been budgeted under the City's Stormwater Fund (403-018-538-631001). August 22, 2008 SSA Jeff Ratliff City of Cape Canaveral 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 RE: SSA Fee Proposal for Construction Support of the Baffle Box installation at Central Ave. Dear Jeff: Per your request, Stottler Stagg & Associates, Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc. (SSA) is pleased to present our engineering proposal for construction support of the baffle box project in the North Central Avenue drainage way. This project will involve the installation of three (3) major baffle boxes with additional supportive drainage structures. Regulator�yl permits with the ST. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and Army Corps of engineers (COE) will require strict adherence to approved permit conditions. SSA's specific scope of work will include: SSA SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1 — Pre Construction Meeting with Contractor SSA will attend a pre -construction meeting with the selected contractor and City staff to review the proposed work and regulatory requirements. Key issues to be reviewed include: • Review of new sewer replacement line • Ccntractor's maintenance of traffic plan • Ccntractor's dewatering plan • Regulatory permit conditions • Erasion and silt control • Ot'?er project issues involving testing, reporting and contract documents. Task 2 — review of Shop Drawings SSA will ebview the contractor approved shop drawings for the baffle boxes (3) and related drainage Aructures. SSA will either note changes to comply with approved plans (and send back to contractor) or approve shop drawings for construction. Task 3 — �urvey Control SSA will provide survey control reference stakes for the contractor. These reference points will be review�:d with the contractor in the field. Task 4 — �'ontractor / City / Coordination Meetings Througho;at the course of the work, SSA will attend up to three (3) team meetings to coordinate the field construction. SSA will provide written responses to the Contractor and City regarding requests for additional information. SI'OTTLER STAGG & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS, INC. 8680 North Atlantic Avenue P. 0. Box 1630 Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 Tel 321-7831320 Fax 321-783-7065 11Fileserver usersUoan Sottoriva\CIVIL]P.oi2cts\PR0P0SA.LICity of Cape Canaverah201m'PrD�osarstipW- 4TUFF consAFAWR;afBe box insddV9W*1 Ave.doc Mr. Jeff Ratcliff July 24, 2008 SSA Fee Proposal Page 2 Construction Support of the Baffle Box installation at Central Ave. Task 5 — Construction Observations / Reports SSA will perform weekly inspections on the construction work and provide summary reports to the City, Qn the project. Contractor monthly draws will also be reviewed by SSA to support the City in approving payments. Task 6 — Proiiect Closeout and Certification Upon receipt of the Contractor record drawings, SSA will perform a project walk thru with the City's Contractor. Items not completed in accordance with the approved plans and permits will be put on,a punch list to the contractor. Once all work is satisfactorily complete, SSA will prepare an engineers certification of completion for SJRWMD. SCHEDULES AND FEES Schedules: Upon the Contractor signing an agreement with the City and authorization for SSA to begin, a preconstruction meeting will be scheduled. Following the preconstruction meeting a project schedule can be prepared for the City. Fees: SSA will perform Tasks 1 thru 6 above for a Lump Sum Fee of $13,200. This fee will be invoiced monthly based on a percentage of work completed and payment will be due within fifteen (15) days of receipt. Additional work authorized in writing by the City that is not specifically included in this proposal will be deemed as additional services upon City's written authorization to proceed and will be billed at SSA's standard hourly rates or negotiated as a lump sum prior to beginning work. Out- of-pocket expenses for hourly work and additional printing will be billed with a fifteen percent (15%) mark-up. Compensation rates are based on ordinances, regulations and procedures in force on the execution date of this Agreement by the appropriate governing bodies having jurisdiction over the project. Any significant modification in these ordinance, regulations, procedures, etc. shall be justification for re -negotiation for the compensation due to the Consultant for the work involved. It is understood that any and all professional liabilities incurred by SSA throughout the course of rendering professional services on this project shall be limited to a maximum of the net fee received by SSA, not including reimbursable expenses and sub -consultants, for all services rendered on the project. Should it become necessary to obtain a third party to collect our fees for services, the City hereby agrees to pay all costs of such collections including Attorney's fees. The City and SSA respectively bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representative to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants to this Agreement. Neither the City nor SSA shall assign, sublet or transfer any interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 11 FileserveNsersWoan Softodva\CIVIL1ProjectslPROPOSALIC4 of Cape CanaveraR2008 Proposalstp-JEFF RATLIFF construction support -baffle box installation at Central Ave.doc Mr. Jeff Ratcliff July 24, 2008 Page 3 SSA Fee Proposal Construction Support of the Baffle Box installation at Central Ave. The terms and conditions of this proposal are effective through September 15, 2008. Acceptance after this date may necessitate increased fees or altered conditions. Jeff, your authorization of this proposal can be accomplished by the appropriate City signature below and our receipt of both a signed copy and a City Purchase Order. SSA is looking forward to working with the City on this project in Cape Canaveral. Sincerely, Stottler Stagg & Associates Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc. John A Pekar, PE Senior Vice President JAP/cs ACCEPTANCE: 3-. TITLE: DATE: 11 FileserverWsersWoan Sottodva\CIVILIProjectslPROPOSAL1Ci y of Cape Canaverafl2008 Proposalslp-JEFF RATLIFF construction support -baffle box installation at Central Ave.doc kkk \\ \\ §! \\ ]�2 Q; !_ != m■ ;; e,�; k « � - }\)} !�# ` �kk/}k IIJ 14 co g �! rz! §\ Mx-- _, )\ \} �/ Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Consideration Item 7 No. I recommend approval. AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF COCOA BEACH DEPT/DIVISION: PUBLIC SAFETY/POLICE Requested Action: City Council consider approval of a School Resource Officer Agreement with the City of Cocoa Beach in the amount of $5,730.00 to cover Cocoa Beach High School. Summary Explanation & Background: This year's cost is $5,730.00 covering 292 (20%) of Cape Canaveral students attending the high school. Last year's cost was $4,719.00. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: SRO Agreement City M s a Department PUBLIC SAFETY/POLICE im\ docum s\admin\co eting\2008\09-02-08\sro.doc POLICE DEPARTMENT City of Cocoa Beach, Florida P.O. Box 322430 20 South Orlando Avenue COCOA BEACH, FL 32932-2430 July 24, 2008 Susan Stills, City Clerk City of Cape Canaveral P.O. Box 326 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Dear Susan, OF COCOge h� U r�, ,F FCORIVP (321) 868-3271 FAX (321) 868-3205 www.cityofcocoabeach.com I have enclosed two original copies of the School Resource Officer agreement for the 2008/2009 school year. Upon approval of the City of Cape Canaveral Council, please have both original signed copies returned to my attention. We will then schedule the agreement on our agenda for Commission approval and return one completed signed copy to you. Thank you. Si e y, Pete Malzone, SupportSer ices Administrator Cocoa Beach Police Department (321) 868-3247 (321) 868-3385 fax pmalzone(�.?cityofcoeoabeach.com Attachments Cc: file AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, dated this day of , 2008, by and between THE CITY of CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA hereinafter called CAPE CANAVERAL and the CITY of COCOA BEACH, FLORIDA, hereinafter called COCOA BEACH. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Brevard County School Board has implemented the School Resource Officer Program, and; WHEREAS, the School Board shares the cost of implementing the program with the Municipalities of Brevard County, and; WHEREAS, COCOA BEACH and CAPE CANAVERAL determine that the School Resource Officer Program is in the best interest of the school system and both communities, and; WHEREAS, COCOA BEACH and CAPE CANAVERAL desire to share the cost of the School Resource Officer Program incurred by the municipalities on the campus of Cocoa Beach Junior/Senior High School; and whereas the program would cover a period of not more than 190 school year days, and; NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration CAPE CANAVERAL and COCOA BEACH agree that the following terms, stipulations and covenants as outlined herein and, by reference, made part hereof, shall govern the responsibilities of each party. 1. The agreement will commence on August 18, 2008 and will terminate on June 2, 2009, unless further continued by mutual agreement of both parties. By July 1, 2009 CAPE CANAVERAL and COCOA BEACH will open discussions regarding renewal for the 2009-2010 school year. 2. CAPE CANAVERAL agrees to provide twenty percent (20%) of the municipality's share of the School Resource Officer's salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms, and overtime during the term of this agreement. For the contract period of August 18, 2008 through June 2, 2009, CAPE CANAVERAL'S payment will be $5,730.00 as outlined in exhibit III. Payment shall be made to COCOA BEACH in two equal installments of $2,865.00 according to the following schedule: February 2, 2009, and June 2, 2009, subject to prorating based on the date of implementation. CAPE CANAVERAL has designated City Mayor Rocky Randels and COCOA BEACH has designated the Bryan D. Holmes, Cocoa Beach Chief of Police for the purpose of implementing the terms of this agreement. 4. CAPE CANAVERAL and COCOA BEACH agree to the goals and guidelines stipulated in the Exhibits I and II, which are attached hereto and, by reference, made part hereof. 5. To the extent permitted by Florida Statute 768.28, CAPE CANAVERAL and COCOA BEACH agree to indemnify and hold each other harmless and free from liability, including the officers, agents or employees of said parties while acting as such, from all claims, damages, injuries, fines, and costs, including expenses and attorney's fees which either party may become obligated to pay resulting from or in any way connected to errors or acts or omissions of employees of either party's performance relative to the terms of this agreement. Page 1 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 6. COCOA BEACH shall not assign or transfer this agreement to any other agency without the prior written permission of CAPE CANAVERAL. 7. Any changes in the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement must be mutually agreed to by both CAPE CANAVERAL and COCOA BEACH and may be implemented only after this agreement has been amended in writing. 8. The parties understand and agree that while the School Resource Officer is rendering services provided for by this agreement, he/she remains an employee of COCOA BEACH. 9. The parties understand and agree that the School Resource Officer will comply with police policy/procedure and regulations when in uniform. The SRO is required to be in uniform to execute all duties as required by the school unless otherwise agreed upon by the school principal and the Cocoa Beach Chief of Police. 10. If any of the terms or provisions hereof are in conflict with any applicable statute or rule of law, then such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent that it may conflict therewith and shall be deemed to be modified to conform with such statute or rule of law. 11. A report of the School Resource Officer activity will be provided to CAPE CANAVERAL on a calendar quarterly basis. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers and agents the day and year first written above. THE CITY OF COCOA BEACH, FLORIDA By: Charles J. Billias, City Manager ATTEST: By: Lorendana Kalaghchy, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency By: Fowler & O'Quinn, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit I- Goals of SRO Program Exhibit II- Guidelines of SRO Program Exhibit III- Officer Salary — 2008/2009 Cost Projection THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA By: Bennett Boucher, City Manager ATTEST: By: Susan Stills, City Clerk Page 2 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 EXHIBIT I SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER PROGRAM GOALS 1. To identify and prevent, through counseling and referral, delinquent behavior, including substance abuse. 2. To foster a better understanding of the law enforcement function. 3. To develop positive concepts of law enforcement. 4. To develop a better appreciation of citizen rights, obligations, and responsibilities. 5. To provide information about crime prevention. 6. To provide assistance and support for crime victims identified within the school setting, including abused children. 7. To promote positive relations between students and law enforcement officers. 8. To enhance knowledge of the fundamental concepts and structure of the law. 9. To provide materials and consultative assistance to teachers and parents on various law education topics. 10. To evaluate program effectiveness, the Chief of Police, SRO, and the Principal will define quantitative and qualitative measurements for each of the nine (9) goals listed prior to the first day students arrive. Program evaluation will occur twice during the school year with a final report prepared on or before the last day of school for students. The evaluation will be based upon input from the principal and school staff, as well as the SRO's chain of command. Page 3 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 EXHIBIT II SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER PROGRAM GUIDELINES BREVARD COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM 1. The school resource officer (SRO) is a City of Cocoa Beach police officer, responsive to the Chief of Police's chain of command and shall remain an employee of the City of Cocoa Beach. They shall report to the school Principal daily and the Principal shall have input in their evaluation. 2. The SRO shall be interviewed by a committee in which the Principal or their designee is a participant. The final selection is by the Chief of Police with mutual consideration on the part of the Principal. 3. The determination as to when the SRO will wear their uniform shall be defined by the Chief of Police and the Principal. 4. The Principal has the authority to request the reassignment of the school resource officer from their duties at school. The SRO may be reassigned from their position at their assigned school after reasonable review and conferencing between the SRO and the Principal has occurred. The following procedures must be followed: A. The Principal will recommend to the Area Superintendent that the SRO be removed from the program at their school, stating the reasons for the recommendation in writing. A copy of that recommendation must be provided to the Superintendent and the Chief of Police. B. Within a reasonable period of time after receiving the recommendation to remove an SRO, the Superintendent, or designee, will meet with the Chief, or his designee to mediate or resolve any problem that may exist between the SRO and the staff at their assigned school. 1. With the agreement of the Superintendent and the Chief, or their designees, the SRO, or specified members of the staff from the school, may be required to be present at the mediation meeting. 2. If, within a reasonable amount of time after commencement of mediation, the problem cannot be resolved or mediated, in the opinion of both the Superintendent and Chief, or their designees, then the SRO will be reassigned from the program at that school and a replacement will be selected. Page 4 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 C. The Principal or any other school board employee shall report all allegations of improper conduct to the SRO's immediate supervisor or to the Internal Affairs function. School Board employees shall not conduct an internal investigation of alleged improper conduct on the part of the SRO. However, the Principal may request reassignment during that investigation. 5. The SRO has the authority to request review of contract provisions after reasonable review and conferencing between the SRO and the Principal has occurred. The following procedures must be followed: A. The SRO will request that a review of the contract provisions be completed stating the reasons for the request in writing. That request should be directed to the SRO's immediate supervisor and the Principal. A copy of that request must also be provided to the Superintendent and the Chief of Police. B. Within a reasonable period of time after receiving the request for review from the SRO, the Superintendent, or designee, will meet with the Chief, or his designee to mediate or resolve any contract provision concerns that may exist between the SRO and the staff at their assigned school. 1. With the agreement of the Superintendent and the Chief, or their designees, the SRO, or specified members of the staff from the school, may be required to be present at the mediation meeting. 2. If, within a reasonable amount of time after commencement of mediation, the contract provision concerns cannot be resolved or mediated, in the opinion of both the Superintendent and Chief, or their designees, then an alternative action will be taken. 6. It shall be the responsibility of the City of Cocoa Beach to provide all salary payments and benefits of the agency to the SRO. The School Board shall reimburse the City for salary and fringe based upon the amount stipulated in the agreement. If a substitute officer is required, the School Board shall reimburse the city for actual cost for that substitute officer consistent with the agreement. 7. The SRO's normal work year shall be the same as the normal teacher work year with an additional alternative for five days of planning prior to the teacher work year and five days of critique and review following the teacher work year. 8. A formal written plan of action with regard to the community policing philosophies will be presented and discussed with the Principal, Chief of Police, SRO and other appropriate personnel prior to the first day students arrive. This plan must include duties for the five days prior and five days after teachers are on campus if that alternative option is selected, as well as the number of hours that the SRO will provide in classroom instruction. 9. The SRO, Principals, Area Superintendents, and Chief of Police will meet to review the plan of action and provide summary evaluation concerning the SRO's progress not less than one time per semester. Additional meetings may be requested by the Principal or the SRO to review the progress of the plan of action. Page 5 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 10. The SRO shall be assigned specifically to the school, five days per week during the school year. Unless it's an extreme emergency, the SRO will not be called away from school by the law enforcement agency. If the SRO is called away from the school for a substantial portion of the school day, the SRO shall notify the Principal and provide the Principal with an alternative means of contacting the appropriate law enforcement agency. If the SRO is called away from the school for more than a school day, the city should make every reasonable effort to provide a substitute officer. 11. The SRO may be assigned to provide supplemental instructions at the discretion of the Principal, as qualified. The Attorney General's (SRO training) philosophy with regard to in - class SRO presentations will be used as a guide. 12. At the request of the Principal, the SRO may train school personnel in interview techniques, investigation skills and related matters. It is preferred that the school resource officer make parent contact prior to participating in a student disciplinary meeting. The SRO may engage a student for the purpose of completing a Referral Form. 13. The SRO may be assigned by the Principal to supervisory duties during or after regular school hours so long as they do not conflict with police department policy or the bargaining agreement between the city and police officers. These after school activities will be under the supervision of school personnel. The School Board will be responsible for 55% of all overtime expenditures directly related to the daily activities of the SRO, not to exceed the budgeted amount contracted between the Brevard County School Board and the employing agency. [This does not include activities such as football games, basketball games, and school dances for which a separate contract of service is required.] 14. If the SRO witnesses an unacceptable activity on campus, they will report the incident to the school administration and police department. Both police and school administrative procedures shall be followed. In the event they conflict, police procedure shall prevail. The SRO shall avoid making arrests on school grounds unless under exigent circumstances. If arrest is necessary, the SRO will be called to execute proper police procedure. The SRO should coordinate arrest and other operational strategies with the Principal if at all possible. 15. The Principal, with the concurrence of the law enforcement agency, may assign the SRO to sponsor extracurricular events and chaperone field trips or other school activities so long as these assignments do not result in non -approved overtime expenses charged to the police department. 16. The SRO will integrate with students in the following ways: between class breaks and during lunch periods, and will patrol neighborhood areas after school if necessary. 17. The SRO is encouraged to attend parent, faculty, and staff meetings, as staff support personnel, to solicit their support and understanding of the program. 18. The SRO should be familiar with all community agencies which offer assistance to delinquent youths, such as: mental health clinics, drug treatment centers, etc., making referrals when necessary and acting as a resource person to the Principal. 19. At the request of the Principal or other school staff, the SRO shall take appropriate action against individual trespassers who appear at school and at school related functions. Page 6 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 20. Should it become necessary to conduct formal police interviews with students, law enforcement policy will be followed, parents shall be notified and coordination made with the Principal. 21. The SRO shall submit bimonthly reports of activities to be reviewed by the Principal and SRO command staff. Overtime shall be approved in advance by the agency supervisor. Overtime shall be borne by the agency and NOT the District. 22. At any time during the school year when students are not in school, or at the conclusion of the contract period, the SRO shall be assigned other duties by the Chief of Police. 23. The SRO shall comply with the provisions specified in Section Florida Statute 1006.12 (School Resource Officer Program). Page 7 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 EXHIBIT III OFFICER SALARY - 2008/2009 COST PROJECTION Officer Kathy Stiles Annual Regular Salary @ 24.67 hr Holiday Pay @ 88 hrs * hrly wage Uniform Allowance Life Insurance @ fixed rate Medicare @ 1.45% Pension - Police @ 23.4% Social Security @ 6.2% Workers Compensation @ 7.68% SRO Annual Conference TOTAL COMPENSATION (Hourly wage based on 2080 hours) (includes projected 3% increase) $51,310 $2,171 $300 $286 $780 $12,585 $1,652 $4,130 $1,141 $35.75 $74,355 Cost of SRO for 190 Days (190 Days * 8 hrs * 35.75) $54,337 Overtime (5% of 190 days = 76 hrs OT) $2,812 SRO Total for 190 Days , SCHOOL BOARD FUNDING (52.45% of SRO Cost for 190 Days less overtime) $28,500 COCOA BEACH & CAPE CANAVERAL FUNDING* $28,649 MUNICIPALITIES FUNDING City of Cocoa Beach (% of Cocoa Beach share of funding) City of Cape Canaveral (% of Cape Canaveral share of funding) 80.00% of $28,649 = $22,919 20.00% of $28,649 = $5,730 $28,649 *The Municipal cost sharing is based on total student enrollment for 2008/09 of 1445 students as of 7/21/08 per Cocoa Beach High School. The number of students residing in the City of Cape Canaveral is 292 or 20.21 %. The amount indicated includes 76 hrs of overtime. Page 8 of 8 Revised 7/21/2008 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Consideration Item 8 No. Exhibits Attached: AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION: QUARTERLY BUDGET REPORT AND TRANSFERS FOR THE QUARTER ENDING 06/30/08 DEPT/DIVISION: ADMINISTRATION/FINANCE Requested Action: City Council consider approval of the Quarterly Budget Report and Transfers for the quarter ending 06/30/08 as presented by the city treasurer. Summary Explanation & Background: See attached report. I recommend approval. Exhibits Attached: City Manage •' ffice Department ADMINISTRATION/FINANCE is\admin7council\meeting\2008\09-02-08\budget.doc MEMORANDUM DATE: August 7, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Andrea Bowers City Treasurer SUBECT: Quarterly Budget Report and Transfers for the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2007/2008, Quarter Ended 6/30/2008 Revenues We are now almost through the year, with one quarter left. When looking at the revenues, the assumptions used are that most will be collected with a two month delay, and a target percentage collected of 58.4% The balance are analyzed on a 67% target. At this time, Ad Valorem taxes are expected to be 100% collected. This is not the case at this time and current year Ad Valorem projections are reduced by approximately 2%. These funds will be collected at some point in the future, but due to the extended period projected before they will be received, it is considered prudent to delay recognition of the delinquent taxes until such time that the economy revives and receipt occurs. Adjustments made with this report reflect the continued decline in projections made by both the City and the State. On a brighter side, Fire Inspection Fees and County EMS Revenue Share are increased to reflect the actual above projections. Fines and Forfeitures have been divided, to allocate the Parking Ticket revenue to a separate line item. Refund of Prior Year Expense has been increased to reflect the rebate of Worker Compensation and Automobile Insurance for the Fire Department and Operating Expenses for the Sheriff's Office. Cash Forward has been increased to fund the increase in capital purchases and off -set capital originally projected to be funded with current revenues. Following is a brief evaluation of budget amendments requiring attention. It should be noted that only those items representing a significant change in fiscal policy have been offered for adjustment. It is not the intent of these amendments to adjust each account to reflect actual activity. Some of these items have previously been approved, and the technical adjustment is merely housekeeping. A reduction has been made to all Personnel Expenses in the Administration Department to free up funds budgeted for the second Administrative Assistant for the City Manager. This position has been deleted. General Insurance has been increased in Public Safety to reflect actual expenditures required. Community Development has increased their funding in Equipment Maintenance and Motor Fuels and Lubricants to provide for the department vehicles. Capital Equipment is increased to provide for a computer for the new Community Development Director. Building & Grounds Maintenance is reduced to provide funding in Capital Equipment in the Streets Department. These funds are required to replace the air conditioning unit on the East side of City Hall. Within the Non -Department, Special Pays is zeroed out to provide the funds required for operational increases within the General Fund. Beach Sand Fence Project is increased to provide the additional funding required to complete the fence construction. Capital -Infrastructure, originally budgeted to clean up the end of Long Point Road, is deleted and has been budgeted in FY 2008/09. Revenue projections from Army Corp of Engineers are also deferred to the coming year. The Waste Water Enterprise Fund reflects significant adjustments. Most are simply reallocating revenues from accounts with limited activity to accounts that have been under budgeted. Two revenue items have been increased. Reuse Hook-up Fees have received revenues over projections. Miscellaneous Income is increased to reflect the payment made to relocate the sewer line at Mermaid Key. This payment offset the increase in expenditure to the contractor. Contingency is increased to reflect the revenues not reallocated to active accounts. This completes the requested Budget Amendments for the third quarter of the fiscal year 2007/2008. Following is a breakdown by line item to enable you to see the overall effect to the budget. Please contact the Finance Department with any questions and or concerns. A u co O O N O M O C W L C'1 +S+ L L 12 N C d ii M Ltd U') O O O 00 19T 't O LO LO O I` N O Cr) LLQ 'a I- CO r 0 Ln O N M O O 00 r 0 (3) i� 00 CO Il - V ti It LO I` N LO ' I- M N O ' N O 00 N C O qT Iq C I` d' M T— 00 CO O) O M 00 N CO 't r L CO N "a M LO N M N N r C'M It r M r N r M R Q O M I- r LC) N Q m m r r co = m 0 0 0 0 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 LO LO 0 O O O O O 4.0 d M O M O O O N O O O O O r r 0 O O O O O N0 E I- O 00 O O LO It 0 0 0 0 Ln O O co O LO �1 CO O -a V O O I- Lf) M CO CO O Lf) CO M CO CO CO O 'I 'ICN.i CN .. r .rte .� .� C%4 M3 m r w E Q m LO LO 0 0 0 U') w� Iq 0 0 0 O I— N O MLO CD>� C d M 00 IT O LO O N N M 0 0 0 0 O m I- 00 co I` C) '� = M It M I- N O IT I� N N O LO N' LO N m �t O Nt N CIl- V- I-- CO r O CO O LO O V) 0) IT N CO Il- CO r' r CO CO d CO r r I- CO r- M r O N r- co M m It O co r r r U-) N m m r r m 0 CD LO r N N v U. U cn N N N N(D cn N U U- m W a) O O L mL vJ Q Z C N V) C U LL a)( f— N 3 .. W Q% U _ ; N U to > a)C O U MC s= O N C ,_ LL O M O O M M> a) v X X LL LL a X~ O O U U co C ca co W c F- i- Q O` -- i- CU O m N c .0 C 0 -1.- r., c N N L Q L U) m m E E� O U O cn Ur (� c o W i cn E E= m cL _ o N N c 8- W W a- O � X N O •— cn O m m N m cn cn U cn . L:)- LL - r w >r �% _(D C _ CD (0 (0 LIT L >1 a) C fa �U N �ii > .� mQ�W°6 CL 41 J� N �-�' M O V K x C7000L.LUL.LQ(/)Z>JUJL.LL.L m-0-0� O O N Q o o `� (AL.LI--M_! 'C d > C L O r N 0 0 0 0 r N O r r O r 0 LL O O O O O ♦, Orr0000NN00O0000 OOOOO y r r r r M N M r r r N O r r M !C O O O r 0 •�_ E O r r M M O') r LO LO U) 00 CO r r O O O O O O O r r r r N M M M M M d L() Lo W (D r r N LC) CO E MMM M M M M M M M M M M M M = r N N U) N O r r M M O r Ln LO LO CO COr r O Ue M CO CO CO CO Q = O r r r r N M M M M M� LO LO W r r r r r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M LC) L? Ln Lf) Lf) J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a O O O O O O O O O O = , i 1 i i i i i i i i d r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 00000000000000o a 00000a OO O O N O M CO O W W i L U � d CY C M U L O L U � U) C m L m a� .a v._ O M CM It O O O cc co O LO LO V- M ti O r r d 4) V ti � LO (fl LC) O ' LO' !t 0) of C Il M M O � CA Q; 0 'a M N co ICT N r r 04 C4 Q m m Co C O OOd' OO OOO O O V) C d E CO CO CO O ti N .a O 1 M _ r O M m d co E Q Catm co OM 0 C a O O � O O O p'C N O ' COO OOf� N C C V_ Cfl N N r- O O M r •� N 14' co N O M m m r O M Ce co ' N CD M o N N L cc U > a ca _ W v Z Ch c +� CL a c CN o a LL LL C UC: � Q C 00 N L L L Q U > .� E 4) E L U cc X Lu 0 0 °' a� ca)w m a) 06 w ��cc m ,a ,a v) ��� E E x ��U x as m L C E CL L a. +� c W p w C C c a m d� c m m a) x O a- O ca :3 ns m o a a) m` E E a (D w U w 2 U aa) CO CO c) E z 0 00 L) d Q Q m_• a C) o00 C oo °� �oo c 3 p - O 000 O_O C) C) m E '� N E m OM p CD V) E O� d m � � �-+ � LO CO CO CD C a a.IT � � C co C z � �tN� �� �91� 'a J 4 a 6 (fl Cfl d ti ff d ti� r -- d C:) C 0 0 0 C 0 C) C �- c- T_ C O d O O O a O O CU O O O d E E � � E 'L � E O O O O Q O O O Q O Q O Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N r- N N '0 }, G)O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O cM f� � � 0 ' OC) %;t ' ' OOo000000000000MI-MIT 0) CoC 'IT O r- O 00 M f` d CO M d• 'O (.C) LO T- q'00 � M N to tC) M � N it fl- � 'IT � M Cfl � 3 Q m = O O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M p A-+ (D O OO LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LO p G) E MO OOOOMCOOOOOOLn00000000 N 'a'0 N CS) CO C6 CM O N .1 Lf") V tM 1 CO U') r- O T- N O Cfl N M= c I- . --co � � .ter �� �LO to m E Q 0CD 0 O OO OCM000000000000C> C14 p C O O O LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O co rl_ Ln N O'= t) V)LO OOOOLnO00000u')000cMI-Mu) N C N CO C 't O Cfl O N O M V 00 00 f- L6 O CO 06 f_ O M M •O t4 CO O CO CO �- N � (fl O � O O N N L H 04 LO UJ U. ' � > ® L a CL U •�+ > Q Q W LU O M1., � 'C U +r c c C.) O O Li Li 0- c cn � m a) C cn N E m m aD cn a) Z •L m •L ca �_ c a c' a� LU a=i CL co _ L a) E L K `� �' uj t1 L cn 3 L 0� O m O to fZ a) tB ! i ++ Q + Co YO O LL ++ >+ m . U G) R5 � (D (j (n Q- Cl) to G) Q- ,� cUa U LL O c y m u cn c .v c 06 c C) C cn N o .Q ! c 2 c d 0 2 fB •` fB G) U 0 0 c (n to � O 0 U -Q O i O N m N C cn to = a� N m 'L C E C= m m ,� w° o E Q Q, c m CU U� w cn U c) c) cD m c) o cn U m cn j� m 3 c,) c) w L L 0Irl-0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cc O M O — 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T- LO � O O O O O O O NO O O O O O O O m O O E O C')0 G1 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- N 0 0 T—'t LO CO CO O T-- 0 0 d O IT CO N d' (fl f IT— U) CO CO N N N N N N N tel- CO T m N �+ M M co — — CO M � � t7' tt LO LO LO LO Ln Ln U') Lf') CO CO m a) O M Ln Ln lf') Lf) Ln Ln Lfi t.{) us us LC) L6 L!') to Ln 6 Ln Ln L() = O M M co M M cM co Mm co co M M co M co M co CV) co M CO 'a Lf) U? U.) Ln LO Lt') U) Ln LC) LO U.) LC) Lo Ln LO LO In In LO 'J O O O d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r- I,- r r r r r r r r r r r r T r r r r r r 'Cr')- r vI'�v� Q IT��Itv�'ItITIT�������vv� Q Meeting Type: City Council Meeting Date: 090208 AGENDA Heading Consideration Item 9 No. and Brevard County and recommended certain changes. Recognizing the changes recommended by DCA, staff AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning DEPT/DIVISION: Community Development Department Requested Action: Adopt the revised Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. Summary Explanation & Background: The Interlocal Agreement between the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, the School Board of Brevard County, and the City of Cape Canaveral was approved by the City Council and signed by the Mayor on January 15, 2008. Since that date, DCA has reviewed the interlocal agreements submitted by West Melbourne and Brevard County and recommended certain changes. Recognizing the changes recommended by DCA, staff has revised the original Interlocal Agreement as depicted in strikethrough and underline format. Staff is requesting that the Council approve the amended Interlocal Agreement so that it can be transmitted to DCA along with the Public School Facilities Element. Exhibits Attached: Revised Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. City Manager's-,Qffice Department AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY PLANNING AND SCHOOL CONCURRENCY Brevard County, Florida Entered into by: Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, School Board of Brevard County, and the Cities or Towns of Cape Canaveral, Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, Indialantic, Indian Harbour Beach, Malabar, Melbourne, Melbourne Beach, Palm Bay, Palm Shores, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Titusville, and West Melbourne JUNE 2008 Table of Contents for the Interlocal Agreement INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1 SECTION1. DEFINITIONS.......................................................................................................2 SECTION 2. JOINT MEETINGS...............................................................................................6 2.1 Staff Working Group......................................................................................................6 2.2 Annual Meetings of Elected Officials.............................................................................6 2.3 Capital Outlay Committee (COC)..................................................................................6 SECTION 3. STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS .......................7 3.1 Population and Student Enrollment Projections Distributed Annually ...........................7 3.2 Student Projections.......................................................................................................7 SECTION 4. COORDINATING AND SHARING OF INFORMATION.......................................7 4.1 Tentative District Educational Facilities Work Plan........................................................7 4.2 Educational Plant Survey..............................................................................................7 SECTION 5. SCHOOL SITE SELECTION, RENOVATIONS, AND SCHOOL CLOSURES ...8 5.1 New School Sites..........................................................................................................8 5.2 School Site Plan Review...............................................................................................9 5.3 Major Renovations and Closures..................................................................................9 SECTION 6. SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................9 6.1 Joint Consideration of On -Site and Off -Site Improvements...........................................9 SECTION 7. LOCAL PLANNING AGENCIES (LPA), COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, REZONINGS, AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS ...............9 7.1 Appointed LPA Members...............................................................................................9 7.2 County and City Development Applications Shared with the School Board ..................9 7.3 Criteria for Evaluating Residential Development Applications.....................................10 7.4 Formulating City and County Plans and Programs......................................................10 SECTION 8. CO -LOCATION AND SHARED USE.................................................................10 8.1 Co -Location and Shared Use....................................................................................10 8.2 Mutual Use Agreement................................................................................................11 SECTION 9. SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES..........................................11 9.1 Specific Responsibilities of the County and Cities.......................................................11 9.2 Specific Responsibilities of the School Board..............................................................12 SECTION 10. SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN....................................13 10.1 School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program.......................................13 10.2 Tentative Educational Facilities Plan........................................................................... 14 10.3 Transmittal...................................................................................................................14 10.4 Adoption...................................................................................................................... 14 10.5 Amendments to the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program .......14 Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement - 9steee;, 2007. Amended June 2008 Page ii SECTION 11. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS.............................................................15 11.1 Required Comprehensive Plan Amendments..............................................................15 11.2 Development, Adoption and Amendment of the Capital Improvements Element (CIE)..........................................................................15 11.3 Development, Adoption and Amendment of the SignaturePages.......................................................................................................................27-42 Appendices............................................................................................................................... 43-46 Appendix "R A" - Tiered Level of Service Table Appendix "G B" - School District Student Generation Multiplier Appendix "D C" - School Concurrency Review Process Flow Chart Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement - 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page iii Public School Facilities Element(PSFE).....................................................................16 11.4 Intergovernmental Coordination Element.................................................................... 16 SECTION 12. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROGRAM...........................................................17 12.1 Commencement of School Concurrency..................................................................... 17 12.2 Concurrency Service Area (CSA) Boundaries.............................................................17 12.3 Level of Service (LOS)................................................................................................18 12.4 School Concurrency Regulations................................................................................18 SECTION 13. UNIFORM SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROCESS...........................................19 13.1 General Provisions......................................................................................................19 13.2 School Concurrency Application Review.....................................................................20 13.3 School Concurrency Approval..................................................................................... 21 13.4 Development Review Table.........................................................................................22 13.5 Proportionate Share Mitigation.................................................................................... 22 13.6 Appeal Process........................................................................................................... 24 SECTION14. OVERSIGHT.......................................................................................................25 14.1 Oversight..................................................................................................................... 25 SECTION 15. SPECIAL PROVISIONS.....................................................................................25 15.1 School District Requirements...................................................................................... 25 15.2 Land Use Authority......................................................................................................26 SECTION 16. AMENDMENT PROCESS, NOTICE, AND TERM OF AGREEMENT ...............26 16.1 Amendment of the Agreement.....................................................................................26 16.2 Notice Requirements................................................................................................... 26 16.3 Repeal of the Agreement.............................................................................................26 16.4 Termination of the Agreement..................................................................................... 26 16.5 Withdrawal...................................................................................................................26 SECTION 17. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES...........................................................................26 17.1 Dispute Resolution.............................:........................................................................26 SECTION 18. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS...................................................................26 18.1 Agreement Execution..................................................................................................26 SignaturePages.......................................................................................................................27-42 Appendices............................................................................................................................... 43-46 Appendix "R A" - Tiered Level of Service Table Appendix "G B" - School District Student Generation Multiplier Appendix "D C" - School Concurrency Review Process Flow Chart Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement - 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page iii INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY PLANNING AND SCHOOL CONCURRENCY Brevard County, Florida THIS AGREEMENT is entered into with the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter referred to as the "County"), the Commission or Council of the Cities or Towns of Cape Canaveral, Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, Indialantic, Indian Harbour Beach, Malabar, Melbourne, Melbourne Beach, Palm Bay, Palm Shores, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Titusville and West Melbourne (hereinafter referred to as the "Cities"), and the School Board of Brevard County (hereinafter referred to as the "School Board"), collectively referred to as the "Parties". The Towns of Melbourne Village and Grant-Valkaria qualify qualifies for an exemption from the ILA for School Concurrency at this time. WHEREAS, the County, Cities and the School Board recognize their mutual obligation and responsibility for the education, nurturing and general well-being of the children within their community; and WHEREAS, the County, Cities and the School Board are authorized to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Section 163.01, Section 163.3177(6)(h)2 and Section 1013.33, Florida Statutes (F. S.); and WHEREAS, the Towns of Melbourne Village and Grant-Valkaria currently qualify qualifies for exemption in accordance with Section 163.3177(12)(b), F. S.; and WHEREAS, the County, Cities, and School Board recognize the benefits that will flow to the citizens and students of their communities by more closely coordinating their comprehensive land use and school facilities planning programs: namely (1) better coordination of new schools in time and place with land development, (2) greater efficiency for the school board and local governments by placing schools to take advantage of existing and planned roads, water, sewer, and parks, (3) improved student access and safety by coordinating the construction of new and expanded schools with the road and sidewalk construction programs of the local governments, (4) better defined urban form by locating and designing schools to serve as community focal points, (5) greater efficiency and convenience by co -locating schools with parks, ball fields, libraries, and other community facilities to take advantage of joint use opportunities, and (6) reduction of pressures contributing to urban sprawl and support of existing neighborhoods by appropriately locating new schools and expanding and renovating existing schools; and WHEREAS, the County, Cities and School Board have determined that it is necessary and appropriate for the entities to cooperate with each other to provide adequate public school facilities in a timely manner and at appropriate locations, to eliminate any deficit of permanent student stations, and to provide capacity for projected new growth; and WHEREAS, Section 1013.33, F.S., requires that the location of public educational facilities must be consistent with the comprehensive plan and implementing land development regulations of the appropriate local governing body; and WHEREAS, Sections 163.3177(6)(h) I and 2, F.S., require each local government to adopt an intergovernmental coordination element as part of their comprehensive plan that states principles and guidelines to be used in the accomplishment of coordination of the adopted Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2887 Amended June 2008 Page 1 comprehensive plan with the plans of the school boards, and describes the processes for collaborative planning and decision making on population projections and public school siting; and WHEREAS, Sections 163.3177(7) and 1013.33, F.S., require the County, Cities and School Board to establish jointly the specific ways in which the plans and processes of the school board district and the local governments are to be coordinated; and WHEREAS, Sections 163.31777, 163.3180(13), and 1013.33, F.S., require the County, Cities and School Board to update their Public School Interlocal Agreement to establish school concurrency to satisfy Section 163.3180 (4213)(g)1, F.S. and WHEREAS, The Agreement acknowledges both the school board's constitutional and statutory obligations to provide a uniform system of free public schools on a countywide basis, and the land use authority of local governments, including their authority to approve or deny comprehensive plan amendments and development orders; and WHEREAS, the County and Cities are entering into this Agreement in reliance on the School Board's obligation to prepare, adopt and implement a financially feasible capital facilities program to achieve public schools operating at the adopted level of service consistent with the timing specified in the School District's Capital Facilities Plan, and the School Board's further commitment to update the plan annually to add enough capacity to the Plan in each succeeding fifth year to address projected growth in order to maintain the adopted level of service and to demonstrate that the utilization of school capacity is maximized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to Section 163.3180 (13)(c)2, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the School Board, is entering into this Agreement in reliance on the County and Cities' obligation to adopt amendments to their local comprehensive plans to impose School Concurrency as provided in Section 163.3180(13), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Section 1002.33(1), F.S., states that charter schools shall be part of the state's program of public education and that all charter schools are public schools. A charter school may be formed by creating a new school or converting an existing public school to charter status. NOW THEREFORE, be it mutually agreed among the School Board, the County and the Cities (hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Parties") that the following definitions and procedures will be followed in coordinating land use, public school facilities planning, and school concurrency. SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS Adjacent Concurrency Service Area: A Concurrency Service Area which is contiguous to and teases the boundary of another Concurrency Service Area along one side to the extent practicable, taking into account water bodies, atm# -limited access interstate corridors. and similar geographic limits. Concurrency Service Areas based on spot zoning that do not include a school within shall not be utilized in concurrency reviews for adjacency purposes. Attendance Zone: The geographic area which identifies the public school assignment for students. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF 2807 Amended June 2008 Page 2 Capital Outlay Committee (COC): Committee responsible for the oversight of school concurrency. Capital Outlay Full -Time Equivalent (COFTE): The basis for student allocation for the Florida Education Finance Program for kindergarten through grade 12 established by the Florida Department of Education. Cities: All municipalities in Brevard County, except any of those that are exempt from the requirements of school concurrency, pursuant to Section 163.3177(12), F.S. Charter School: Public schools of choice which operate under a performance contract, or a "charter," in accordance with Section 1002.33, F.S. Class Size Reduction: Florida Constitutional amendment creating class size limits for teacher to pupil ratios for core educational instruction. Beginning in the 2010 school year, a sufficient number of classrooms in a public school will permit: 1. The maximum number of students who are assigned to each teacher who is teaching in public school classrooms for pre -kindergarten through grade 3 does not exceed 18 students; 2. The maximum number of students who are assigned to each teacher who is teaching in public school classrooms for grades 4 through 8 does not exceed 22 students; and 3. The maximum number of students who are assigned to each teacher who is teaching in public school classrooms for grades 9 through 12 does not exceed 25 students. Comprehensive Plan: A plan that meets the requirements of Sections 163.3177 and 163.3178 F.S. Concurrency Service Area (CSA): A geographic unit adopted by the School Board and local governments within which the level of service standard is measured when an application for residential development is reviewed for school concurrency purposes. Consistency: Compatible with and furthering the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan Elements and this Agreement. Core Facilities: The media center, cafeteria, toilet facilities and circulation space of an educational facility. Developer: Any person, including a governmental agency, undertaking any construction. Development Order: Any order granting, or granting with conditions, an application for a development permit. Development Permit: Any building permit, zoning permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other official action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land. Educational Facility: The buildings, equipment, structures, property and special educational Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9steber; 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 3 use areas that are built, installed or established to serve educational purposes. Educational Facilities Impact Fee: A fee designated to assist in the funding for acquisition and development of school facilities, owned and operated by the school district, needed to serve new growth and development. Educational Plant Survey: A systematic study of present educational and ancillary plants and the determination of future needs to provide an appropriate educational program and services for each student based on projected capital outlay FTE's approved by the Department of Education. Exempt Local Government: A municipality which is not required to participate in school concurrency when meeting all the requirements for having no significant impact on school attendance, per Section 163.3177(12)(b), F.S. Financial Feasibility: An assurance that sufficient revenues are currently available or will be available from committed funding sources for the first 3 years, or will be available from committed or planned funding sources for years 4 and 5, of a 5 -year capital improvement schedule for financing capital improvements, such as ad valorem taxes, bonds, state and federal funds, tax revenues, impact fees, and developer contributions, which are adequate to fund the projected costs of the capital improvements identified in the comprehensive plan necessary to ensure that adopted level -of -service standards are achieved and maintained within the period covered by the 5 -year schedule of capital improvements. The requirement that level -of -service standards be achieved and maintained shall not apply if the proportionate -share process set forth in s. 163.3180(12) and (16) is used (ref. 163.3164(32) F.S.). Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program: The School Board's annually adopted financially feasible, five-year list of capital improvements which provide for student capacity to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service. Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH): The current edition, published by the Florida Department of Education, Office of Educational Facilities, listing all land and facilities owned or acquired under a long-term (40 or more years) lease agreement by local school boards (hereinafter referred to as "FISH). Full -Time Equivalent (FTE) Student Count: Fall Semester: The fall semester count of all "full-time equivalent" students, pursuant to Chapter 1011.62, F.S. Level of Service (LOS): A standard or condition established to measure utilization within a Concurrency Service Area Boundary. Local Governments: Brevard County and its Cities. Maximum School Utilization: The balance of student enrollment district -wide, to ensure the most efficient operation of each school within the adopted LOS standard, based on the number of permanent student stations according to the FISH inventory, taking into account the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) utilization factor, special considerations such as, core capacity, special programs, transportation costs, geographic impediments, court ordered desegregation, and class size reduction requirements to prevent disparate enrollment levels to the greatest extent possible. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — Osteber, 2007^n7 Amended June 2008 Page 4 Permanent Capacity: . The number of factored permanent satisfactory student stations in the FDOE FISH inventory. Permanent Classroom: An area within a school that provides instructional space for students assigned to a teacher which the school board considers not temporary and cannot be relocated. Program Capacity: A FDOE regulated space within a school used to meet the needs of special programs, including exceptional education and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes, which contribute to a school's capacity. Proportionate Share Mitigation: A developer improvement or contribution identified in a binding and enforceable agreement between the Developer, the School Board and the local government with jurisdiction over the approval of the development order to provide compensation for the additional demand on public school facilities created through the residential development of the property, as set forth in Section 163.3180(13)(e), F.S. Proposed New Residential Development: Any application for new residential development or any amendment to a previously approved residential development, which results in an increase in the total number of housing units. Public Facilities: Civic capital assets including, but not limited to, transit, sanitary sewer, solid waste, potable water, schools, parks, libraries and community buildings. Residential Development: Any development that is comprised of dwelling units, in whole or in part, for permanent human habitation. School Board: The governing body established Article IX, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution, which shall operate, control and supervise all free public schools within the school district and determine the rate of school district taxes within the limits prescribed. School Capacity: yr The maximum number of students that can be accommodated based on factored permanent satisfactory student stations in the FDOE FISH inventor School Capacity Availability Determination Letter: A letter prepared by the School District of Brevard County, identifying if school capacity is available to serve a residential project, and if capacity exists, whether the proposed development is approved or vested. School District: The School District of Brevard County is created pursuant to Article IX, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution, which establish that each county shall constitute a school district unless otherwise established upon a vote of the electors of the county. School District Capital Facilities Work Program: The adopted Brevard County School District's Five -Year Capital Plan and Capital Budget as authorized by Section 1013.35, F.S. School Impact Analysis (SIA): A formal description of a residential project subject to school concurrency review provided by the developer for School District review in accordance with Section 13.1 of this Agreement. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement - 9stebef-47- Amended June 2008 Page 5 Spot Zone: A school attendance boundary area considered part of but geographically detached from, the boundary area that includes the school facility. Temporary Classroom: A movable classroom facility for non -permanent student stations. Tentative Educational Facilities Plan: The School District's annual comprehensive capital planning document that includes long-range planning for facilities needs over 5 -year, 10 - year, and 20 -year periods. Tiered Level of Service: A level of service which is graduated over time, used to achieve an adequate and desirable level of service at the end of the planning period, as permitted by the Florida Statutes. Type of School: An educational facility providing the same level of education, i.e. elementary, middle, junior/senior, or high school or special purpose school such as magnet school. Utilization: The comparison of the total number of students enrolled to the total number of student stations (FISH) at a school facility. SECTION 2. JOINT MEETINGS 2.1 Staff Working Group. A staff working group comprised of staff representatives from the County, School Board, and Cities will meet on a semi-annual basis, in December and July, to discuss issues and formulate recommendations regarding coordination of land use and school facilities planning, including such issues as population and student projections, development trends, school needs, co -location and joint use opportunities, and ancillary infrastructure improvements needed to support the school and ensure safe student access. Representatives from the Regional Planning Council will also be invited to attend. A designee of the School Board shall be responsible for coordinating and convening the semi-annual meeting. 2.2 Annual Meetings of Elected Officials. One or more elected representatives of the County, each City and the School Board will meet annually in September to discuss the draft Tentative District Educational Facilities Work Plan, which includes the Five -Year Capital Facilities Program submission to DOE in a joint workshop session. A representative of the Regional Planning Council will also be invited to attend. The joint workshop sessions will provide the opportunity for the County, the Cities, and the School Board to hear reports, discuss policy, set direction, and reach understandings concerning issues of mutual concern regarding coordination of land use and school facilities planning, including population and student growth, development trends, school needs, off-site improvements, and joint use opportunities. The Parties will discuss opportunities to co -locate schools with other public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers to the extent possible. 2.3 Capital Outlay Committee (COC). The Parties hereby establish a Capital Outlay Committee (COC) for the purpose of reviewing potential sites for new schools, proposals for significant renovation, potential closure of existing schools and opportunities to co -locate schools with other public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers to the extent possible. Based on information gathered during the review, the COC will submit recommendations to the Superintendent or designee. Additionally, the COC will be a standing committee to review the School District's annual Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program in Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — OGteber-2007 Amended June 2008 Page 6 accordance with Section 4.1 and 10 of this Agreement, and serve as the required oversight committee for school concurrency as detailed in Section 14 of this Agreement. In addition to appropriate representatives of the School Board, the Committee will include at least one staff member from the County and a representative from each of the participating Cities. SECTION 3. STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS 3.1 Population And Student Enrollment Projections Distributed Annually. In fulfillment of their respective planning duties, the County, Cities, and School Board agree to coordinate and base their plans upon consistent projections of the amount, type, and distribution of population growth and student enrollment. At the first staff working group meeting of the school year described at subsection 2.1, the County and Cities shall provide updated five-year municipal population projections and the School Board will supply the annually updated student enrollment projections. 3.2 Student Projections. The School Board shall use student population projections based on information produced by the demographic data, where available, as modified by the School Board based on development data and agreement with the Cities and the County. The SG#ee} tFends. in felcrnulatiRg 66IGh a Fequest, the SGheel Beard Will GeeFdiRate with the Cities and SECTION 4. COORDINATING AND SHARING OF INFORMATION 4.1 Tentative District Educational Facilities Work Plan. By August 1s' of each year, the School Board shall submit to the County, each City and the Capital Outlay Committee (COC) the Tentative District Educational Facilities Plan prior to adoption by the Board. (a) The plan will be consistent with the requirements of Section 1013.35, F.S., and include projected student populations based on Florida Department of Education (DOE) Capital Outlay Full -Time Equivalent (COFTE) projections data apportioned to each school based on the student projections described in Section 3.2 above, an inventory of existing school facilities, projections of facility space needs, information on relocatables, general locations of new schools for the 5, 10, 20 -year time periods, and options to reduce the need for additional permanent student stations. (b) The plan will also include the financially feasible School District Capital Facilities Work Program for a 5 -year period. The Cities and County shall review the plan and provide written comments to the School Board prior to September 1St (c) If the local government does not support the plan, the matter shall be resolved pursuant to Section 17 of this Agreement. 4.2 Educational Plant Survey. Three months prior to preparation of the Educational Plant Survey update, the staff working group established in subsection 2.1 will assist the School Board in an advisory capacity in the preparation of the update. The Educational Plant Survey shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 1013.31, F.S., and include at least an inventory of existing educational facilities, recommendations for new and existing facilities, and the general location of each in coordination with the land use plan. Upon receipt of the Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 7 Educational Plant Survey, the Staff Working Group will have fifteen (15) calendar days to evaluate and make recommendations regarding the location and need for new schools, significant renovation or expansion, and closures of educational facilities, and the consistency of such plans with the local government comprehensive plan and relevant issues listed in subsections 5.2, 5.3, 6.1, 7.4 and 8.1 of this Agreement. SECTION 5. SCHOOL SITE SELECTION, RENOVATIONS, AND SCHOOL CLOSURES 5.1 New School Sites. When the need for a new school is identified in the annual capital facilities work program, the COC will review a list of potential sites in the area of need. The list of potential sites for new schools will be submitted to the local government with jurisdiction for an assessment regarding consistency with the local government comprehensive plan. The coordination process shall be in accordance with Chapter 1013.33 F.S. as follows: (a) To improve coordination relative to potential educational facility sites, the school board shall provide written notice to the local government that has regulatory authority over the use at least 60 days prior to acquiring or leasing property that may be used for a new public educational facility. (b) The local government, upon receipt of this notice, shall notify the board within 45 days if the site proposed for acquisition or lease is consistent with the land use categories and policies of the local government's comprehensive plan. This preliminary notice does not constitute the local government's determination of consistency pursuant to 5.1(c). (c) As early in the design phase as feasible and consistent with this Agreement entered, but no later than 99 180 days before commencing construction, the district school board shall in writing request a determination of consistency with the local government's comprehensive plan. (d) The local governing body that regulates the use of land shall determine, in writing within 45 days after receiving the necessary information and a school board's request for a determination, whether a proposed educational facility is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and consistent with local land development regulations. If the determination is affirmative, school construction may commence and further local government approvals are not required, except as provided in this section. (e) Failure of the local governing body to make a determination in writing within 90 days after a school board's request for a determination of consistency shall be considered an approval of the school board's application. Campus master plans and development agreements must comply with the provisions of Sections 1013.30 and 1013.63 F.S. (f) If a determination is made that a proposed school site is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, the local government shall identify whether it will support necessary amendments to the comprehensive plan required to make the school site consistent. Based on the information gathered during this review for new schools, the COC will make a recommendation to the Superintendent or designee if one or more sites have been identified, in the order of preference. (g) If the local government does not support the proposed School District's choice for a school site, the matter shall be resolved pursuant to Section 17 of this Agreement. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 200 Amended June 2008 Page 8 5.2 School Site Plan Review. Once a school site has been selected and site design has begun, the School Board shall provide the local government the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed site plan as early in the design phase of the new public educational facilities as feasible. (a) A local governing body may not deny the site applicant based on adequacy of the site plan as it relates solely to the needs of the school. If the site is consistent with the comprehensive plan's land use policies and categories in which public schools are identified as allowable uses, the local government may not deny the application but it may impose reasonable development standards and conditions in accordance with s.1013.51(1) and consider the site plan and its adequacy as it relates to environmental concerns, health, safety and welfare, and effects on adjacent property. Standards and conditions may not be imposed which conflict with those established in Chapter 1013 F.S. or the Florida Building Code, unless mutually agreed to as a part of this Agreement. 5.3 Major Renovations and Closures. When the need for a major renovation that changes the primary use of a facility, 'RGItdeB including stadiums, or results in a greater than 5 percent increase or decrease in student capacity, or the closure of a sGhGE)i an educational facility has been identified by the School District, the (COC) will review the proposed change to determine the impact the renovation or closure will have on the adopted level of service for schools and provide a recommendation to the school board regarding the proposed change. The School Board shall provide the local government having jurisdiction the opportunity to review and comment on a proposed maior renovation as early in the design phase as feasible and terms as described in Paragraph 5.2(a) above shall apply to the review by the local government SECTION 6. SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE 6.1 Joint Consideration of On -Site and Off -Site Improvements. In conjunction with the land use consistency determination described in subsection 5.1 of this Agreement, the School Board and affected local government will jointly determine the need for and timing of on-site and off-site improvements necessary to support each new school or the proposed major renovation of an existing school. The School Board and the affected local government will enter into a written agreement identifying the timing, location, and the party or parties responsible for financing constructing, operating and maintaining the required improvements. SECTION 7. LOCAL PLANNING AGENCIES (LPA), COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, REZONINGS, AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS 7.1 Appointed LPA Members. The County and Cities will include a nonvoting representative appointed by the School Board on the local planning agencies, or equivalent agencies, to attend those meetings at which the agendas consider comprehensive plan amendments and rezonings that would, if approved, increase residential density on the property that is the subject of the application. The Cities and County may at their discretion grant voting status to the appointed School Board member. 7.2 County and City Development Applications Shared with the School Board. The County and the Cities shall give the School Board Superintendent notification of land use applications and development proposals pending before them that may affect student Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 9 enrollment, enrollment projections, or school facilities in accordance with Section 13 of this Agreement. Such notice will be provided concurrently with receipt of the application. This notice requirement applies to amendments to the comprehensive plan future land use map, rezonings, developments of regional impact, and/or major residential or mixed-use development projects. 7.3 Criteria for Evaluating Residential Development Applications. In addition to the regulatory review process for school concurrency described in Section 13 of this Agreement, reviewing and approving Comprehensive Plan amendments, rezonings, for residential development proposals, the County and Cities will also consider the following issues, as applicable: (a) The consideration of School Board comments on residential development proposals; (b) The provision of school sites and facilities within neighborhoods; (c) The compatibility of land uses adjacent to existing schools and reserved school sites; (d) The co -location of parks, recreation and neighborhood facilities with school sites; (e) The linkage of schools, parks, libraries and other public facilities with bikeways, trails, and sidewalks for safe access; (f) The existing traffic circulation pattern serving schools and their surrounding neighborhood; (g) The provision of off-site signalization, signage, access improvements, and sidewalks to serve schools; (h) The location / inclusion of school bus stops and turnarounds, and (i) The impact of development proposals on the public school facilities capital plan. 7.4 Formulating City and County Plans and Programs. In formulating community development plans and programs, the County and Cities will consider the following issues: (a) Scheduling of capital improvements that are coordinated with and meet the capital needs identified in the School District's Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program; (b) Providing incentives to the private sector to identify and implement creative solutions to developing adequate school facilities in residential developments; (c) Targeting community development improvements in older and distressed neighborhoods near schools; and (d) Working to address and resolve multi -jurisdictional public school issues SECTION 8. CO -LOCATION AND SHARED USE 8.1 Co -location and Shared Use. The co -location and shared use of facilities are Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF�r Amended June 2008 Page 10 important to both the School Board and local governments. The School Board will look for opportunities to co -locate and share use of sheet educational facilities and suis public facilities when preparing the District's Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program. Likewise, co -location and shared use opportunities will be considered by the local governments when preparing the annual update to the comprehensive plan's schedule of capital improvements and when planning and designing new, or renovating existing, community facilities. Opportunities for co - location and shared use with public schools will be considered for the following: (a) Libraries; (b) Parks and recreation facilities; (c) Community centers; (d) Auditoriums; (e) Learning centers; (f) Museums; (g) Performing arts centers, and (h) Stadiums. In addition to the above, co -location and shared use of school and governmental facilities for health care and social services will be considered. 8.2 Mutual Use Agreement. For each instance of co -location and shared use, the School Board and local government shall enter into a separate agreement which addresses liability, operating and maintenance costs, scheduling of use, and facility supervision or any other issues that may arise from co -location and shared use. SECTION 9. SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES 9.1 Specific Responsibilities of the County and Cities. When the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted in accordance with Section 11 of this Agreement become effective, the County and Cities shall undertake the following activities: (a) Adopt the required school concurrency provisions into their Land Development Regulations (LDR) consistent with the time frame established by law, the requirements of this Agreement, and the County and Cities' comprehensive plans, unless electing to be bound by the provisions established by the County. (b) Withhold the approval of any rezoning, site plan, preliminary plat, or functional equivalent for new residential units not exempted under Section 13.1(c) of this Agreement, until the School District has reported that there is school capacity available to serve the development being approved consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (c) Share information with the School District regarding population projections, projections of development and redevelopment for the coming year, infrastructure required to Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9steb�^^' Amended June 2008 Page 11 support public school facilities, and amendments to future land use plan elements consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (d) Maintain data for approved new residential development. The data shall be provided to the School District annually by October 15`h, and include at a minimum, the following: 1. Development name and location 2. Total number of dwelling units by unit type (single-family, multi -family, etc.) 3. Impact fee calculation 4. Total number of dwelling units with certificates of occupancy (CO) by development (e) Transmit site plans, preliminary plats and final plats for approved new residential development upon request by the School District, for their review and comment. (f) Annually, coordinate with the school board the review of the entire PSFE 9.2 Specific Responsibilities of the School Board. By entering into this Agreement, the School Board agrees to undertake the following activities: (a) Annually prepare and update a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program containing enough capacity each year to meet the anticipated demand for student stations identified by the COFTE and local government population projections so that no schools exceed the adopted level of service. (b) Institute program and/or school attendance boundary adjustments as necessary based upon adopted School Board Policy to maximize the utilization of capacity in order to ensure that all schools of each type (elementary, middle, high) in each Concurrency Service Area and each individual school operate at the adopted level of service, consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (c) Construct the capacity enhancing and modernization projects necessary to maintain the adopted level of service specified in the School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. (d) Consider utilizing charter schools built in conformance with School District standards to expand the capacity of the public school system and mitigate the educational impact created by the development of new residential dwelling units. (e) Provide the County and Cities with the required data and analysis updated annually to support the comprehensive plan elements and any amendments relating to school concurrency. (f) Adopt a ten- and twenty-year work program consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (g) Review proposed new residential developments for compliance with concurrency standards, consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 12 (h) Review proportionate share mitigation options for new residential development consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (i) Prepare annual reports on enrollment and capacity, consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. Q) Provide necessary staff and material support for meetings of the COC as required by this Agreement. (k) Provide information to the County and Cities regarding enrollment projections, school siting, infrastructure necessary to support public school facilities, and amendments to future land use plan elements consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (1) Annually, coordinate with the local governments the review of the entire PSFE. SECTION 10. SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 10.1 School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. In preparation of the School District's Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program and each annual update, the School Board shall undertake the following: (a) Update and adopt the School District's Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program for public schools in Brevard County on or before September 301' of each year, adding a new financially feasible fifth year that will achieve and maintain the adopted LOS for the five-year period. (b) Specify all new construction, remodeling or renovation projects which will add permanent capacity or modernize existing facilities. (c) Prepare the School District's Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program and each annual update to provide a financially feasible program of school construction for a five (5) year period. (d) Include school construction projects which, when completed, will add sufficient capacity to achieve and maintain the adopted LOS standard for all schools based on the projected enrollment; provide for required modernizations; and satisfy the School District's constitutional obligation to provide a uniform system of free public schools on a county -wide basis. (e) Include a description of each school project, a listing of funds to be spent in each fiscal year for the planning, preparation, land acquisition, and actual construction and renovation of each school project which adds capacity or modernizes existing facilities; the amount of capacity added, if any; and a generalized location map for proposed schools included in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. (f) Maximize utilization of existing schools so that proposed projects add the necessary capacity to maintain the adopted Level of Service standard. (g) The School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Program and each annual update shall Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement—9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 13 identify the projected enrollment, capacity and utilization percentage of all schools. The School District shall annually update the Concurrency Service Area Boundary Tables, as necessary, and the School District's Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program. 10.2 Tentative Educational Facilities Plan. In addition to the adopted School District's Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program, the School District shall annually adopt a tentative five-year, ten-year and a twenty-year work plan based upon revenue projections, enrollment projections and facility needs for the ten-year and twenty-year period. It is recognized that the projections in the ten- and twenty-year time frames are tentative and should be used only for general planning purposes. Upon completion, the Tentative Educational Facilities Plan will be transmitted to the local governments. 10.3 Transmittal. The School District shall transmit to the County, the local governments and the COC copies of the proposed Tentative Educational Facilities Plan, which includes the Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program, for review and comment. The annually updated Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program sentains the Five Year Capital l.,,.,mvem.ent demonstrates the financial feasibility of the Program. Transmittal to the COC, the Cities and the County shall occur on or before August 1st of each year commencing after the effective date of this Agreement. 10.4 Adoption. Unless the adoption is delayed by mediation or a lawful challenge, the School Board shall adopt the School District's Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program no later than September 30th, and it shall become effective no later than October 1 St of each year. 10.5 Amendments to the School District's Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program. The School Board shall not amend the School District's Five-Year Capital Facilities Work Program so as to modify, delay or delete any project in the first three (3) years of the Program unless the School District, with the concurrence of a majority vote by its Board members, provides written confirmation that: (a) The modification, delay or deletion of a project is required in order to meet the School District's constitutional obligation to provide a county -wide uniform system of free public schools or other legal obligations imposed by state or federal law; or (b) The modification, delay or deletion of a project is occasioned by unanticipated change in population projections or growth patterns or is required in order to provide needed capacity in a location that has a current greater need than the originally planned location and does not cause the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the Concurrency Service Area from which the originally planned project is modified, delayed or deleted; or (c) The project schedule or scope has been modified to address local government concerns, and the modification does not cause the adopted LOS standard to be exceeded in the Concurrency Service Area from which the originally planned project is modified, delayed or deleted; and (d) The COC, as the required oversight committee for school concurrency as detailed in Section 14 of this Agreement, has had the opportunity to review the proposed amendment and has submitted its recommendation to the Superintendent or designee. (e) The School Board may amend at anytime the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program to add necessary capacity projects to satisfy the provisions of this Agreement. For Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebe0P' Amended June 2008 Page 14 additions to the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program, the School Board must demonstrate its ability to maintain the financial feasibility of the Program. SECTION 11. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS 11.1 Required Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The County and the Cities agree to adopt the following Comprehensive Plan amendments upon the execution of this Agreement. All three elements (PSFE, CIE, and ICE) will be adopted in the same amendment package. The timing for the adoption of PSFE shall be set for the same time as the adoption of the ICE and the CIE update. (a) An amended Capital Improvement Element (CIE) shall include the School Board of Brevard County Capital ImpFevements Summalcy Table Capital Facilities Work Program. The School Board's Sapital ImpFevements Summary T Capital Facilities Work Program in the CIE shall be adopted and annually updated consistent with the updated and adopted School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. The School District's data and analysis shall demonstrate that the School District's Capital Facilities Work Program is financially feasible for the five year period. The amended table program shall be included in the next comprehensive plan amendment, but no later than December 1St, following the annual adoption of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program by the School Board. (b) That the CIE uniformly sets forth a financially feasible public school capital facilities program, consistent with the adopted Level of Service standards for public schools. (c) A Public School Facilities Element (PSFE) consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3177 (12) and 163.3180 Florida Statutes and this Agreement. (d) An amended Intergovernmental Coordination Element as required by Section 163.3177(6)(h)1 and 2., Florida Statutes and this Agreement. (e) Each jurisdiction's amendments shall be consistent with this Agreement, and those adopted by the other jurisdictions as required by Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes. 11.2 Development, Adoption and Amendment of the Capital Improvements Element (CIE). The School District shall transmit the adopted Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program based on data and analysis supporting financial feasibility and the ability to achieve and maintain the adopted LOS. The annual update or any amendment to the School District's Five - Year Capital Facilities Work Program, once adopted by the School Board, shall be transmitted to the County and the Cities. The update will include a new financially feasible fifth year to the CIE that will achieve and maintain the adopted LOS for the five year period. The County and the Cities shall adopt the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program into the Capital Improvement Element of their Comprehensive Plans. (a) Corrections or modifications to the School District's Five -Year Capital ImpinevemeRt SurmmaaFy Table WhiGh are—GeRGiStent with the Ssheel DistFiEt's-Pive Year Capital Facilities Work Program concerning costs, revenue sources, or acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications, may be accomplished by ordinance, and shall not be deemed an amendment to the comprehensive plan. A copy of the ordinance shall be transmitted to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — OstebeF�r Amended June 2008 Page 15 (b) The County and the Cities, by adopting "The School District of Brevard County Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program in the Capital Improvements Element of the Local Government's Comprehensive Plan, shall have neither the obligation nor the responsibility for funding the School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. 11.3 Development, Adoption and Amendment of the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE). The County and the Cities shall adopt a Public School Facilities Element which is consistent with those adopted by the other local governments within the County. The PSFE must also be consistent with this Agreement, Chapter 163.3177(12), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.025, F.A.C. The County and the Cities shall notify the COC when this element is adopted and when the element becomes effective. (a) In the event that it becomes necessary to amend the PSFE, the local government wishing to initiate an amendment shall request review through the COC prior to transmitting the amendment to the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S. The COC shall be responsible for distributing the amendment to all Parties to this Agreement for review and comment. To achieve required consistency, all local governments shall adopt the amendment in accordance with the statutory procedures for amending comprehensive plans. 2. If any local government objects to the amendment and the dispute cannot be resolved between or among the Parties, the dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Agreement. In such a case, the Parties agree not to adopt the amendment until the dispute has been resolved. (b) Any local issues not specifically required by Statute or Rule in the PSFE may be included or modified in the Local Government PSFE by following the normal Comprehensive Plan amendment process and COC review. 11.4 Intergovernmental Coordination Element (ICE). The process for the development, adoption, and amendment of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element, for school concurrency purposes, shall be that process set forth below and pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S. (a) In the event that it becomes necessary to amend the ICE, the local government wishing to initiate an amendment shall request review through the COC prior to transmitting the amendment to the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S. The COC shall be responsible for distributing the amendment to all Parties to this Agreement for review and comment. 1. To achieve required consistency, all local governments shall adopt the amendment in accordance with the statutory procedures for amending comprehensive plans. 2. If any local government objects to the amendment and the dispute cannot be resolved between or among the Parties, the dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Agreement. In such a case, the Parties agree not to adopt the amendment until the dispute has been resolved. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — QGteber, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 16 SECTION 12. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROGRAM 12.1 Commencement of School Concurrency. The School Concurrency Program described in this Agreement shall GOMFReRGe GR jUly 1, 2 be implemented no later than the effective date of the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE). 12.2 Concurrency Service Area (CSA) Boundaries. The Parties hereby agree that School Concurrency shall be measured and applied using a geographic area known as a Concurrency Service Area (CSA) which shall coincide with the school attendance boundaries, as adopted by the School Board. The mapping of the CSAs shall be included in the data and analysis of the Public School Facilities Element and are previded in Append,A"this gFeea}eRt. (a) The County and Cities shall adopt the standards for modification of the Concurrency Service Area boundary maps as defined here into the PSFE of the Comprehensive Plan. The School District and local governments shall apply school concurrency on a less than district -wide basis, using the school attendance zones, in which the school is located, as the CSA. Use of this method will create a separate concurrency service area boundary map for each elementary, middle and high school. Each school attendance zone will become its own CSA. 2. Charter schools and magnet schools will not have their own CSA. Charter and magnet schools are open to all students residing within the district; and students are generally accepted through application approval. These special public schools vary in size, and may target a specific type of student and can limit the age groups or grade levels. (b) As future school boundary changes are required for schools programmed in the Brevard School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program, the CSAs shall be modified to the greatest extent possible to provide maximum utilization. The School District will perform as lead agency for coordination and review of proposed changes to the CSAs. (c) Any Party may propose a change to the CSA boundaries. Prior to adopting any change, the School District must verify that as a result of the change: 1. The adopted level of service standards will be achieved and maintained for each year of the five-year planning period; and 2. The utilization of school capacity will be maximized to the greatest extent possible, taking into account transportation costs, court approved desegregation plans and other relevant factors. (d) The Parties shall observe the following process for the timing of the review and approval for modifying CSA boundary maps. At such time as the School District determines that the change is appropriate considering the above standards, the School District shall transmit the proposed CSA boundaries and data and analysis to support the changes to the Cities, to the County and to the COC. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9etebeF�r Amended June 2008 Page 17 2. The County, Cities and COC shall review the proposed amendment and send their comments to the School District within forty five (45) days of receipt. The change to a Concurrency Service Area boundary shall become effective upon final adoption of the new school boundaries by the School Board. (e) The Parties hereby agree that the "spot zoned" geographic areas of a school attendance boundary do not constitute additional adjacencies. 12.3 Level of Service (LOS). To ensure the capacity of schools is sufficient to support student growth, the County, Cities and School District shall adopt a LOS for all schools of the same type. The Parties hereby agree that the desired LOS standard shall be 100% of Permanent FISH capacity for each elementary, middle, and high school, and any combination or magnet school. (a) To ensure that the capacity of all schools is sufficient to support student growth at the adopted LOS for the five-year planning period and through the long term planning period for each CSA, the Parties hereby establish a Tiered LOS, as provided in Appendix "9 A" of this Agreement to achieve the adopted LOS. Upon achieving the LOS standard of 100% of Permanent FISH capacity, by school year 7nzv-1c201v 2011-2012, the Tiered LOS will be terminated. (b) The School District may use a Tiered LOS standard to provide, as during the five year planning period, the opportunity to eliminate any deficits in capacity while maintaining a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. During the time that the Tiered LOS is in effect, the School District shall initiate necessary program changes, boundary adjustments, and/orrp ovide additional capacity to prevent the LOS standard from being exceeded at the end of the five—year planning period. The Tiered LOS Table, provided as Appendix "9 A" of this Agreement, shall be incorporated in the Public School Facilities Element and Capital Improvement Element of local governments' comprehensive plans. The Tiered LOS will be reduced over a speGifi^ ti the planning period until a LOS of 100% is attained. The Tiered LOS and the timeframe necessary to achieve a LOS of 100% shall be based on the financially feasible School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program as adopted by the School Board. 2. The Tiered LOS shall be supported with data and analysis demonstrating how LOS will be maintained and aGhieved achieved and maintained. 12.4 School Concurrency Regulations. By july 1, 2008, Each Local Government shall adopt school concurrency provisions into its land development regulations (LDR) consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. (a) The County and the Cities shall amend their LDRs to adopt school concurrency provisions for the review of development orders. 1. In the event that any participating City does not adopt LDRs, that government shall be deemed to have "opted in" to the County regulations and agrees to be bound by the terms and provisions therein until it adopts its own ordinance. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stef eF, 2007- Amended June 2008 Page 18 2. At any time, any Local Government may opt out of the County's implementing ordinance through implementing its own ordinance. SECTION 13. UNIFORM SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROCESS 13.1 General Provisions. The County, the Cities and the School Board shall ensure that the Level of Service Standard established for each school type is maintained. (a) Upon adoption of the PSFE, no NG rezoning, site plan, preliminary plat, or functional equivalent for new residential development may be approved by the County or Cities, unless the residential development is exempt from these requirements as provided in Section 13.1 (c) of this Agreement, or until a School Capacity Availability Determination Letter (SCADL) has been issued by the School Board to the local government indicating that adequate school facilities exist. (b) A local government may condition the approval of the residential development to ensure that the necessary school capacity is in place to meet the adopted LOS at the time of residential impacts, in order to validate or render effective the approval. This shall not limit the authority of a local government to deny a development permit or its functional equivalent, pursuant to its home rule regulatory powers. (c) The following residential uses shall be considered exempt from the requirements of school concurrency: All single family lots of record at the time the School Concurrency implementing ordinance becomes effective. 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. 3. Any amendment to any previously approved residential development, which does not increase the number of dwelling units or change the type of dwelling units (single-family to multi -family, etc.). 4. Any age restricted community with no permanent residents under the age of eighteen (18). Exemption of an age restricted community will be subject to a restrictive covenant limiting the age of permanent residents to 18 years and older. 5. The replacement of an existing residential dwelling unit, including those partially or entirely damaged, destroyed or demolished, with a new unit of the same type and use provided that the existing unit has been occupied at some time during the five-year period immediately preceding the construction of the new unit. (d) Upon request by a developer submitting a land development application with a residential component, the local government or the School District may issue a determination as to whether or not a development, lot or unit is exempt from the requirements of school concurrency. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — OGtebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 19 13.2 School Concurrency Application Review (a) Any developer submitting a development permit application (such as a rezoning, site plan or preliminary plat) with a residential component that is not exempt under Section 13.1(c) of this Agreement is subject to school concurrency and must prepare and submit a School Impact Analysis (SIA) to the local government, for review by the School District in order to determine the availability of school capacity within the adopted LOS standard. (b) The SIA must indicate the location of the development, number of dwelling units and unit types (single-family, multi -family, apartments, etc.), a phasing schedule (if applicable), and age restrictions for occupancy (if any). The local government shall initiate the review by determining that the application is sufficient for processing. Upon determination of application sufficiency, the local government shall transmit the SIA to the School District representative for review. A flow chart outlining the school concurrency review process is included as Appendix "D C". The process is as follows: 1. An application for residential development is submitted to the local government initiating a sufficiency review. Once deemed sufficient, the local government transmits the SIA to the School District for review. The School Board may charge the applicant a non-refundable application fee payable to the School Board to meet the cost of review. 2. The School District representative shall review the applicant's SIA for a residential development which has been submitted and deemed sufficient for processing by the applicable local government. 3. The School District representative shall review each SIA in the order in which it is received and verify whether sufficient student stations for each type of school are available or not available in the proposed development's CSA to support the development. a. To determine a proposed development's projected students, the proposed development's projected number and type of residential units shall be converted into projected students for all schools of each type within the specific CSA using the School District Student Generation Multiplier (SGM), as established by the method described in Appendix "O B," which shall be reviewed annually and amended as necessary to reflect the current district wide student generation rates. b. New school capacity within a CSA which is in place or under actual construction in the first three years of the School District's Capital Facilities Work Program will be added to the capacity shown in the CSA, and is counted as available capacity for the residential development under review. (c) If the projected student growth from a residential development causes the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the CSA, an adjacent CSA will be reviewed for available capacity. In conducting the adjacency review, the School District shall first use the adjacent CSA with the most available capacity to evaluate projected enrollment and, if necessary, shall continue to the CSA with the next most available capacity Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9G'�;-'007 Amended June 2008 Page 20 until all adjacent CSAs have been evaluated or the available capacity has been identified to allow a SCADL approving school concurrency to be issued. 2. If a proposed new development causes the LOS in the CSA in which it is located to exceed the adopted LOS standard and there is available capacity in an adjacent CSA, actual development impacts shall be shifted to the contiguous CSA having available capacity. This shift shall be accomplished through boundary changes or by assigning future students from the development to an adjacent CSA. Sub -section 12.2(e) of this Agreement shall be observed when considering adjacent capacity. (d) In the event that there is not adequate capacity available in the CSA in which the proposed development is located or in an adjacent CSA to support the development, the School District representative will issue a SCADL within +weRty—(20) ten 10 working days detailing why the development is not in compliance, and offer the applicant the opportunity to enter into a negotiation period to allow time for the mitigation process described below in Section 13.5 of this Agreement. If the proposed mitigation is accepted, the School Board shall enter into an enforceable and binding agreement with the affected local government and the developer pursuant to Section 13.5 of this Agreement. (e) When capacity has been determined to be available, the School District representative shall issue a SCADL verifying available capacity to the applicant and the affected local government within ten (10) working days of receipt of the application. (f) The local government shall be responsible for notifying the School District representative when a residential development has received a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent, when the development order for the residential development expires or is revoked, and when its school impact fees have been paid. 13.3 School Concurrency Approval. Issuance of a SCADL by the School District identifying that adequate capacity exists indicates only that school facilities are currently available, and capacity will not be reserved until the local government issues a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency, or the functional equivalent. (a) A local government shall not issue a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent for a residential development until receiving confirmation of available school capacity in the form of a SCADL from the School District. Once the local government has issued a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent, school concurrency for the residential development shall be valid for the life of the Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent. Expiration, extension or modification of a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent for a residential development shall require a new review for adequate school capacity to be performed by the School Board. (b) Local governments shall notify the School District within ten (10) working days of any official change in the validity (status) of a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent for a residential development. (c) The Local Government shall not issue a building permit or its functional equivalent for a non-exempt residential development until receiving confirmation of available school Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 21 capacity from the School District in the form of a SCADL. Once the local government has issued a Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent, school concurrency for the residential development shall be valid for the life of the Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Nondeficiency or functional equivalent. 13.4 Development Review Table. The School District shall create and maintain a Development Review Table (DRT) for each CSA, and will use the DRT to compare the projected students from proposed residential developments to the CSAs available capacity programmed within the first three years of the current five-year capital planning period. (a) Student enrollment projections shall be based on the most recently adopted School District Capital Facilities Work Program, and the DRT shall be updated to reflect these projections. Available capacity shall be derived using the following formula: Available Capacity = School Capacity' — (Enrollment2 + Vested 3) Where ' School Capacity = FISH Capacity (As programmed in the first three (3) years of the School District's Capital Facilities Work Program 2 Enrollment = Student enrollment as counted at the Fall FTE. 3 Vested = Students generated from residential developments approved and receiving a SCADL after the implementation of school concurrency (b) Using the Fall FTE, the vested number of students on the DRT will be reduced by the number of students represented by the residential units that received certificates of occupancy within the previous twelve (12) month period. 13.5 Proportionate Share Mitigation. In the event there is not sufficient school capacity available to support the students generated from the proposed residential development under review, based on the student generation multiplier (SGM) calculation of students as described in Section 13.2(b)3.a, the School District shall entertain proportionate share mitigation options and, if accepted, shall enter into an enforceable and binding agreement with the local government and developer to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional school capacity. (a) When the student impacts from a proposed development cause the adopted LOS to fail, the developer's proportionate share will be based on the number of additional student stations necessary to meet 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, plus a share of the land acquisition and infrastructure expenditures for school sites as determined and published annually in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. (b) The methodology used to calculate a developer's proportionate share mitigation shall be as follows: Proportionate Share = ('Development students - Available Capacity) x Total Costa per student station Where Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — QGtetio�r 2097 Amended June 2008 Page 22 'Development students = Students generated by residential development that are assigned to that school 'Total Cost = the cost per student station as determined and published by the State of Florida, plus a share of the land acquisition and infrastructure expenditures for school sites as determined and published annually in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. (c) The applicant shall be allowed to enter a negotiation period with the School District 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 agreement with the School Board and the local government with jurisdiction over the approval of the development order. 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 project identified in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. Capacity projects identified within the first three (3) years of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program shall be considered as committed in accordance with Section 10.5 of this Agreement. 2. If capacity projects are planned in years four (4) or five (5) of the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program within the same CSA as the proposed residential development, the developer may pay his proportionate share to mitigate the proposed development in accordance with the formula provided in Section 13.5 (b) of this Agreement. This may not change the timing of the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. 3. If a capacity project does not exist in the Capital Facilities Work Program, the School Board may add a capacity project to satisfy the impacts from a proposed residential development, if it is funded through the developer's proportionate share mitigation contributions in the next update of the Program. Mitigation options may include, but are not limited to: Contribution of land or payment for land acquisition in conjunction with the provision of additional school capacity; or Mitigation banking based on the construction of a public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits; or c. Provision of additional student stations through the donation of buildings for use as a primary or alternative learning facility; or d. Provision of additional student stations through the renovation of existing buildings for use as learning facilities; or e. Construction or expansion of permanent student stations or core capacity; or f. Construction of a public school facility in advance of the time set forth in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9steber, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 23 g. Construction of a charter school designed in accordance with School District standards, providing sufficient permanent capacity to the District's inventory of student stations. Use of a charter school for mitigation must include provisions for its continued existence, including but not limited to the transfer of ownership of the charter school property and/or operation of the school to the School Board. (d) For mitigation measures (a) thru (g) 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. (e) Developer shall receive an impact fee credit for that portion of the developer's educational impact used to fund the improvements on which the proportionate share mitigation is calculated. (f) If the proportionate share mitigation required is greater than the impact fees generated by the development, the difference between the developer's proportionate share and the impact fee credit shall be the responsibility of the developer. (g) Any proportionate share mitigation must directed by the School Board toward a school capacity improvement identified in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. (h) Upon conclusion of the negotiation period, a second Determination Letter shall be issued. If mitigation is agreed to, the School District shall issue a new Determination Letter approving the development subject to those mitigation measures agreed to by the local government, developer and the School Board. Prior to preliminary plat, site plan approval or the functional equivalent, the mitigation measures shall be memorialized in an enforceable and binding agreement with the local government, the School District and the Developer that specifically details mitigation provisions to be paid for by the developer and the relevant terms and conditions. In accordance with 163.3180(13)(e) F.S., having executed a legally binding commitment, school concurrency is satisfied and the development may proceed. If mitigation is not agreed to, the Determination Letter shall detail why any mitigation proposals were rejected and why the development is not in compliance with school concurrency requirements. A School Capacity Determination Letter indicating either that adequate capacity is available, or that there is no available capacity following the ninety (90) day negotiation period as described in Section 13.5 of this Agreement, constitutes final agency action by the School District for purposes of Chapter 120, F.S. 13.6 Appeal Process. A person may appeal a determination made as a part of the School Concurrency Process. (a) A person substantially affected by a School District'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. (b) A person substantially affected by a local government decision made as a part of the Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9etebeF,-2007 Amended June 2008 Page 24 School Concurrency Process may appeal such decision using the process identified in the local government's regulations for appeal of development orders. This shall not apply to any decision subject to section (a) above. SECTION 14. OVERSIGHT 14.1 Oversight. The COC will serve as the required oversight committee for school concurrency to monitor and annually evaluate the school concurrency program and the PSFE. The committee shall appoint a chairperson, meet semi-annually in mid-September and mid- March in accordance with the laws of Florida governing public meetings, and report to participating local governments, the School Board and the general public on the effectiveness with which this Agreement is being implemented. A designee of the School Board shall be responsible for coordinating the semi-annual meeting. (a) The monitoring and evaluation of the school concurrency process is required pursuant to Section 163.3180(13)(g)(6)(c), F.S., and Section 2 of this Agreement. The COC shall be responsible for preparing an annual assessment report on the effectiveness of the School Concurrency System. The report will be made available to the public and presented at the COC March meeting. (b) The COC members shall be invited to attend all meetings referenced in Section 2 and shall receive copies of all reports and documents produced pursuant to this Agreement. The COC shall evaluate the effectiveness of the CSAs for measuring the LOS and consider making recommendations to amend the CSA Map. (c) By August 1st of each year, the COC shall receive the proposed School District's Tentative District Educational Facilities Plan that includes the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. The COC will report to the School District, the County, and the Cities on whether or not the proposed Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program maintains the adopted Level of Service in each CSA by adding enough projects to increase the capacity. The COC will examine the need to eliminate any permanent student station shortfalls by including required modernization of existing facilities, and by providing permanent student stations for the projected growth in enrollment over each of the five (5) years covered by the program. SECTION 15. SPECIAL PROVISIONS 15.1 School District Requirements. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the School District is or may be subject to the requirements of the Florida and United States Constitutions and other state or federal statutes regarding the operation of the public school system. Accordingly, the County, the Cities and the School Board agree that this Agreement is not intended, and will not be construed, to interfere with, hinder, or obstruct in any manner, the School District's constitutional and statutory obligation to provide a uniform system of free public schools on a Countywide basis or to require the School District to confer with, or obtain the consent of, the County or the Cities, as to whether that obligation has been satisfied. Further, the County, the Cities and the School Board agree that this Agreement is not intended and will not be construed to impose any duty or obligation on the County or City for the School District's constitutional or statutory obligation. The County and the Cities also acknowledge that the Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebe�^^' Amended June 2008 Page 25 School District's obligations under this Agreement may be superseded by state or federal court orders or other state or federal legal mandates. 15.2 Land Use Authority. The Parties specifically acknowledge that each Local Government is responsible for approving or denying comprehensive plan amendments and development orders within its own jurisdiction. Nothing herein represents or authorizes a transfer of this authority to any other party. SECTION 16. AMENDMENT PROCESS, NOTICE, AND TERM OF AGREEMENT 16.1 Amendment of the Agreement. This Agreement may be amended by written consent of all parties to this Agreement after a COC review. The Agreement will remain in effect until amended in accordance with Florida Statutes. 16.2 Notice Requirements. County, City or Town Clerk, School Board Superintendent, or as designated by the individual. 16.3 Repeal of the Agreement. If the Florida Statute as it pertains to school planning coordination and school concurrency is repealed, the Agreement is terminated. Parties desiring to continue the Agreement may do so by written consent. 16.4 Termination of the Agreement. No party to this Agreement may terminate its participation in the agreement except through the exemption process in which a municipality may not be required to participate in school concurrency when demonstrating that all the requirements are no longer having a significant impact on school attendance, per Section 163.3177(12)(b), F.S., at the time of a local government Evaluation and Appraisal Report, by providing a sixty (60) day written notice to at other Parties to this Agreement and to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. 16.5 Withdrawal. Withdrawal from the Agreement by any party shall not alter the terms of the Agreement with respect to the remaining signatories. SECTION 17. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES 17.1 Dispute Resolution. If the parties to this Agreement are unable to resolve any issue in which they may be in disagreement covered in this Agreement, such dispute will be resolved in accordance with governmental conflict resolution procedures specified in Chapter 164, F.S. SECTION 18. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS 18.1 Agreement Execution. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which so executed shall be deemed to be original, but all such counterparts shall, together, constitute but one in the same instrument. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 26 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been executed by and on behalf of Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, the Cities and Towns of Cape Canaveral, Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, Indialantic, Indian Harbour Beach, Malabar, Melbourne, Melbourne Beach, Palm Bay, Palm Shores, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Titusville, West Melbourne and the School Board of Brevard County on this day of 200 BREVARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, FLORIDA Attest Chairperson, Brevard County Board of County Commissioners Clerk Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement —9stebeF, 2947 Amended June 2008 Page 27 (Seal) DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BREVARD COUNTY, THIS Day of SCHOOL BOARD OF BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA , 200_ Attest (Seal) Chairman, School Board Brevard County Superintendent Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9steber2987 Amended June 2008 Page 28 DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, THIS Day of CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA By: Attest Clerk ,200 Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — OstGbeF, 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 29 (Seal) APPENDIX "S A" Tiered Level of Service Table - Amended TIERED LEVEL OF SERVICE - SCHOOL YEARS 2007-08 to 2011-12 Facility Type 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Elementary Schools 127% 130% 115% 105% 100% Middle Schools 122°fa ` 1'2Q%; 400% 100% 100%0 . Junior / Senior High Schools 133% 135% 110% 105% 100% High Schools 139% 130% 115% 100% 100% Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9steb�nn' Amended June 2008 Page 43 APPENDIX "G B" School District Student Generation Multiplier Determining the number of students generated from new residential development is necessary to identify the new development's impact on public schools. In order to calculate the number of students associated with new residential development, a student generation multiplier was created. Because the number of students living in a housing unit varies depending on the type of residential housing, the student generation rate per residential unit is based on four housing types as identified in Table 1. These housing types are: single family; multi -family; condominium/Co-Op; and mobile home. In accordance with this Agreement, the SGM shall be reviewed annually using this methodology and amended as necessary to reflect the current district wide student generation rates. Table 1: Brevard County School Concurrency Student Generation Multipliers (SGM) Condos and Co -Ops were not aggregated with the multi -family housing type for two reasons. The real estate market for Condos/Co-Ops differs from that of multi -family housing units, such as apartments and duplexes. The difference in housing types and their associated markets generate unique student multipliers. Typically, Condos / Co-ops do not generate as many students as multi -family housing units. Secondly, the specificity of the parcel data allowed for the calculation of unique generation rates for Condo/Co-ops and multi -family housing units. Two datasets were used to calculate the student generation rates. These datasets were the geographic information systems (GIS) property parcel file from the Brevard County Property Appraiser's office and October 2005 student enrollment data. The 2005 student enrollment data were obtained from the School District and contained student addresses and grade level data. The student address data were geocoded to property parcel data and street centerline data to create a GIS point file with the spatial location of each student based on their address. 71,805 of the 75,646 student records (95%) were matched to a property parcel. The remaining 3,841 students were then geocoded to the street centerline file. Of these 3,841 students, 547, or 0.7 percent, were unmatched due to address errors such as post office boxes or unidentifiable address data. A spatial join was applied to the parcel data and geocoded student data. A spatial join is a type of spatial analysis in which the attributes of features in two datasets are joined together based on the relative location of each feature. In this case, the spatial join linked the point location of each student to a specific property parcel. The result of this operation is one GIS file that contains student data as well as housing type data from the property appraiser. FmiguFes-1 levels Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9etebeF, '� Amended June 2008 Page 44 Mobil w �11Fc Ft � Elementary 0.20 0.03 0.07 0.19 Middle 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.05 High 0.12 0.02 0.03 0.07 Total 0.38 0.06 0.12 0.31 Condos and Co -Ops were not aggregated with the multi -family housing type for two reasons. The real estate market for Condos/Co-Ops differs from that of multi -family housing units, such as apartments and duplexes. The difference in housing types and their associated markets generate unique student multipliers. Typically, Condos / Co-ops do not generate as many students as multi -family housing units. Secondly, the specificity of the parcel data allowed for the calculation of unique generation rates for Condo/Co-ops and multi -family housing units. Two datasets were used to calculate the student generation rates. These datasets were the geographic information systems (GIS) property parcel file from the Brevard County Property Appraiser's office and October 2005 student enrollment data. The 2005 student enrollment data were obtained from the School District and contained student addresses and grade level data. The student address data were geocoded to property parcel data and street centerline data to create a GIS point file with the spatial location of each student based on their address. 71,805 of the 75,646 student records (95%) were matched to a property parcel. The remaining 3,841 students were then geocoded to the street centerline file. Of these 3,841 students, 547, or 0.7 percent, were unmatched due to address errors such as post office boxes or unidentifiable address data. A spatial join was applied to the parcel data and geocoded student data. A spatial join is a type of spatial analysis in which the attributes of features in two datasets are joined together based on the relative location of each feature. In this case, the spatial join linked the point location of each student to a specific property parcel. The result of this operation is one GIS file that contains student data as well as housing type data from the property appraiser. FmiguFes-1 levels Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9etebeF, '� Amended June 2008 Page 44 This study was conducted using over 99 percent of the total student population, not a sample set, and the volume of data used was large enough to offset occasional housing type assignment errors. The total student population used in the multiplier analysis was 72,165. The student population used in the multiplier analysis is smaller than the total student population contained in the October 2005 enrollment data for several reasons. Students with address errors or post office box addresses were not matched to an address by geocoding. Additionally, 1,387 students who attend non-traditional schools, such as the Space Coast Marine Institute and Crosswinds, were removed from the dataset. Pre -K students were also not included in the multiplier analysis. Charter school students were included in the student population for this analysis. Table 2 displays the number of students by housing type and school type in Brevard County as of October 29, 2005. In addition to the students summarized in Table 2, 1,096 students were not assigned to a residential land use due to errors in the parcel data and GIS analysis. These students were proportionately distributed to the four housing types based on the housing type distribution for the total student population. Table 2: Students by Residential Housing Type and School Type q rt,jSingle�Cc�n lVcUde X�ItiEutttx ' r 61Ce�Ifult' Elementary K-6 30,678 829 1,490 4,388 Middle 7-8 9,671 283 413 1,041 High 9-12 19,626 446 585 1,619 All Students 59,975 1,558 2,488 7,048 Table 3 details the 2005 housing type counts for Brevard County. These data were obtained from several sources. The single family and Condo/Co-Op numbers are from the August 2006 property parcel GIS data. The total number of units, not the total number or parcels, was used to calculate the number of multi -family and mobile home housing units. The mobile home totals are from 2002 and published by the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, which is maintained by the University of Florida and these numbers are published on the county's website. The total multi -family units are from 2005 and published by the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR). Table 3: Dwelling Units by Type To determine the student impact of a proposed residential development for school concurrency purposes, a proposed development's projected number and type of unit are converted into the number of projected students within the specific Concurrency Service Area Boundary. Based on the generation rates in Table 1, for every 100 new single-family housing units constructed in Brevard County, 20 elementary school students will be generated for the Brevard County Public School System. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 45 61Ce�Ifult' Occupied 157,455 26,286 20,784 22,881 Dwelling Units To determine the student impact of a proposed residential development for school concurrency purposes, a proposed development's projected number and type of unit are converted into the number of projected students within the specific Concurrency Service Area Boundary. Based on the generation rates in Table 1, for every 100 new single-family housing units constructed in Brevard County, 20 elementary school students will be generated for the Brevard County Public School System. Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement — 9stebeF 2007 Amended June 2008 Page 45 APPENDIX "D C" School Concurrency Process Flow Chart Appl,cation revised by Ic? sUbm' __4_ Local ovem „ It, applicant Incomplete ocal Government reviews Complete cation apP�icatum foScompletene"sl pp ini q I iii, , x I Application I Applicant receives written Application forwarded and reviewed notice specifying deficiencies boot 'strict for avai CAPACITY lable..; Applicant withdraws AVAILABLE application School District issues School Capacity Availability School District issues Determination Letter identifying School Capacity Availability 1-,'Norkna deficiency in capacity Determination Letter Days Local Government issues Concurrency Evaluation if all School Capacity Availability Determination Letter valid for the life of the Concurrency Evaluat'wn Mitigation option rejected School Distnct issues a School Concurrency Deficiency Letter Local Government \ Applicant, Local denies application Government and Schoot I Approved No CAPACITY AVAILABLE applicant Applicant submits notice of appeal with Local Government or School Board, as applicable Appeal reviewed and scheduled for hearing by the Board or Hearing Officer The Board or Hearing Officer considers appeal . _ . \� Appeal to Circuit Court Brevard County School Planning Interlocal Agreement - 9stebeic,-2007 Amended June 2008 Page 46 Meeting Type: City Council Meeting Date: 090208 AGENDA Heading Qrdjuances-1st 1Cea ing Item 10 No. amendments to the Capital Improvement, Intergovernmental Coordination, and Future Land Use Elements that AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: Public School Facilities Element DEPT/DIVISION: Community Development Department Requested Action: Approve the Public School Facilities Element and Amended Capital Improvements, Intergovernmental Coordination, and Future Land Use Elements for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Summary Explanation & Background: Pursuant to Florida Statutes Chapter 163, all cities and counties shall have a public school facilities element by December 1, 2008. Included in this packet is the proposed Public School Facilities Element and proposed amendments to the Capital Improvement, Intergovernmental Coordination, and Future Land Use Elements that are necessary to implement the Public School Facilities Element. Also included is the Data and Analysis provided by the Brevard County School Board. The Planning and Zoning Board has reviewed and recommended approval of the Public School Facilities and amended Elements. The Public School Facilities Element must be adopted before we can adopt any other comprehensive plan amendments. Exhibits Attached: Proposed Public School Facilities Element and proposed amendments to the Capital Improvement, Intergovernmental Coordination, and Future Land Use Elements. Data and Analysis to support Public School Facilities Element. City Man a ' ffice �' Department ORDINANCE NO. 09-2008 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT AND AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, SEVERABILITY, INCORPORATION INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND LEGAL STATUS OF THE PLAN AMENDMENTS. WHEREAS, section 163.3161 et. seq., Florida Statutes (1987) established the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act; and WHEREAS, section 163.3167, Florida Statutes, requires each municipality in the State of Florida to prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Plan as scheduled by the Florida Department of Community Affairs; and WHEREAS, section 163.3177(12), Florida Statutes, requires that each Florida municipality adopt a Public School Facilities Element consistent with those adopted by the other local governments within the county; and WHEREAS, the Brevard County School Board, Brevard County, and the Cities of Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, Indian Harbour Beach, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Titusville, West Melbourne, and the Towns of Indialantic, Malabar, Melbourne Beach, and Palm Shores participated in a coordinated effort to ensure consistency between each local government's proposed Public School Facilities Element; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 163.3177(3)(b)(1), Florida Statutes, certainportions of the City's Capital Improvements Element must be amended consistent with the adoption of the Public School Facilities Element to address financial feasibility; and WHEREAS, the City's Intergovernmental Coordination and Future Land Use Elements require amendment consistent with the adoption of the Public School Facilities Element; and WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency of the City of Cape Canaveral held a duly noticed public hearing, in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and considered findings and advice of staff, citizens, and Cin of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 09-2008 Page 1 of 4 all interested parties submitting written and oral comments; and WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency recommended the City Council transmit the subject large scale comprehensive plan text amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for its review and comment; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Cape Canaveral, Florida; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are fully incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. Authority. This Ordinance is adopted in compliance with, and pursuant to, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Sections 163.3184 and 16' ).3 Florida Statutes. Section 3. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this ordinance is to adopt the large scale comprehensive plan text amendment adopting a Public School Facilities Element as part of the City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan and to amend the Capital Improvements, Intergovernmental Coordination and Future Land Use Elements consistent with same as required by section 16' ).3 Florida Statutes. Section 4. Adoption of Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment. The City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as set forth below: A. Public School Facilities Element The Public School Facilities Element, attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by this reference as "Exhibit A," is hereby adopted into the City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan. B. Intemovernmental Coordination Element The Inter-ovenunental Coordination Element is amended as set forth in "Exhibit B," attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by this reference. (Underlined type indicates additions and strikeo rt type indicates deletions of text in the Comprehensive Plan). C. Capital Improvement Element The Capital Improvement Element is amended as set forth in "Exhibit C," attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by this reference. (Underlined type indicates additions and strik - rt type indicates deletions of text existing in the Comprehensive Plan). D. Future Land Use Element. The Future Land Use Element is amended as set forth in "Exhibit D," attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by this reference. (Underlined type indicates additions and sttikeotrt type indicates deletions of text existing in the Ciry or"gape Canaveral Ordinance No. 09-2008 Page 2 of 4 Comprehensive Plan). Section 5. Transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. The City Manager or his designee is hereby designated to sign a letter transmitting the adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, in accordance with Section 16' ).3 Florida Statutes, and Section 9J-11, Florida Administrative Code. Section 6. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, or parts of ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict. Section 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section S. Incorporation Into Comprehensive Plan. Upon the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments adopted by this Ordinance, said Amendments shall be incorporated into the City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan and any section or paragraph number or letter and any heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the foregoing. Section 9. Effective Date and Legal Status of the Plan Amendment. The effective date of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments adopted by this Ordinance shall be the date a final order is issued by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, or the Administration Commission finding the Amendments in compliance with section 163.3 184, Florida Statutes. No development orders, development permits, or land use dependent on these Amendments may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, the Amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status. After and from the effective date of these Amendments. the Comprehensive Plan Amendments set forth herein shall amend the City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan and become a part of that plan and the Amendments shall have the legal status of the City of Cape Canaveral Comprehensive Plan, as amended. [ADOPTION PAGE FOLLOWS] Cii- of Cape Canaverai Ordinance No. 09-2008 Page 3 of 4 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this '2008. ATTEST: SUSAN STILLS, City Clerk Transmittal Hearing: Adoption Hearing: Effective Date: Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for the City of Cape Canaveral only: ANTHONY A. GARGANESE, City Attorney ROCKY RANDELS, Mayor Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Buzz Petsos Rocky Randels C. Shannon Roberts Lite of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. 09-2008 Page 4 of 4 day of For Against MEMORANDUM TO: Bennett Boucher, City Manager Susan Stills, City Clerk FROM: Susan Chapman, Secretary, Planning & Zoning Board DATE: 08/11/08 RE: Recommendation to City Council Ordinance No. 09-2008, Adopting a Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Establishing a Public School Facilities Element and Amending the Capital Improvements, Intergovernmental Coordination and Future Land Use Elements, Consistent with the Requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; Providing for Transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs, the Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions, Severability, Incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan, an Effective Date and Legal Status of the Plan Amendments. At the Local Planning Agency meeting, held on August 13, 2008, by unanimous vote, the Board recommended approval of the above referenced Ordinance to the City Council. Please schedule this Ordinance for the September 2, 2008 City Council meeting. NOTICE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Notice is hereby given that the City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, will conduct Public Hearings on the adoption of its Public School Facilities Element and other amendments related thereto to its Comprehensive Plan to be held as follows: A Public Hearing of the City of Cape Canaveral Local Planning Agency will be held on August 13, 2008 at 7:00 p.m., City Hall Annex at 111 Polk Ave., Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Local Planning Agency will take public comment and make recommendations to the City Council on whether to transmit the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2008-1 to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). A Public Hearing on the transmittal of Ordinance 09-2008 will be held by the City of Cape Canaveral City Council on September 2, 2008, at 7:00 p.m., City Hall Annex at 111 Polk Ave., Cape Canaveral, Florida. The City Council will take public comment and consider whether to transmit the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2008-1 to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). ORDINANCE 09-2008 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT AND AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, SEVERABILITY, INCORPORATION INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND LEGAL STATUS OF THE PLAN AMENDMENTS. Copies of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and ordinance will be available for public inspection no later than Friday, August 8, 2008. All persons wishing to be heard should appear in person at these hearings or send written comments to the City Clerk. All persons and parties are hereby advised that if they should decide to appeal any decision made by the City with respect to any matter considered at the public meeting or hearing described in this notice, they will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose, said person or party may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based (Chapter 286, Florida Statutes). In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting should contact the City Clerk at (321) 868-1221 at least 48 hours in advance of this meeting. Barry Brown City Planner CAPE CANAVERAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 9 PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Goal, Objectives and Policies 1-8 Appendix A - Map Series 9-13 PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES GOAL TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC; SCHOOL SYSTEM THAT OFFERS A HIGH QUALITY EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT, PROVIDES ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL OF ITS STUDENTS, AND ENSURES ADEQUATE SCHOOL CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE ENROLLME.,NT DEMAND WITHIN A FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES WORK PROGRAM. Objective 1 Maintain adequate school facilities in Brevard County Schools by adopting a concurrency management system to address the need for correction of school facility deficiencies through a tiered level of service for the short and. long term plamiing periods. Policy 1.1 To ensure that the capacity of all schools is sufficient to support student growth at the adopted LOS for the five-year planning period and trough the long term planning period for each CSA, the Parties hereby establish a Tiered LOS to achieve the adopted LOS. Upon achieving the LOS standard of 100% of permanent FISH capacity, by school year 2011- 2012, the Tiered LOS will be terminated. TIERED LEVEL,OF SERVICE - SCHOOL YEAR 2007-08 to 2011-12 Facility Type 2007-08 2080-09 2009.10 2010-11 2011-12 Elementary Schools 127% 130% 115% 105% 100% MiddleSchools 122% 120°!a 100°l0 1,00% 100% Junior/ Senior High Schools 133% 135% 110% 105% 100% High Schools 139% 130% 115% 100% 100% Source: r nniey-born and Associates, Inc. 2UU7 Policy 1.2 Cape Canaveral hereby adopts the School Board's current public school attendance boundaries, as the Concurrency Service Areas (CSA). Policy 1.3 Concurrency shall be measured and applied using a geographic area known as a Concurrency Service Area (CSA) which shall coincide with the school attendance boundaries, as adopted by the School District. Either Cape Canaveral or the School District may propose a change to the CSA boundaries. The following procedures shall be used for modifying a CSA map: 2 A. The School District will transmit a proposed CSA map modification with data and analysis to support the change to the Cities, the County, and the Capital Outlay Committee (COC). Any proposed change to a CSA shall require a demonstration by the School. District that the change complies with the public school LOS standard and that utilization of school capacity is maximized to the greatest extent possible. B. Cape Canaveral and the COC will review the proposed modification of the CSA and send their comments to the School District within 45 days of receipt of the proposed change. C. State transportation costs, court approved desegregation plan, and other relevant factors must be considered when ensuring the maximum utilization of school capacity when considering a change to a concurrency service area. D. The modification of a CSA shall be effective upon adoption by the School. Board. Policy 1.4 The Parties shall observe the following process for changes in the use of schools: 1. At such time as the School District determines that a school change is appropriate considering the appropriate use of the school and utilization requirements, the School District shall transmit the proposed school change ill use and data and analysis to support the changes to the Capital Outlay Committee and the Staff Working Group. 2. The Capital Outlay Committee and the Staff Working Group shall review the proposed changes to the school use and send their comments to the School District within forty five (45) days of receipt. 3. The change in school use shall become effective upon final approval by the School Board. Objective 2 Cape Canaveral shall ensure a school concurrency evaluation shall be performed by the Brevard County School District to review projected residential development in order to accommodate new students at the adopted level of service for adequate school facility capacity. Policy 2.1 Cape Canaveral shall not approve any non-exempt residential development application for a new residential preliminary plat, site plan or functional equivalent until the 3 School District School has issued a School Capacity Availability Determination Letter (SCADL) verifying available capacity. Policy 2.2 V Cape Canaveral shall consider the following criteria to exempt residential uses from the requirements of school concurrency: Criteria: A. Single family lots of record, existing at the time the school concurrency implementing ordinance becomes effective. B. 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. C. Any amendment to any previously approved residential development that does not increase the number of dwelling units or change the type of dwelling units (single-family to multi -family, etc.). D. Age restricted communities with no permanent residents under the age of 18. Exemption of an age restricted community will be subject to a restrictive covenant limiting the age of permanent residents to 18 years and older. E. Single family homes utilized as short tern resort housing which are considered a commercial use by the City. Policy 2.3 Cape Canaveral, through its land development regulations, and in conjunction with the School District, shall establish a school concurrency review process for all residential projects that are not exempt under Policy 2.2. The minimum process requirements are described below: A. A residential development application including a School Impact Analysis (SIA) is submitted to the city for review. B. Cape Canaveral determines that the application is complete for processing and transmits the SIA to the School District for review. C. The School District reviews the application for available capacity and issues a School Capacity Availability Determination Letter (SCADL) to the city: a] If capacity is available within the affected CSA, the School District shall issue a SCADL verifying available capacity. 2. If capacity is not available within the affected CSA, contiguous CSAs are reviewed for available capacity. 3. If capacity is available in the contiguous CSAs, the School District shall issue a SCADL verifying available capacity in the adjacent CSAs. 4. If capacity is not available in the contiguous CSAs, the School District shall issue a SCADL indicating the development i.s not in compliance with the adopted LOS and offers the developer a 90 -day negotiation period for mitigation. Policy 2.4 Cape Canaveral in conjunction with the School District shall review developer proposed applications for proportionate share mitigation projects to add the school capacity necessary to satisfy the impacts of a proposed residential development. Mitigation options may include, but are not limited to: A. Contribution of land or payrn.ent for land acquisition in conjunction with the provision of additional school capacity; or B. Mitigation banking based on the construction of a public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits; or C. Donation of buildings for use as a primary or alternative learning facility; or D. Renovation of existing buildings for use as learning facilities; or E. Construction or expansion of permanent student stations or core capacity; or F. Construction of a public school facility in advance of the time set forth in the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program. Policy 2.5 For mitigation measures in Policy 2.4 (A) thru (F) above, the estimated cost to construct the mitigating improvement will reflect the estimated fiiture construction costs at the time of the anticipated construction. A. Improvements contributed by the developer shall receive school impact fee credit. 5 B. The cost difference between the developer's mitigation costs and the impact fee credit, if greater, shall be the responsibility of the developer. Policy 2.6 Cape Canaveral and the School District shall provide a 90 -day negotiation period to allow for the review and negotiation of proportionate share mitigation offers proposed by a developer. Criteria: A. If mitigation is approved, Cape Canaveral and the School District enter into an enforceable binding agreement with the developer and the improvement(s) will be included in the School District's annually adopted Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program and reflected in the next update to the Capital Improvements Element. B. If mitigation is denied, the City must deny the application based upon no available school capacity. C. Cape Canaveral shall not issue any pennits for a residential development until receiving confnnation of available school capacity in the form of a SCA.DL, from the School District. Policy 2.7 Cape Canaveral shall, upon acceptance of a mitigation option identified in Policy 2.4, enter into an enforceable binding agreement with the School District and the developer. Policy 2.8 Cape Canaveral shall notify the School District when an approved residential development has paid impact fees and when the development order for the residential development expires. Objective 3: Beginning with an effective date of 2008, all new public schools built within the City of Cape Canaveral will be coordinated with the School District to be consistent with the City's Future Land Use Map designation to ensure facilities are proximate to appropriate existing and future land uses, serve as community focal points, are co -located with other appropriate public facilities, and will have needed supporting infrastructure. Policy 3.1 Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District, shall jointly determine the need for, and timing of, on-site and off-site improvements necessary to support a new school. 0 Policy 3.2 Cape Canaveral shall enter into an agreement with the School Board identifying the timing, location, and the party or parties responsible for the planning, constructing, operating, and maintaining off-site improvements necessary to support a new school or school improvement to ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in. place prior to or concurrent with constriction. Policy 3.3 Cape Canaveral shall encourage the location of schools near residential areas by: A. Assisting the School District in the identification of funding and/or construction opportunities (including developer participation or City capital budget expenditures) for sidewalks, traffic signalization, access, water, sewer, drainage and other infrastructure improvements. B. Reviewing and providing comments on all new school sites including the compatibility and integration of new schools with surrounding land uses. C. Allowing schools within all residential land use categories. Policy 3.4 Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District, shall seek opportunities to co -locate schools with public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, as the need for these facilities is identified. Policy 3.5 Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District, hereby designates the Capital Outlay Committee (COC) as the monitoring group for coordinated planning and school concurrency in Brevard County. Policy 3.5 School concurrency shall become effective upon the adoption of this element (Public School Facilities Element). Additionally, the City of Cape Canaveral shall adopt school concurrency provisions into its Land. Development Regulations (LDR) to further implement school concurrency. Policy 3.7 Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District and the mtnlicipalities within the Brevard County shall identify issues relating to public school emergency preparedness, such as: A. The' determination of evacuation zones, evacuation routes, and shelter locations. B. The design and use of public schools as emergency shelters. 7 C. The designation of sites other than public schools as long-term shelters, to allow schools to resume normal operations following emergency events. Objective 4 Beginning with an effective date of 2008 and no later than December I" of each year thereafter, the Cape Canaveral will include in its Capital Improvements Element (CIE), the School District's annually updated five-year schedule of capital improvements as adopted by the School Board, which identifies school facility capacity projects necessary to address existing deficiencies and. meet future needs based upon achieving and maintaining the adopted level of service standard for schools. Policy 4.1 The City of Cape Canaveral shall adopt as part of its Capital Improvements Element, the Brevard County School Districts five year work program approved by the School Board, May 13, 2008, as part of the School District Budget, and by December 1 each year, including planned facilities and funding sources to ensure a financially feasible capital improvements program and to ensure the level of service standards will be achieved by the end of the five-year period. Policy 4.2 Cape Canaveral shall annually coordinate review of the entire Public School Facilities Element, including school enrollment projections, in conjunction with the School District and other local governments through the Capital Outlay Committee. This will provide an annual update of the process, including the Public School Facilities Element and maintain a public school facilities map series which are coordinated with Cape Canaveral's Future Land Use Map or Map Series, including the planned general location of schools and ancillary facilities for the five-year planning period and the long-range planning period. The Map Series shall include: A. Existing Public School Facilities Map - type and location of ancillary plants B. Five -Year Planning Period Map - generally planned public school facilities and ancillary plants Policy 4.3: Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District, shall coordinate the long range public school facilities map with its comprehensive plan and. future land use map. The Map shall be included in the Map Series provided in Policy 4.2. A. The Long Range Planning Period Map - generally planned areas of future public school facility needs P APPENDIX A MAP SERIES s.�. Existing Public School Facilities and Ancillary Plants 10 Existingand Proposed Elementary Schools 07-ANU E Legend Elementary Schools Proposed Elenientary, Schools 0 N I a . jot- Roads Water 0 25 11 D;DUll, ;l_R7X;L. El -;SIVE ............ . . . ',FAL a _cam D;DUll, ;l_R7X;L. El -;SIVE � 11fiare tt 4, „,,, 1 Existing and, Proposed Middle School Locations 12 Existing and Proposed High Schools 13 Comprehensive Plan INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES and POLICIES Prepared for The City of Cape Canaveral Updated July 15, 2008 P ��-W:�7�T�� GOAL 1 The City shall participate in coordinated activities with State, County, Regional and adjoining community governments in order to better provide for the public health, safety and welfare of its inhabitants. Objective IG -1.1: The City shall coordinate its planning efforts with the plans of school boards, other units of local government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land, and with the planning efforts of Cocoa Beach, Cocoa, Brevard County, the Port of Canaveral, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, and the State of Florida. The measurement of this Objective shall be the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. Policy IG -1.1.1: The City shall request the review of plans of others to ensure compatibility between uses within Cape Canaveral and areas immediately adjacent to the Cape Canaveral city limits. Policy IG -1.1.2: The City shall review policies of the State, regional entities and Brevard County to encourage conformance of the City's Plan with those of these other governments. Policy IG -1.1.3: The City shall exchange planning information on a regular basis with the City of Cocoa Beach, the City of Cocoa, Brevard County, the Brevard County Housing Authority, the Brevard County School Board, and any other units of local government providing services in the City but not having regulatory authority over the use of land therein. Objective IG -1.2: The City shall cooperate with any state, regional or local entity having operational and maintenance responsibility for public facilities within Cape Canaveral in establishing level -of -service standards for those facilities. The measurement of this Objective is the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Page 2 City of Cape Canaveral -rr.,..s-mi +..1 EAR Based n...,,..a,..,,nt IveyIvey H rr:� & 1Ah11� T..., October- 28 1998 , r r Policy IG -1.2.1: The City shall cooperate with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) in establishing level -of -service standards for State highways within the City. Furthermore, the City shall work towards greater communication with the FDOT on transportation and growth management issues. Policy IG -1.2.2: The City shall cooperate with the City of Cocoa in establishing level -of -service standards for Cocoa's water system within Cape Canaveral. Policy IG -1.2.3: When conflicts occur between Cape Canaveral and other governmental entities, Cape Canaveral shall consider the use of the Regional Mediation Process in resolving such conflicts. Policy IG -1.2.4: The City shall coordinate any proposed or requested annexations with Cocoa Beach and/or Brevard County. Policy IG -1.2.5: When development within Cape Canaveral is proposed adjacent to the city limits, the City shall review the proposed development in relationship to the existing comprehensive plans of adjoining governments. Policy IG -1.2.6: The City shall, where practicable, coordinate the management issues concerning the Banana River and the Atlantic Ocean with other governing bodies bordering on said river and ocean. Policy IG -1.2.7: The City will share information on level -of -service issues with the following entities: Port Canaveral (for sanitary sewer), Cocoa Beach (for recreation, drainage, and transportation), Brevard County (for solid waste and transportation), ECFRPC (for planning assistance), City of Cocoa (for potable water), and FDOT (for transportation). INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Page 3 City of Cape Canaveral ryeyr Harris R_ Walls, Inc October 74 r1994 Objective IG -1.3: The City shall, through coordination with adjacent units of local government, including Brevard County and the Canaveral Port Authority, and coordination with regional entities such as the ECFRPC and the SJRWMD, and coordination with State agencies, facilitate the mutual consideration of the impacts of development proposed in this Plan. The measurement of this Objective is the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. Policy IG -1.3.1: The City shall ensure that the coordination entities cited in Objective IG -3 are made aware of the contents of this Plan as far as proposed development is concerned, and the City shall be receptive to comments from those entities concerning the impacts of the proposed development. Policy IG -1.3.2: The City shall discuss and share information on infrastructure services regarding proposed development with Port Canaveral (sanitary sewer), Cocoa Beach (recreation, drainage and transportation), Brevard County (solid waste and transportation), Brevard County (solid waste and traffic circulation), ECFRPC (planning assistance), City of Cocoa (potable water, and FDOT (transportation). Goal 2 The City shall establish and maintain a cooperative relationship with the Brevard County School Board to provide an effective joint planning process including_ procedures to coordinate land use planning with the development of school facilities including public school siting, population projection calculations, and the provision of public schools concurrently with residential development and infrastructure. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Page 4 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR R Base Amendments ryey, Harris A- Walls , -Inc-. October 28,199-8 Objective IG -2.1: The City shall establish coordination mechanisms with the School Board to achieve a collaborative effort to identify school needs, provide for schools facilities and implement school concurrency using consistent supporting data and anal. Policy IG -2.1.1 In cooperation with the School Board, the City shall adopt and implement the interlocal agreement as required by Section 1013.33 F.S., which includes procedures for: a) Coordinating and sharing information b) Placement of schools and ancillary facilities c) Amendment and review of the Comprehensive Plan d) Site design and development plan review e) joint development of schools, parks and other uses f) Implementation of school concurrency g) Implementation of Interlocal Agreement amendments h) Resolution of disputes Policy IG -2.1.2 The City shall participate as members of School Board committees listed in the Interlocal Agreement to assist with the coordination of school placement, review of School Board data, provision of determinations of impact fee fund distribution INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Page 5 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR Based Amendments Ivey, Harris & Walls, Inc. October 28 1998 and review of proposed school concurrency amendments to local government comprehensive plans Policy IG -2.1.3 The City shall review School Board data and share development information, population projections and infrastructure availability information with the School Board consistent with the procedures provided in the Interlocal Agreement. Policy IG -2.1.4 The Cit,, shall the School Board with applications for new development in accordance with the provisions in the Interlocal Agreement. Objective IG -2.2: The City shall adopt regulations necessary to implement school concurrency Policy IG -2.2.1 The city shall adopt regulations necessary to implement school concurrency no later than the date of issuance by the State Department of Community Affairs Notice of Intent to find the Public School Facilities Element in compliance. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Page 6 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR Amendments Ivey, sr H-arFiS Rk 1A7-a11Inc. October 74 r1094 Comprehensive Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES and POLICIES Prepared for The City of Cape Canaveral Updated August 26, 2008 p rAV ....:. GOAL 1: The overall goal for the Capital Improvements Element of the City of Cape Canaveral is to provide a program to coordinate the timing and to prioritize the provision of capital improvements which support the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and encourage efficient and fiscally -sound utilization of public facilities; this includes the principle that the Capital Improvements Element is to serve as a tool for decision-making by the City government. Objective CI -1.1: The City shall utilize the Capital Improvements Element as a tool to ensure that capital facilities are made available in a timely manner to satisfy existing deficiencies, accommodate infrastructure needs for planned future growth, and replace obsolete or worn-out facilities. The measurement of this Objective is the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. Policy CI -1.1.1: The City shall, at least once per year, review and update the Capital Improvements Schedule and Budget in order to ensure that it is based upon the most recent data and outlook. Policy CI -1.1.2: The City shall accommodate the public facility needs of new growth on an ongoing basis. Policy CI -1.1.3 The City shall evaluate public facilities necessary to correct existing deficiencies and to provide for future growth by determining the capacity of existing and planned facilities to meet the needs of new development. This evaluation shall employ the level -of - service standards adopted in the Comprehensive Plan for sanitary sewer, traffic circulation, drainage, recreation and open space. These level -of -service standards are as follows: A. RECREATION: * Parks: two acres /1000 population for all parks. * Open Space: one acre/ 1000 population CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Page 2 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR Rased Amendments yr ly14ar--is & Walls, nn V i 1994 JOeto .er 28, B. SANITARY SEWER: 118 gallons per person per day C. DRAINAGE: retention of the first inch of rainfall for new developments, and a design storm of 5 -year frequency and one hour duration with rainfall of 3 inches per hour and removal of excess water within 3 hours of the event. D. SOLID WASTE: 8.52 lbs. per capita per day. E. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION: minimum level -of -service standard "E", with desired level -of -service standard "C"; plus use of "interim" level -of -service standard as defined in Policy T-1.2 in event of an "F" condition. F. POTABLE WATER: * Consumption standard: 264 gallons per household per day. * Pressure standard: 60 psi. G. The uniform, district -wide level of service standard for permanent capacity, based on the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) capaci , is as follows: TIERED LEVEL OF SERVICE BY SCHOOL YEAR Facili Type 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Elementary 127% 130% 115% 105% 100% Middle Schools 122% 120% 100% 100% 100% Tr. High 133% 135% 110% 105% 100% High 139% 130% 115% 100% 100% !" ote: See analysis of the Public School Facilities Element for detailed information on LOS Standards. POLICY CI -1.1.4: The City shall employ the usual policies and procedures of its legislative, administrative and fiscal system to ensure that the City's share of funds for the capital improvements specified in the Capital Improvements Schedule and Budget and included in the Annual Capital Improvements Budget are identified, made available, authorized, appropriated, and expended for the intended purposes. POLICY CI -1.1.5: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Page 3 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR B a Amendments Ivey, Harris iP- Wall T Oet,.l. er 94 1998 The City shall allocate costs of new public facilities according to benefits received by existing and future residents. Objective CI -1.2: The City shall adopt an Annual Capital Improvements Budget as a part of its annual budgeting process which is consistent with the Capital Improvements Schedule and Budget of this Element. The measurement of this Objective is the extent to which it is accomplished and the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. POLICY CI -1.2.1: Annually, the City shall prioritize traffic circulation improvements based upon its established level -of -service standards, and the City shall consider the following factors: the volume -to -capacity ratio of each City roadway; the roadways based upon the established level -of -service standard and the highest volume -to -capacity ratio shall be ranked highest for improvements. POLICY CI -1.2.2: Drainage improvements shall be identified and ranked based upon a drainage system condition. The drainage improvements will receive a ranking according to facility deficiencies measured by the applicable level -of -service standard. POLICY CI -1.2.3: The City shall rank sanitary sewer and water facility improvements based upon the following factors: established level -of -service standards; locational criteria of the Future Land Use Element; the degree to which they eliminate public health hazards; the degree to which they improve the treatment levels for pollutants; and the degree to which they project that the natural environment. The highest funding priority shall be given to projects addressing facility needs for development approvals awarded prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. POLICY CI -1.2.4: The City shall rank recreation and open space facilities based upon their ability to attain or maintain the established level -of -service standard; the degree to which they promote the efficient operation of existing facilities; and the degree to which they eliminate handicapped -access problems. Factors for prioritization are: facilities which will correct the greatest facility deficiencies based upon the established level -of -service standard will be given the highest ranking; facilities addressing the operation and maintenance of existing facilities shall be given the next highest ranking. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Page 4 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR Based Amendments Ivey, Harris & Walls T [l.,E..ber 28 1998 POLICY CI -1.2.5: The City shall insure that the Annual Capital Improvements Budget Contains all of the City's capital improvements for which funding is needed during the year in question, including, but not limit to, the items in the Capital Improvements Schedule of the Comprehensive Plan. POLICY CI -1.2.6: The City shall adhere to the following debt management criteria; the ratio of total debt service to total revenue shall not exceed .1, or 10%; the ratio of total capital debt to the taxable portion of the tax base shall not exceed .1, or 10%; there shall be no limitation on the use of revenue bonds as a percentage of bonded debt. Objective CI -1.3: The City shall ensure that its public facility expenditures do not unnecessarily subsidize development in high -hazard coastal areas, except for expenditures for public land acquisition or enhancement of natural resources. The measurement of this Objective is the degree to which public facility expenditures are restricted in high -hazard coastal areas, plus the extent to which the following Policies are implemented. POLICY CI -1.3.1: The City shall not locate public infrastructure (other than public recreation, open space, conservation, or coastal access facilities) within the high -hazard coastal zone unless there is no alternative. POLICY CI -1.3.2: The City shall require developers in high -hazard coastal areas to provide sanitary sewer, water, drainage, and circulation facilities for new development, thereby reducing the amount of public funds needed for such improvements. POLICY CI -1.3.3: The City shall insure that prior to City approval, all development proposed for coastal high -hazard areas meets FDEP requirements. Objective CI -1.4: The City shall provide the public facilities and the funding required for future growth and redevelopment and that new growth pays for its fair share of these facility costs. The measurement of this Objective is the implementation of LOS standards and the degree to which all users pay their fair share of public facility costs. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Page 5 City of Cape Canaveral Transmittal EAR Based AMp"dMpnfS lv e., Harris p- Walt r Oetober 28 '1994 POLICY CI -1.4.1: The City shall continue to enforce its adopted impact fee ordinances for sanitary sewer and fire protection. POLICY CI -1.4.2: The City shall continue to require that developers provide the on-site facilities for sanitary sewer, water, drainage, and transportation for their developments. POLICY CI -1.4.3: The City shall consider whether other types of impact fees are necessary and appropriate (e.g., transportation or recreation impact fees). GOAL 2: The City shall support the Brevard County School Board in its efforts to provide a financially feasible public school facilities program. Objective CI -2.1: The city shall coordinate with the School Board in its efforts to address existing deficiencies and future needs consistent with the adopted level of service standards for public schools. POLICY CI -2.2.1 Beginning with an effective date of 2008 and no later than December 1St of each .year thereafter, the Cape Canaveral will include in its Capital Improvements Element (CIE), the School District's annually updated five-year schedule of capital improvements as adopted by the School Board which identifies school facility capacity projects necessary to address existing deficiencies and meet future needs based upon achieving and maintaining the adopted level of service standard for schools POLICY CI -2.2.2 Proportionate Share - The City shall coordinate with the School Board as provided in the adopted interlocal agreement to ensure that future development pays a proportionate share of the costs of capital facili capacity needed to accommodate new development and to assist in maintaining the adopted level of service standards via impact fees and other legally available and appropriate methods CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Page 6 City of Cape Canaveral y... Trans Transmittal EAR Based Amendments _ ly, Ir -.-is R_ Walls, October 78 Jr �4ai .. r7098 Comprehensive Plan FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES and POLICIES Prepared for The City of Cape Canaveral Updated July 15, 2008 ■��l�l��/�tt�lt•\T�t•\ It•\�lS et•/1�%J GOAL 1 The overall goal for the City of Cape Canaveral for future land use is to insure the proper relationship among residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and other activities in order to maximize the efficient use of land, accessibility to the circulation system and general compatibility among the land uses. Objective LU -1.1: The City shall coordinate future land uses with the appropriate topography, soil conditions, and the availability of facilities and services. The measurement of this Objective is the coordination of land uses with the above parameters and the degree to which the following Policies are implemented: Policy LU -1.1.1: The City shall require soil borings before development takes place to assure that the soil is capable of bearing the structure(s) proposed. Policy LU -1.1.2: The City shall require developers to provide for the local sanitary sewer, reuse and water systems to serve their developments. Policy LU -1.1.3: The City shall require developers to provide for the following on-site infrastructure improvements for their projects: drainage and stormwater management, open space, safe and convenient traffic flow, and vehicle parking. Policy LU -1.1.4: The City shall apply its adopted level -of -service standards to a proposed development before allowing the development to take place. Policy LU -1.1.5: The City shall require large scale residential development to provide an adequate range of services and facilities in accordance with the character of the development, and to reduce the direct or indirect cost to the public sector in providing such services and facilities. FUTURE LAND USE Page 2 City of Cape Canaveral Adoption EAR Based Amendments Ivey, Harris & Walls, ine. Deee.: ber 15, 1�U4 Objective LU -1.2: Should blighted areas occur, the City shall work toward redevelopment or renewal of such areas. The measurement of this Objective is the continuing lack of blighted areas and the degree to which the following Policy is implemented. Policy LU -1.2.1: The City shall enforce its housing and building codes in an effort to prevent any blighted areas. Objective LU -1.3: The City shall work toward the elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the community's character and future land uses. The measurement of this Objective is the consistency and compatibility of land uses within Cape Canaveral and the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. Policy LU -1.3.1: The City shall enforce its various ordinances which regulate the land use categories included in the Future Land Use Map (Zoning Ordinance), subdivisions (Subdivision Regulations), signage (Sign Ordinance), and areas subject to seasonal or periodic flooding (Stormwater Management Ordinance and Federal Flood Insurance Program Regulations). Policy LU -1.3.2: The City shall require new development to be compatible with adjacent land uses. Policy LU -1.3.3: The City shall enforce its requirements pertaining to densities and intensities of land use in each land -use category--i.e. *R-1, Low Density Residential: maximum 5.808 lots/ acre. *R-2, Medium Density Residential and Townhouse Apartments: maximum 15 units/ acre. *R-3, Duplex/Multi-Family/Townhouse Apartments: maximum 15 units/ acre. *M-1, Light Industrial: maximum 4.356 lots/acre. *C-1, Commercial: zoning regulations impose a variety of requirements, depending upon type of use. FUTURE LAND USE Page 3 *C-2, Commercial: zoning regulations impose a variety of requirements, depending upon type of use. PUB, Public and Recreation Facilities CON, Conservation Objective LU -1.4: The City shall enforce its regulations for protection of natural resources and historic resources. The measurement of this Objective is the extent to which natural and historic resources are protected and the degree to which the following Policies are implemented. Policy LU -1.4.1: The City shall continue to enforce its regulations which protect environmentally sensitive land. (e.g. wetlands, beaches and dunes) Policy LU -1.4.2: As historically -significant properties are identified, these shall be designated and protected. Policy LU -1.4.3: The City shall maintain a list (including locations) of archaeological sites to cross-check against locations of proposed development before issuing a Development Order. Objective LU -1.5: The City shall coordinate coastal area population densities with the local hurricane evacuation plan. The measurement of this Objective is the density of population in the coastal area and the degree to which the following Policy is implemented. Policy LU -1.5.1: The City shall continue to monitor density of developments, especially in the high - hazard areas. Objective LU -1.6: The City shall attempt to prevent urban sprawl. The measurement of this Objective is the extent to which urban sprawl is prevented and the degree to which the following Policy is implemented. FUTURE LAND USE Page 4 Policy LU -1.6.1: The City shall work toward development on infill parcels. Policy LU -1.6.2: The City shall encourage projects which are adjacent to existing public infrastructure. Objective LU -1.7: The City shall ensure the availability of land suitable for utility facilities necessary to support proposed development. The measurement of this Objective is the availability of land for utility facilities. Policy LU -1.7.1: The City shall continue with its policy of requiring developers to provide local sanitary sewer and water lines at the time of development. Policy LU -1.7.2: The City shall continue to cooperate with the Cocoa Water Department for locating and obtaining land for additional water facilities which may be required to be located within Cape Canaveral at some future date. Objective LU -1.8: The City shall work toward the use of innovative land development regulations. The measurement of this Objective is the extent to which innovative land development techniques are allowed and the degree to which the following Policy is implemented. Policy LU -1.8.1: The City shall allow planned unit developments (PUD's) with proper review, using the following specific criteria: 1. The PUD is an area of land developed as a single entity, or in approved stages, in conformity with a final development plan which is intended to provide for a variety of residential and compatible uses and common space. 2. The PUD is a concept which permits variation in residential developments by allowing deviation in lot size, type of dwelling, density, lot coverage, and open space from that required for any one residential land -use classification under the zoning regulations. 3. PUD procedures and standards will have the following objectives: FUTURE LAND USE Page 5 City of Cape Canaveral Adoption EAR Based Amendments A. Accumulation of large areas of usable open spaces for recreation and preservation of natural amenities. B. Flexibility in design to take the greatest advantage of natural land, trees, historical and other features. C. Creation of a variety of housing types and compatible neighborhood arrangements that give the home buyer greater choice in selecting types of environment and living units. D. Allowance of sufficient freedom for the developer to take a creative approach to the use of land and related physical development, as well as utilizing innovative techniques to enhance the visual character of the City of Cape Canaveral. E. Efficient use of land which may result in smaller street and utility networks and reduce development costs. F. Establishment of criteria for the inclusion of compatible associated uses to complement the residential areas within the planned unit development. G. Simplification of the procedure for obtaining approval of proposed developments through simultaneous review by the City of proposed land use, site consideration, lot and setback considerations, public needs and requirements, and health and safety factors. H. PUD should utilize economical and efficient use of land, utilities and streets and other infrastructure. 4. No PUD shall be approved by the City until such time as a PUD ordinance is adopted by the City; this PUD ordinance shall be an up-to-date type of ordinance based upon the criteria specified above. Objective LU -1.9: The City shall alleviate the impacts of inadequate public facilities and services, substandard structures and lot configurations in the blighted or other affected areas in the County through redevelopment and beautification activities. Policy 1.9.1: In July of 1995, the City identified areas, prepared and adopted in the State Route A1A Beautification Plan and Redevelopment Plan (B&R) and in order to improve traffic circulation and to provide for aesthetically pleasing and environmentally sound FUTURE LAND USE Page 6 commercial, office and residential opportunities, consistent with this Comprehensive Plan. At a minimum, the following criteria shall apply: CRTTF,RTA: A. The B&R Plans shall be coordinated with the availability of the following public facilities and services at the levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan: roadways, potable water, sanitary sewer, drainage, solid waste and emergency services. B. The B&R Plans shall be coordinated with transportation improvements including marginal access, existing roadway networks in the study area, reduction of access points, parking, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and mass transit. C. The B&R Plans address the impacts of redevelopment activities on the natural systems. Redevelopment activities shall be conducted consistent with the Conservation, Coastal Management and Surface Water Management elements of this Comprehensive Plan. D. The B&R Plans provide for the visual continuity of the study area through landscaping, signage and architectural and design requirements. E. The Redevelopment Plan addresses economic development strategies such as business recruitment, commercial revitalization and marketing campaigns. F. The Redevelopment Plan shall identify housing and other structures which are substandard and shall address measures for rehabilitation or replacement. G. The B&R Plans shall be consulted with the various decision- making task forces, comprised of a balanced set of representatives from all affected parties in the City of Cape Canaveral. Obi ective LU -1.10: The City shall strive to coordinate with the Brevard County School Board with regard to the location of future public schools within the corporate boundaries of the City. Policy 1.10.1 Traditional types of public schools (high schools, junior high/middle schools, and elementary schools) shall be an allowable use in all Future Land Use categories except FUTURE LAND USE Page 7 City of Cape Canave Adoption EAR Based Amendments iv.,..�z.'ss & s, T..., is e b r iC 1004 the M-1 Industrial and PUB Public/ Recreation. The City shall be cautious and attempt to reduce an impact of school sitting and its compatibility to other uses for the Future Land use category that may be impacted. Policy 1.10.2 High schools shall be required to be located on collector and arterial roads. Policy 1.10.3 The City of Cape Canaveral, in conjunction with the School District, shall seek opportunities to co -locate schools with public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, as the need for these facilities is identified. FUTURE LAND USE Page 8 C;►-, of Caro r.,..ave ,iAdoption EAR Based Amendments lvey, Harris & Walls, lne. Beeenber 15,1 8 Introduction Public schools are critical components to the well-being and future of a community. Residential development occurring within the community is the primary factor associated with student population growth within a public school system. Because of the relationship between residential development and the provision of public schools, coordination among Brevard School District, Brevard County and the Municipalities of Brevard County is critical to ensure that public school capacity needs for future student growth can be met within the public school system. Recognizing the importance of public schools, the 2005 Florida Legislature enacted legislation amending Sections 163.3180 and 163.3177, Florida Statutes (F.S.), mandating the implementation of public school concurrency supported by data and analysis. This Data and Analysis Report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of 163.3177(12) (c), F.S. and 9J-5.025(2), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), to detail the methods and analyze the results of the study that have been employed to support the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE) for the School Concurrency Program. The School District of Brevard County along with Brevard County, and the Local Governments participating in school concurrency including, the City of Cape Canaveral, the City of Cocoa, the City of Cocoa Beach, the City of Indian Harbour Beach, the Town of Indialantic, the Town of Malabar, the City of Melbourne, the Town of Melbourne Beach, the City of Palm Bay, the Town of Palm Shores, the City of Rockledge, the City of Satellite Beach, the City of Titusville, and the City of West Melbourne. The Towns of Melbourne Village and Grant-Valkaria are exempt from school concurrency based on the criteria contained in 163.3177(12) (b), F.S. At the time of their comprehensive plan's evaluation and appraisal report, the Towns of Melbourne Village and Grant-Valkaria must determine if they continue to meet the criteria as an exempt municipality. Purpose of Report The purpose of the Data and Analysis Report is to present and explain all applicable data that are incorporated in the decision making process upon which the Public School Facilities Element is based. It verifies that a financially feasible school concurrency program which achieves and maintains an adopted level of service for schools in Brevard County is established. The Data and Analysis Report includes inventories, estimates, projections, data analyses, maps, and recommendations for the public school concurrency program. The Report identifies any assumptions made and methodologies Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 1 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 employed. This data and related analysis will be used to plan, anticipate growth and identify revenue requirements and sources. Response to the (DCA) Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report This Report addresses the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Reports to Brevard Local Governments in 2008, and provides the participating Local Governments within the Brevard County School District with the statutorily required updated data and analysis necessary to adopt amendments to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE), and a Public School Facilities Element (PSFE), consistent with the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency (Attachment A) as amended, Subsection 9J-5.025(2), F.A.C. and Chapter 163, F.S., including: Demographic profile • Land development patterns • School utilization and enrollment adjustments • Financial feasibility • Levels of service standards (and Tiered LOS) • Public infrastructure • Co -location of facilities The data and analysis has been updated to reflect changes in the data and provide for the Comprehensive Plan Amendments' consistency to ensure coordination between the School District, Local Governments, and County in planning and permitting residential development and in adding school capacity in order that capacity at the adopted level of service standard is available at the time of the impacts of residential development. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 2 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Brevard County Information (Population / Trends) Overall Population Population data were collected for the Municipalities and the unincorporated areas of the County. Local governments were queried to determine their methods for developing population projections. Generally, the County and Municipalities do not produce their own population projections, instead relying on projections from the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) or the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing. Table 1 below details 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census estimates; the 2007 data are BEBR population estimates, and projections for 2010-2030 are from University of Florida's Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing for Brevard County and the Municipalities. Figure 1 depicts the County map showing the total percentage increase in population by municipality though 2015. Table 1: Brevard County / Municipal Population 1990-2030 Sources: the 79YU and ZUUU data are census, ZUUr IS 1=0K, and w u-wJu rrom yrs cmimuery i.Cnmr luf r Iluruaulc Housing. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 3 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 2007U.1(t=x}15 :: 020 2025,-:, ,.2030 Brevard 398,978 476,230 552,109 582,271 630,577 675,689 715,780 753,090 Count Cape 8,014 8,829 10,526 10,891 11,666 12,393 13,054 13,680 Canaveral Cocoa 17,722 16,412 17,164 17,851 18,018 18,124 18,151 18,138 Cocoa Beach 12,123 12,482 12,805 13,174 13,414 13,612 13,747 13,860 Grant-Valkaria 3,907 Indialantic 2,844 2,944 3,009 3,142 3,215 3,274 3,320 3,358 Indian Harbour 6,933 8,152 8,715 9,275 9,811 10,287 10,684 11,031 Beach Malabar 1,977 2,622 2,814 3,142 3,426 3,687 3,925 4,145 Melbourne 59,646 71,382 78,386 80,180 84,739 88,767 92,120 95,065 Melbourne 3,021 3,335 3,369 3,516 3,600 3,671 3,725 3,777 Beach Melbourne 591 706 724 756 789 816 836 853 Village Palm Bay 62,632 79,413 101,793 103,772 114,851 125,162 134,303 142,751 Palm Shores 210 794 947 1,195 1,447 1,698 1,934 2,169 Rockledge 16,023 20,151 25,911 28,264 1 31,878 35,436 38,536 41,390 Satellite Beach 9,889 9,577 10,769 11,941 12,604 13,205 13,715 14,178 Titusville 39,352 40,605 44,526 45,573 47,236 48,709 49,925 51,009 West 8,399 9,824 15,777 18,455 21,860 25,302 28,703 32,228 Melbourne Brevard- 148,464 188,918 210,967 231,144 252,023 271,546 289,102 305,458 Unincorporated Sources: the 79YU and ZUUU data are census, ZUUr IS 1=0K, and w u-wJu rrom yrs cmimuery i.Cnmr luf r Iluruaulc Housing. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 3 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 1 ected Change in "Intal Population by Munici Legend Projected Pohularion Increase Elen,enrary Schools a Middle SCI1DOIS U9 1 ligh Schools H Mijor Roads .. x. N May I,=. Miles 0 1 2 p4 ffYY Brevard County Public School Facilities Element ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 4 Brevard County Student Populations and Projections A major objective of school concurrency is the development of a process by which each local government and the school district agree to project student enrollment. In Brevard County, the 2007 Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalency Projection (COFTE) forecast, developed by the State Estimating Conferences, was utilized to develop "Update No. 1 to the 2007-08 Five -Year Facilities Work Program." Going forward, the relevant COFTE forecast will be utilized to develop this document each year. Note that this forecast is adjusted to accommodate local government development projections, and the methodology is described in the "Projected Public School Facility Conditions" section. Using the described student projection methodology, Figure 2 compares these forecasts, termed the "Growth Management" forecasts, with the COFTE forecasts for the planning period, as well as the actual student membership for 2006-07 and 2007-08. This information was updated in response to the DCA's ORC Report. For the school year 2007-08, the actual student count exceeds the State's COFTE count for Brevard by more than 4000 students. While the COFTE uses a cohort survival method based on an average of the two attendance counts in the fall and early spring, COFTE does not account for the local governments' development patterns as required by 163.31777(2)(a),F.S. and 1013,33(3)(all, F.S. for the geographic distribution of jurisdiction -wide growth forecasts. In order to obtain up-to-date student enrollment projections, these growth management estimates are recalculated each year by the local governments and the School District to adjust for growth and economic trends. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 5 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 2 COFTE/ Growth Management Comparison School Year bOE COFTEi COFTE forecast (Summer 2007) Growth Management Projections Delta (Growth Mgt - COFTE) Decrease 2002 69,056 -- 2003 2006-07 516 67,132 70,717(actual) 3,585 2007-08 68,636 66,453 70,479(actual) 4,026 2008-09 66,450 70,075 3,625 2009-10 66,796 69,618 2,822 2010-11 67,206 68,854 1,648 2011-12 67,825 69,052 1227 Sources: Brevard Public Schools 2008; Department of Education CU/- I E ZUUi Student Growth Summary Table 2 shows summary data provided by the Florida Department of Education (DOE), 2007, reflecting average student enrollments for the County from SY 2002 through SY 2006. According to the figures, student population showed a decline between years 2004 and 2006. According to the DOE, between 2002 and 2004, the student population increased by 1.5 percent, but declined by 4.2 percent from 2004 to 2006. Table 2: Capital Outlay FTE Enrollment Comparison School Year " bOE COFTEi ,: number of students counted two times per year school year, and projections are based on a cohort of those averages. The School District's Actual and Projected Student membership is reported in Table 3 below which depicts the enrollment membership and growth management projection data for student enrollment for Brevard owned public schools. This Table does not include charter schools, or special schools and centers. Table 3 Student Growth Actual and Projections: Not Including Charter Schools and Special Centers Source: Brevard Public Schools ZUU6 The decline in student population in Brevard is consistent with what other Florida school districts are experiencing. Table 4 is the DOE's 2007 Capital Outlay Full -Time Equivalent Projection Forecast (COFTE) Table, showing actual and projected enrollments. The student projections by COFTE are made by grade level and not by individual schools. Note that Growth Management projections are utilized to apportion the COFTE projections in the District's Five -Year Facilities Program by school. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 7 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 ACTUAL and PROJECTED ENROLLMENT SCHOOL 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08` 2008'=09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 YEAR DISTRICT 70,047 70,946 71,750 71,692 70,717 70,479 70,075 69,618 68,854 69,052 TOTAL Source: Brevard Public Schools ZUU6 The decline in student population in Brevard is consistent with what other Florida school districts are experiencing. Table 4 is the DOE's 2007 Capital Outlay Full -Time Equivalent Projection Forecast (COFTE) Table, showing actual and projected enrollments. The student projections by COFTE are made by grade level and not by individual schools. Note that Growth Management projections are utilized to apportion the COFTE projections in the District's Five -Year Facilities Program by school. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 7 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 M � n o c O r N 11 N N N M M co M c- C O O M N U V M ccC to co r C M Ln N O CO r, CCL cc(C U co M a- C (On CD V N C M N r c V n U) C w M r C O to O u MCN 0 n (VD M C V to O V w Cl) C m V (o CO U) c w M c w M U) M c n u) co n o v v to � c V two N c- C N 04 04 W M U) CD c V r V O u V tno N C M to CD O c M M O (D y t0 N M c V co O O c to co C N M O n U o (n n co C V ti M C Z E E U) r J v to (s Y m (a (D n v o c n O co N M (n w O V U) c r- N co to N Cl) (D c CN to Ln O V V I � W U) O c O O N U) i n I tD (o v CD c to M I n U) I � 1 0 D o c Ln I V I to M O O c Ln I to ) M 1 r 1 � ) M ) to two 1 M - o 1 O I r caE E CN (n Y Y d (7 a (D c CD fA 00 0 O cp O C t C� � C _C r W O a) SZ w � co� CA _T O C U Q C/ U � _ N CO is d0 _T C � O U > N_ Y Co C m0 U) N n O (D n V n N U N (�D In U1 U) U) U) U) U) U.) to (D U) V (h (D 2— U) d N O n Cl) U) Cl) V N O O n O M -o M O O V U) M n tD N M M cD n co n n M N O O U) cc O oc N (n Lo U) U) (o U) U) U) (n (n Lo v LQ 0 � U7 aN n (D n M U) n 00 n N n N Lo Lo N tp n M co O 00 V V O co CD M CD U) U) U7 r U) M V M V r U) M U) Cl! U) O U) n U) N U) U) U N V O U7 a� N Co N M to U) (D (D O n M U) n N �- n M 00 co N Cl) V M O n M N (D M O cc c O N O cr cc V N L) N V U) U) V V U) U) U) U) V U) U) U) N O N o (n LL f (V 1 1 N U) V t10 00 M p U) U) O N M 0) O M O V I N Cl) M M U) W v n V O V U) O U) M V Cr V O V N co O U) O U) M i O U) d N 1 h 1 tti O V N to n n M n U) O (D M 1 U o) V N M w V n w ID N O M 1 C (D O (D ap O M O n O M V V O LL U N -It U] V V 0 V V V LO 0 (D U) Lo W N o0 F O o V LL p ttt i r O Q) n co Cl) .; (D � M M Cl) O O Cl) 1 00 (D N U) M O M V v N O (D i A p n co o V r� V cr V o V o V n V Oct V U) (n U7 (D v U) o to CL A U N O O V n aN . O O i N N n � n U) M V M M M n (D O O N O N M (D O w M 00 n U) O O cl n CD n to M N U) N 7 0 N U) U) V V V V M 0 U) (D N U) M U O O Q O N V V M 00 n n N M (D N N CD N co to V U) 00 N M M O oc N cr (D (D M O M N (D V (D w O N M M M V N O M O U) V V V V U) U) U) U) (D U) U) U) U O M Q o N V M M O N O CD C U) N tl) n 0 CO M M M V c O (D U) n o N LO V V V U) U) U) U) U) CD U) U) Qo � N N co a (n O n O M a) (U (U N tU (U (U N c N N (U fU a L O y v v v o a o v v m � c� m M � n o c O r N 11 N N N M M co M c- C O O M N U V M ccC to co r C M Ln N O CO r, CCL cc(C U co M a- C (On CD V N C M N r c V n U) C w M r C O to O u MCN 0 n (VD M C V to O V w Cl) C m V (o CO U) c w M c w M U) M c n u) co n o v v to � c V two N c- C N 04 04 W M U) CD c V r V O u V tno N C M to CD O c M M O (D y t0 N M c V co O O c to co C N M O n U o (n n co C V ti M C Z E E U) r J v to (s Y m (a (D n v o c n O co N M (n w O V U) c r- N co to N Cl) (D c CN to Ln O V V I � W U) O c O O N U) i n I tD (o v CD c to M I n U) I � 1 0 D o c Ln I V I to M O O c Ln I to ) M 1 r 1 � ) M ) to two 1 M - o 1 O I r caE E CN (n Y Y d (7 a (D c CD fA 00 0 O cp O C t C� � C _C r W O a) SZ w � co� CA _T O C U Q C/ U � _ N CO is d0 _T C � O U > N_ Y Co C m0 Existing Public School Facility Conditions The planning for Brevard public school students is complicated by the fact that many students attend choice schools or other school district facilities. For a variety of reasons, nearly one quarter of Brevard's students attend schools outside their home school or "residence" boundaries. These students may attend other public schools offering special programs, or may be in charter schools or special program facilities not used to measure capacity for school concurrency. This reality makes it necessary to adjust forecasts to accurately project student enrollment within each school attendance area for the next five years. Manual adjustments are made to compensate for anomalous and non-recurring growth patterns. The result of this "from- to" analysis has been provided in Appendix A. Table 5 summarizes the student numbers discussed above for the school year 2007-08. Table 5 - Brevard County Student Attendance Location Relative to Residence Student Attendance Summary Number of Public School,. Students Attendance Percentage Students attending schools within designated areas 58,786 78% Students attending schools in other than designated areas 16,628 22% Brevard public school students in 2007-08 75,414 100% Source: Brevard public schools 2008 Total number of Brevard Public School students 2007-08 The special programs referred to include magnet programs, International Baccalaureate Programs, and special vocational programs. These schools include the District's five schools of choice, namely Robert Louis Stevenson, Freedom 7, West Melbourne, Edgewood Junior/Senior High, and West Shore Junior/Senior High. Centers that offer programs include the Abeyance Centers, the Halfway House, and the Center for Drug Free Living and Outward Bound, among others. With nearly a quarter of Brevard County Public students attending schools outside the school of their residence, the freedom to choose their schools is an important feature of Brevard's public schools that is highly valued by parents and students alike. Due to this shifting of students for the opportunity to select programs of their choice, special challenges are presented to the School District to maintain the integrity of its enrollment projections. To address the mandates of school concurrency and ensure the adopted level of service (LOS) is not exceeded in any year, it is important that the annual updating of the student projections incorporate any new growth patterns and movement of students by choice for each year. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 9 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 School Enrollment, Facility Capacity, and Existing Utilization (Current Surpluses and Deficiencies) In addition to taking into account the shifting of students caused by the choice programs, an analysis of existing enrollment, capacity and utilization of the existing public schools in Brevard County is performed to identify existing surpluses and deficiencies in capacity (student stations) by school and by school type. This analysis establishes a base which helps develop the level of service standard for schools. With areas deficient in capacity identified, a determination of the financial cost to add additional capacity to correct the deficiency and/or student boundary adjustments according to school board policy can be made to areas with surplus capacity. For the school year 2007-08, twenty-two (22) schools in Brevard County have a utilization that exceeds a LOS of 100 percent. Of the 22 schools, 12 are elementary, 2 are middle schools, 2 are Jr/Sr high schools, and 6 are high schools. Table 6 below shows the result of the analysis. The items highlighted in blue indicate a utilization rate greater than 100 percent. The school capacity figures are based on the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Manual's capacity analysis, as accepted by the DOE, excluding capacity provided in "portable" classrooms. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 10 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Table 6: Existing Concurrency Service Area Utilization 2007-2008 Indicates a utilization rate greater than 100% Source: Brevard Public Schools 2008 Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 11 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 �T GVV/- OT ZVV/- " 7T /-VVI- School Name 08 School Name 08 School Name 08' Utilization Utilization Utilization Elementary Schools Mlddi"' Schaals Allen _ McAuliffe 1:: Central n Andersen, Meadowlane Int. aFP Clearlake Meadowlane Apollo Prim. 8 Delaora ' Atlantis�< Mila Hoover. Audubon Mims Jackson Cambridge Oak Park Jefferson. Cape View Ocean Breeze Johnson Carroll Palm Bay Kennedy`."•: Challenger 7 :,':, Pinewood 83';o Madison Columbia Port Malabar McNair 9!",% Coquina 74, Quest 4 Southwes# Creel {" Riverview rs,>.; St©ne' Croton 7 , : Riviera 801" , Junior / Senior High Schools Discovery�, .. Roosevelt 74 ;'o Cocos Beach Endeavour '"_q Sabal Space Coast `= Enterprise I, 79;�: Saturn _ High Schools Fair len Sea Park to Astronaut Gardendale Sherwood Baysideh,E Gemini South Lake Cocoa 71 Golfview Sunrise Eau Gallie Harbor City'_, Suntree Melbourne't�, Holland Surfside' Merritt Island Imperial Estates Tropical': Palm +Bay Indialantic 04',, Turner ' Rockledge Jupiter University Park '-. Satellite X,, Lockmar 8', Westside ' . Titusville : Longleaf Williams` Viera Manatee : 4`Xclt Indicates a utilization rate greater than 100% Source: Brevard Public Schools 2008 Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 11 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Existing School Facilities Maps displaying the locations of existing and proposed elementary, middle, jr/sr high and high school facilities are displayed as Figures 3a, 3b, and 3c. The existing / under -construction schools are built / being built on DOE recommended land areas, in accordance with the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF). Placing all the existing Brevard County Public School District facilities on one map, Figure 4a is provided showing all existing schools and ancillary plants county -wide. Based on the updated School District student projections and capital budget availability, the anticipated ancillary plants are proposed in accordance with the following updated information: • New Satellite Beach Bus Compound - Existing SBBC property, 5 acres. New facility to be constructed on same site 2011-12. • SR 520 Warehouse Addition - Existing SBBC property, 16 acres. Addition to be constructed on same site 2011-12. These proposed ancillary plants for the School District are displayed in Figure 4b. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 12 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 3a: Existinq and Proposed Elementary Schools Existing and Proposed Elementary Schools � t (No Proposed Elementary Schools) M%' _ S��c�tnri 1 zltTRe �o E Er a t � j CAPE .IE: 'C FP_=Y_ R40U6 19-, r.3 l�5rs FREEOCi h1' L \l A Yt ' i a)fJrEE , 3� it t ;E=P. -R1' t.^ i Mi LL --PID ��. ;c E:.FI BRE ELE tL,i' FE IPIDL LIRTE, i P1E�D 'Lui{EP 1 F ! l $PGEL11W1 tiE Ds?,Li NE.M�iERPAE 01 f � DI EP p !"• - 8 P�LRi Bw 1 W L I,Fe P.,", 7 I �S Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 13 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 31b: Existing and Proposed Middle and Jr/Sr High Schools Existing and Proposed Middle and Jr/Sr High \ Schools (No Proposed Middle or Jr/Sr High Schools Tixl.�Illrc m 9 'z y ' YuShIiC �rv� v Ci(.hlCS�1 k € Og: € l a b t} J LFIT PI f{PR K ,A x '4 DEL{uF- E -� _a Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 14 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 3c: Existing and Proposed Senior High and Jr/Sr High Schools NA �} Existing and Proposed Senior and Jr/Sr High 4! Schools {{{1 Proposed "CCC' Senior High Ts cT s ,,s T3nrvn�x1 HTIi �uL Niblic .`.r Schexfl "� ,SSµ j i raE„rrr����&j Existing High Schools v� o E ,.. Proposed High School X. 5 EA,H k� ti IJ i u d”, s 3 ; 'zhTELLME gg F •' Y 4 a IE j[ �, , xG1ElF�lHE f a fpa Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 15 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 4a: Existing Public School Facilities and Ancillary Plants Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 16 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 4b. Figure 4b Proposed Ancillary Facilities 520 Warehouse Addition New Satellite Beach Bus Compound Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 17 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Student Generation Rates Determining the number of students generated from new residential development is necessary to identify the student impact on public school capacity. In order to calculate the number of students associated with new residential development, a student generation multiplier was created based on the actual students residing in the various housing types. Because the number of students living in a housing unit varies depending on the type of residential housing, the student generation rate (SGR) per residential unit is based on four housing types. These housing types are: single family; multi -family; condominium/ cooperatives; and mobile home. Condominiums (condos) and cooperatives (co-ops) were not aggregated with the multi -family housing type for two reasons. The real estate market for condos and co-ops differs from that of multi -family housing units, such as apartments and duplexes. The difference in housing types and their associated markets generate unique student multipliers. Historically, condos and co-ops do not generate as many students as multi -family housing units. Secondly, the specificity of the parcel data allowed for the calculation of unique generation rates for condo and co-ops and multi -family housing units. Two datasets were used to calculate the student generation rates. These datasets were the geographic information systems (GIS) property parcel file from the Brevard County Property Appraiser's office and October 2005 student enrollment data. The 2005 student enrollment data were obtained from the School District and contained student addresses and grade level data. The student address data were geocoded to property parcel data and street centerline data to create a GIS point file with the spatial location of each student based on their address. Of the 75,646 student records, 71,805 (95 percent) were matched to a property parcel. The remaining 3,841 students were then geocoded to the street centerline file. Of these 3,841 students, 547, or 0.7 percent, were unmatched due to address errors such as post office boxes or unidentifiable address data. A spatial join was applied to the parcel data and geocoded student data. A spatial join is a type of spatial analysis in which the attributes of features in two datasets are joined together based on the relative location of each feature. In this case, the spatial join linked the point location of each student to a specific property parcel. The result of this operation is one GIS file that contains student data as well as housing type data from the property appraiser. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 18 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 This study was conducted using over 99 percent of the total student population, not a sample set, and the volume of data used was large enough to offset occasional housing type assignment errors. The total student population used in the multiplier analysis was 72,165. The student population used in the multiplier analysis is smaller than the total student population contained in the October 2005 enrollment data for several reasons. Students with address errors or post office box addresses were not matched to an address by geocoding. Additionally, 1,387 students who attend non-traditional schools, such as the Space Coast Marine Institute and Crosswinds, were removed from the dataset. Pre -K students were also not included in the multiplier analysis. Charter school students were included in the student population for this analysis. The numbers of actual students in Brevard County as of October 29, 2005 are displayed in Table 7 by housing type and school type. In addition to the students summarized in Table 7, 1,096 students were not assigned to a residential land use due to errors in the parcel data and GIS analysis. These students were proportionately distributed to the four housing types based on the housing type distribution for the total student population. Table 7. Students by Residential Housing Type and School Type _� ` £r�S�ngle Condi/ tUl�l��l� "Mukfi "Famfl co.Q y HOttile Famll Elements K-6 30,678 829 1,490 4,388 Middle 7-8 9,671 283 413 1,041 High 9-12 19,626 446 585 1,619 All Students 59,975 1,558 2,488 7,048' Source: Civaterra, Inc.; 2006 (includes Jr/Sr High students) Table 8 details the 2005 housing type counts for Brevard County. These data were obtained from several sources. The single family and condo/co-op numbers were calculated from the August 2006 property parcel GIS data and were calculated by CivaTerra, Inc. The total number of units, not the total number or parcels, was used to calculate the number of multi -family and mobile home housing units. The mobile home totals are from 2002 and published by the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, which is maintained by the University of Florida, and these numbers are published on the county's website. The multi -family unit totals are from 2005 and published by the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR). Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 19 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Table 8: Dwelling Units by Type Source: Civaterra, Inc.; 2006 Table 9 below shows the resulting student generation rates by unit type and school type. Table 9: Brevard County School Concurrency Student Generation Rates Single ' Gondol=g ''Mobile Multi. Muhl Famil . Co=o y' .; Home,,,,,, Farnil Occupied Dwelling Units 157,455 26,286 20,784 22,881 Source: Civaterra, Inc.; 2006 Table 9 below shows the resulting student generation rates by unit type and school type. Table 9: Brevard County School Concurrency Student Generation Rates Source: Givaterra, Inc.; 2006 (includes Jr/Sr High students) To determine the student impact of a proposed residential development for school concurrency purposes, a proposed development's projected number and type of unit are converted into the number of projected students by school level within the specific Concurrency Service Area Boundary. Based on the student generation rates in Table 9 above, 100 new single-family housing units constructed in Brevard County, will generate 20 elementary school students, 6 middle school students, and 12 high school students for the Brevard County Public School System. Because the projection of the number of students that will be generated from new residential development is critical to the school concurrency process, a student generation multiplier was created using the full student population. Consequently, the number of students associated with a development can be calculated by applying the multiplier by school level to the development's proposed number and type of residential housing units. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 20 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 '.Single ' ; Conch/ Mobil e Muhl 1=anvil�a0Home Farm[ Elementary 0.20 0.03 0.07 0.19 Middle 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.05 High 0.12 0.02 0.03 0.07 Total 0.38 ;0.06 0.12 0.31 Source: Givaterra, Inc.; 2006 (includes Jr/Sr High students) To determine the student impact of a proposed residential development for school concurrency purposes, a proposed development's projected number and type of unit are converted into the number of projected students by school level within the specific Concurrency Service Area Boundary. Based on the student generation rates in Table 9 above, 100 new single-family housing units constructed in Brevard County, will generate 20 elementary school students, 6 middle school students, and 12 high school students for the Brevard County Public School System. Because the projection of the number of students that will be generated from new residential development is critical to the school concurrency process, a student generation multiplier was created using the full student population. Consequently, the number of students associated with a development can be calculated by applying the multiplier by school level to the development's proposed number and type of residential housing units. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 20 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Projected Public School Facility Conditions Planning for Student Growth One of the main documents used to plan for new educational facilities is the Educational Plant Survey. The Educational Plant Survey (Attachment B) is prepared once every five years (and updated as necessary within the five year time frame with "spot" surveys), and is a comprehensive and systematic study of present educational and ancillary facilities used for determining future capital needs. This Educational Plant Survey is used as a reference when formulating the District's Tentative Facility Work Program, which includes the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program (Attachment C). In accordance with statutes, the Five -Year Facility Program is updated annually. Based on the recommendations of the DCA and DOE, the District in 2008 performed a Spot Survey to update the Educational Plant Survey utilizing COFTE projections. This document is attached in Attachment B. Likewise, the School District has updated the Five -Year Capital Facilities Work Program with COFTE student projections, and this is attached as the revised Attachment C. With each annual update to the Work Program, the District reviews the existing and projected student growth as determined by COFTE and distributed by school based on local data to prepare for the additional capacity necessary to support the growth. The School District also prepares a long range ten and twenty-year plan as a part of the Five -Year Facilities Work Program. Based on the slowing of growth and the DOE required revised projections of students, the School District has reduced the number of projected new schools, ancillary facilities, and additions it currently identifies as necessary within the 10 and 20 year planning horizons. Figure 5 below identifies the location of property owned by the School District and the location of future schools by school type for the "long range" planning period (10 yrs). Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 21 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 22 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Projected Enrollment According to state law, the School District is required to accurately project future student enrollment and school capacity annually. The State's DOE Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalent (COFTE) student count is the measure the DOE has required for student projections. Summary data, shown in Table 10 provided by the Florida Department of Education (DOE), reflects student projections for the County to school year 2013-14. According to the projections by the DOE, student population is expected to decrease from 2006 through 2009, at which point it will start to increase once again. The COFTE student population is projected to jump from 66,450 in 2008-09 to 69,277 students in 2013-14. While this represents a five-year increase of nearly 3000 students, these numbers reflect considerably lower student growth rate than previously anticipated by the DOE. Each year the DOE adjusts its COFTE projections. Therefore, by the School District's careful monitoring of actual student membership, the School District will be able to adjust and plan as needed for future student enrollment. Table 10 Capital Outlay FTE Growth Summary Source: Department of Education, July 2007. Projection Method for Brevard Students As required by the Florida DOE, the School District must rely upon the COFTE projections as the basis of its annual capital planning for the financially feasible Five—Year Capital Facilities Work Program. During the summer of each year, the Florida Department of Education (DOE) publishes grade by grade COFTE enrollment projections for each Florida school district for the next 10 years. The DOE uses an average of the student counts and a standard `cohort survival' method using five year enrollment trends. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 23 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 While the DOE methodology used is generally accepted and is considered fairly reliable for long term projections, using the DOE COFTE projections alone for annual school concurrency planning presents the School District with several issues. To address the differences in the data, the School District prepares projections school by school, grade by grade modifying information where boundary changes have occurred, development trends have affected population distribution, and where unique information of housing trends has been provided by local government data. In preparation for the School District's 2008-09 Capital Facilities Work Program and Five Year Capital Plan, the School Board retained a consulting firm, CivaTerra, to obtain future residential development activity data from the local governments, and to produce student population projections that incorporate the residential growth data. CivaTerra produced student population projections using Davis Demographics software. Davis Demographics is a GIS -based program that uses a cohort survival method, and incorporates future residential growth to produce student population projections. Next the "From -To" analysis discussed in the Section above entitled "Existing Public School Facility Conditions" adjusts future enrollments by accounting for students attending schools outside of their residence boundary. Finally, established redistricting schedules, governed by Board policy, are applied to further refine these projections to develop school utilization projections for the end of the planning period of 2011-12. This data provides the basis for the updated student projections and apportionment of COFTE projections to develop the Update No. 1 to the 2007-08 Five -Year Facilities Work Program. The CivaTerra model and the student adjustments data are provided in Appendix "A". The student membership projections developed with the Davis Demographics "School -Site" software are based on birth rates; student mobility rates; and residential development data. When the software calculations have been generated, the sum of all the changes (from -to, established re -districting) is added or subtracted from each school projection generated. The results become the final projections for school concurrency, aka the "Growth Management" projections. These student membership projections will be recalculated each year using the software. Subsequent adjustments to reflect the patterns of student attendance across the county will also be recalculated every year. In response to the ORC Report, the School District compared the input factors and model results to the School Board's annual enrollment forecast, total population figures, and the COFTE projections to provide consistency with the State's data and determine the financial feasibility of its adopted 2007-08 Capital Plan. The resulting Update No. 1 (Included in Attachment C) demonstrates sufficient capacity for the School District to reach its adopted LOS standard at the end of the planning period. See Appendix C for the full Capital Plan. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 24 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Level of Service Standard The Level of Service (LOS) standard for schools, as proposed and discussed in this Report, is described as the optimum utilization of schools based on a ratio of permanent capacity to school enrollment in each Concurrency Service Area (CSA) according to a financially feasible plan for the District. The school utilization must not exceed the adopted LOS by students generated from new developments. The School District's LOS standard is calculated based on permanent student stations, as defined by the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) and is applied to each school of the four types of schools: elementary, middle, jr/sr high and high schools. The Level of Service (LOS) standards, which are adopted in the amended Interlocal Agreement (ILA) and applied in each CSA, are used to establish the maximum permissible school utilization rate relative to capacity. The LOS standard for Brevard Schools, which apply at the school level, is 100% of permanent FISH capacity for all schools of each type by the year 2011-2012. The LOS standard is based on permanent capacity within a CSA as defined by FISH for two reasons. First, FISH permanent capacity is the measurement that the Board has utilized over the years to indicate the available capacity at area schools. Each year after the fall student count, a utilization report is produced which indicates the school enrollment at each school, FISH capacity and the percentage each school is over or under the FISH capacity. This is the basis for the School Board's adopted five year capital plans and any new capacity projects which may need to be funded if other means of balancing utilization of schools are not available. Upon the adoption and implementation of school concurrency, the School District's school utilization report will be used to provide recommendations for the evaluation of residential development proposals pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement amended for School Concurrency (ILA). Second, FISH capacity is generated by the Florida Department of Education (DOE) and is the accepted capacity calculation based on design, though not always reflective of how schools are used based on the programs offered at a school. The FISH measurement provides a basis for capacity that is generally recognized by the local governments and development communities at this time. School concurrency requires a review of proposed residential developments to confirm that student stations will be available to serve the students generated by the development at the time the student impact will occur. This review first considers capacity in the Concurrency Service Area (CSA) of the proposed residential development, and it includes a review of adjacent CSA's for capacity if none exists in the directly affected CSA. The use of adjacency requires the School District to maximize utilization of Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 25 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 schools to the greatest extent possible to ensure that the utilization of two adjacent schools is not disparate. School Districts can maximize utilization through school attendance zone adjustments, changes in school programs, building new schools, or providing additional capacity at existing schools. School concurrency management then requires that residential development projects not be approved if sufficient capacity at the designated level of service is not available to serve the project. If a proposed development fails the school concurrency test due to lack of sufficient capacity, and there is no adjacent capacity, the development may seek options to provide for the necessary school capacity through mitigation. Levels of service standards for public school facilities serve several purposes: • To guide long range projections of school facility needs; • To assist with the determination of school facility needs over the five year capital improvement element time frame; and, • To establish a basis for the review of petitions for final subdivisions and site plans for residential development. The Florida Legislature recognized that the premise of concurrency is that public facilities will be provided to achieve and maintain the adopted standards (Section 163.3180(13)(d), F.S.]. Therefore, when considering the school concurrency LOS standard to be set, future student enrollments and capacity measurement, and the School Board's financial capability for capital projects must be taken into consideration. In addition, Section 163.3180(13)(b) 3., F.S. provides authorization for tiered level of service standards; this recognizes that in some rapidly growing counties there is a severe backlog of public school capacity and that meeting those needs may take time to achieve while maintaining an adequate and desirable level of service over the planning period. The school concurrency legislation, Section 163.3180(13)(b), Florida Statutes, contains three provisions regarding level of service standards for the purposes of school concurrency: • Level -of -service standards must be established jointly in the interlocal agreement by the School Board and local governments within the County, they must be adequate, and they must be based on data and analysis. • Public school level -of -service standards are to be adopted by the local governments into the Public School Facilities and Capital Improvements Elements of the comprehensive plan and are Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 26 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 to be applied district -wide to all schools of the same type. Types of schools may include elementary, middle, and high schools as well as special purpose facilities such as magnet schools. Levels of service may differ between types of schools. • As an option, the law permits local governments to utilize tiered level -of -service standards to allow time to achieve an adequate and desirable level of service on a system -wide basis or utilize a long-term concurrency management system for specifically defined districts where significant backlogs exist. An Analysis of Existing and Projected Student Enrollment An analysis of existing and projected enrollment, capacity and utilization of the existing and future public schools in Brevard County has been performed to identify surpluses and deficiencies in capacity (student stations) by school and by school type. This analysis established a base that helped develop the level of service standard for schools. With areas deficient in capacity identified, a determination of the financial cost to add additional capacity to correct the deficiency and/or student boundary adjustments to areas with surpluses can be made. Table 11: Brevard County Public Schools Utilization 2007-08 to 2011-12 below shows the result of this analysis. As of 2007-08, there are twenty-two (22) schools in Brevard County with an LOS greater than 100 percent. The majority of these schools (12) are elementary schools. The Utilization Table shows that the School District will meet its adopted LOS at the end of the planning period using a Tiered Level of Service discussed in the following section. Note that new capacity is in place at several existing high schools in years 2008-09 and 2009-10, and high school "CCC' will open for school year 2009-10. This additional capacity will resolve LOS issues at the high school level. However, the ability to conduct student attendance area adjustments will allow the District to achieve and maintain an adopted Level of Service at the elementary, middle and Jr./Sr. high schools. The School Board, recognizing the need to define criteria for the implementation of strategies to meet the Level of Service requirements established by the Board and contained in the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency (part of the 2005 Growth Management Legislation), established a School Board Policy (Appendix D) to permit adjustments to ensure maximum utilization. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 27 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 U) �: t " 1)rz coai vi (tel�; OD <0 t a m t- mi h ;7 w 0 G M;W 0) w,go ;� �r 1, km &; w V) co �& %N,W V, W W w w t-- 0 w w w 0 w t, w W t- r- N C- -7- Z) E E >> 0 -C L) c/) 0 a) a) cm -0 ca C ':) C > D a) 0 T >0 c R ca cc :t Lli L) .0 C: aj a) a) (D E E E E •x x x x a) -a -0 c: I C> cu -6 a) 2 E 0. E. .2 E 'r C, o 2 z .2 0 a) 0 a) a.-, 2 - E U -5 m c ca cu w m 0 m < < CL < 0 -C 0 0 0 00 2 (Ln) a w w LL ca w cc 0 _oj 0 1 -j m a) a) m 2 0 0 V f, -'04 40 WlV 0 OD,-,I�t �Or WO M 0 1- W'C) LO It 0 W,C'4 N C%l 0 0 04 0 04 n00 ?- OD N. 0 co 10 CC 00 rl N a) �o (0 V) I0 2'-It.M L� F- ;Z M — 00 r- t- f- (0 r- I to t- M — — t-- 00 CD r- CO t- 0) 00 4) CL CL m 04 0 n 0 W 04 LI) M M CD M W 00 M (0 V) CO V 0 to (D 0) CN cr) M cd 0 V co - w 7100 CO a m N. fl- M Lo (0 V) r.- f- co w co N M N I- I- f�- C� M W 4) to to N - 00 'i v co W co r-. 00 00 ;t go w w r - o 0 0 co (0 00 M r- rl- W U*) rl M r, U,) P, w I- rl- r- w r- v 4G 1-A00mACD r- CF) co 13) CL 8 0.) z, 7� J, ca Q) CL cu X� c o� U O CD '0 C m w 0 N (D U.) (M -It w co C,4 U-) r- -It r- -It 0 A co 0n r- 'D CN a) 0 r- C) m tT W W N m n n tt 0 m M M r- CN 0 M r- 0) v 0 (0 r- r- w 0 0m r- 0 w v w r- 't LO -e r-- 00 w co r- w r-- m N 16 u .P" rj� < 0 0 Z, 0 v 0 CY) C) C, -T - - U) fl- ;; N 04 (0 w r- Mm r- C) M NOD -It M 00 v M (0 m m rl- C) 00 C�l Ln m (0 N. CN N 0 0 cl) - - N 0 N r-- CO I- w N C, V U) E Z cD oo o) r- r- cD o r- U-) r- Q-) r-- w r- r- t- to I- It (D r- r- 00 m r- 00 r- 0) co co CL U -cc CIS 0 o co CL C�,� q S, a)4 co D X" co CD nn N r- V W W I- r- r- 00 OM r- ,T W N W :Mm tf M q W LO r- 0 (0 P- co M LOO r-- I-- (D - f 0 m w 0 It LO to U) tT " V- 0 w 0 cl 0 0 0 w r- 0) (0 v 0 w r- OO v v co m (0 " r- w r- r- M- to w m (N Lo t - U) CJ m 0 C L) >1 'IT C) CD It 3 N- co r-- cl) CO N co co "t T cn CD F,- Lo v m p cl CD C', 00 C-4 U) :tEi m CD QD co r- N Lo w (D r- r- C) m Lo r- Lo r- co W co r-- r-- C) W C, r- (0 1- W v w I-- M m m r.- f- CO r- 1- 00 r- 0 V m 00 O cdd LL CL ca 0 76 a)CL.L4 a. Cc W �o . . ... . .. . . . L) CD r- IL M CD 0 U) C*4 W 0 Iq -,t M M!�2 I.- r- w 0 0 N 'IT co r.- 0 tt O v (D N w m r-- r- cc 0 1- ( f) c') co m to m to co co U-) cl C) m m r- co co cl) -,:r U.) (0 (D co v v (D W r-- w t-- M Vj 04 to w m ,�! m 0(O co LO Qr- tr V. a) zz E 0 0 0 0 cd 0 U) U) 6i C A C) r- �CN CO r- M 00 CN W W M M r- Lo M 0 C N 00 04 0 U) W Co M r- r- ) �o W M 1- r- 0 m 0 r- ED m "It r-- CO m w r- r- C) co CD r- co r- cc N v r- m r- 1- w r-- r- co P.- m CO 0) >, W Ln cc O CL CL LL co E U) -c 0 u .2 - CM Z w qc -i t c C C C 0 0 0 .0 m ca 4�g-- N C- -7- Z) E E >> 0 -C L) c/) 0 a) a) cm -0 ca C ':) C > D a) 0 T >0 c R ca cc :t Lli L) .0 C: aj a) a) (D E E E E •x x x x a) -a -0 c: I C> cu -6 a) 2 E 0. E. .2 E 'r C, o 2 z .2 0 a) 4) -c -M a) a.-, 2 - E U -5 m c ca cu w m 0 m < < CL < 0 -C 0 0 0 00 2 (Ln) a w w LL ca w cc 0 _oj 0 1 -j m a) a) m 2 00 04 CO OE Q) C, wr- w 0 T) o - :t! Q) L) = 0� m V) LL U5 -5 0 03 I- L) (n -0 .2 CCU .0 ca D 0 cn > a) Q) m` o C Z- N to O JI O 'C O, (6 � = V; E L N W O O O; O' N N �q EEE E': 7 D 7 0'r E E E E' X XX X R N w >m 2222 m N co 0 c � E W o r a> Q. w � O N LL 'O OJ, OO C U Q U) U U C O � N 7 (6 ao C � 7 N O N U a) a � > U m o 0 Cl) 0 E r w o r N Q)a (B N LL N — T O O C U Q U U COc � l6 7 a cu O .N U � > U m O O O O O` m .@ .c cc N ,N N E..EEE' o a D D E`,'EEE x 'x ;x N r `7 W In Co vaamrn o tn V 1, LO O OI M I'G*O O vvvrnrnl `V' In CO M. �- r M N h LO r Lo M. M t0 Of V U') — O O Y7 O r M OD h N_ r V fD N T � Im N w M r M O LO In In d7 O N M M h r d V C 0 W E U r c n o 0 o 0 o —y O c ; p co O C 0 O0 N r W O r d N m n LL 'T O O C U Q U C R � co d N C � O ti U -o W > U m` O tb � N U N 00 O l� o N � Q C � �o N � • ^I +, 3 �z d O � a� � o v a, F+1 � O O cd O 0 N U) TO .-+ C = U O d � O O O O` m .@ .c cc N ,N N E..EEE' o a D D E`,'EEE x 'x ;x N r `7 W In Co vaamrn o tn V 1, LO O OI M I'G*O O vvvrnrnl `V' In CO M. �- r M N h LO r Lo M. M t0 Of V U') — O O Y7 O r M OD h N_ r V fD N T � Im N w M r M O LO In In d7 O N M M h r d V C 0 W E U r c n o 0 o 0 o —y O c ; p co O C 0 O0 N r W O r d N m n LL 'T O O C U Q U C R � co d N C � O ti U -o W > U m` O Tiered LOS Through the introduction of a tiered level of service, the deficiencies in capacity can be addressed over the planning period to allow the School District adequate time to build additional capacity and make necessary boundary or program adjustments. Based on establishing the LOS standard of 100% per CSA for each school type and the projected enrollment by school through school year 2011-12, all of the schools in Brevard County will be able to meet the 100 percent LOS by 2011-12. The Level of Service (LOS) standards, which are adopted in the amended Interlocal Agreement (ILA), are used to establish the maximum permissible school utilization rate relative to capacity. An essential component of determining the LOS for schools is the School District's ability to adopt a financially feasible capital program that can achieve and maintain the adopted LOS for public schools. Boundary changes, program shifts, and new or expanded school facilities must be built in time to handle the additional students that will come from new residential developments as those developments come on line. If sufficient school capacity does not exist in the CSA of a proposed residential development or its adjacent CSA then that new development may be required to mitigate its impacts or not build. The Florida Statutes require that school concurrency must provide how the LOS standards will be achieved and maintained. The ability to achieve and maintain the LOS must be based on a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Plan, adopted annually by the School Board as prescribed in Chapter 163.3180(13)(d)(1), F.S. The LOS standards for schools will be adopted into the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) of the local governments' comprehensive plans and must apply district -wide for all schools of the same type. Currently schools are operating at an average level of service of 91 percent with twenty-two schools operating above the 100 percent level of service. This includes twelve elementary schools, two middle schools, two Junior/Senior high schools and six high schools. With boundary adjustments, program changes, and/or the additional capacity projects identified in the proposed five-year capital plan, the number of schools utilized over 100 percent will be reduced to 100% by 2011-12. Based on the information provided above, it is recommended that Brevard County Schools adopt, achieve and maintain a level of service standard of 100 percent of permanent FISH capacity. To achieve 100 percent LOS and remain financially feasible, the use of a tiered LOS will be required Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 32 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 initially for a period of time in order for the twenty-two schools to have their utilization maximized with other schools with lower levels of service. Upon achieving the LOS of 100 percent of permanent FISH capacity in 2011-12, the tiered LOS will be terminated. The Tiered Level of Service shall be as shown in Table 12. Table 12: Tiered Level of Service TIERED LEVEL OF SERVICE -.SCHOOL YEARS 2007''-08 to 2011-12' Facility Type 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Elementary Schools 127% 130% 115% 105% 100% Middle"Schbols' 122%x 120% ` 1f00% .,' 10t}% 100% Junior/'Senior HighSchools 133% 135% 110% 105% 100% High Schools 139% 130% 115% 100% 100% Board Policy 7120 - Criteria for Balancing School Membership to Capacity The School District also recognized that in order to implement some of the strategies necessary to meet the Level of Service requirements established herein, and included in the Interlocal Agreement, the School Board of Brevard County must address the balancing of enrollments through attendance redistricting. The School Board instituted Policy 7120 "Criteria for Balancing School Membership to Capacity" which provides criteria for balancing enrollments. The entire policy is included in Appendix D. School Concurrency Service Areas The School Concurrency Service Areas (CSA) are geographic areas in which the level of service is measured when an application for residential development is reviewed for school concurrency purposes. A fundamental requirement of school concurrency is the establishment of these areas. These CSAs are used to determine whether adequate capacity is available to accommodate new students generated from residential development. Brevard County School District currently operates eighty-five (85) schools. Using capacity as established by the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH), the majority of Brevard District schools operate at or below 100 percent of capacity. Schools that are operating above 100 percent of permanent FISH capacity have some form of relief planned within the current five year planning period. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 33 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Brevard School District and Brevard County local governments have agreed to apply school concurrency on a less than district -wide basis and use school attendance areas (boundaries) as the CSAs. Utilization of this method will create separate concurrency service area boundary maps for elementary, middle, Jr./Sr. and high schools. Each school will be its own CSA. Existing school attendance zones will remain the CSA for measuring level of service for each school. As the CSA allows the impact of new residential development to be analyzed against the directly impacted schools, the review for available capacity will occur at the schools most likely to be impacted by the new residential development. If available capacity is not present, the adjacent school will be analyzed for capacity, lessening the burden on the School District to make significant boundary changes or program adjustments to accommodate the additional students. Figures 6, 7, and 8 below, detail the school concurrency service area boundaries for the elementary, middle, Jr./Sr. high and high school grade levels, respectively. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 34 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 6: Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 35 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 7: Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 36 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 8: Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 37 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 School District Capital Improvements and Revenue Sources School District Financial Feasibility School concurrency requires the School Board to adopt a financially feasible five-year capital facilities plan (Attachment C) and annually update it to provide enough capacity meet the adopted LOS standard for each CSA. The Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, which is annually updated to add an additional year and adopted, details the capital improvements needed and funding revenues available to maintain the adopted level of service. The School District assesses its projected growth in students and determines its student capacity project needs in consideration of its responsibility to adopt a financially feasible capital plan for the five year planning period. As previously demonstrated, the School District will continue to experience student growth at a slower rate. The review of current costs per student station and current and future revenue streams is critical for a financially feasible plan. At the same time the District must pay close attention to the cost per student station limits imposed by the Department of Education. The following section "Student Station Costs" is representative of the analysis that is performed in determining the cost factor student station at a given point in time. This information, directly from the 2004 Impact Fee Study Report prepared by Tindale—Oliver & Associates, demonstrates the analysis to assess and forecast costs per student station. Student Station Costs The 2004 Impact Fee Report prepared by Tindale -Oliver and Associates, Inc. (Attachment D) shows the total costs by school type are based on both capital building and land costs, where available, and were provided to reflect typical capital costs for the land and construction costs for new schools in Brevard County. Data in Table 13 are based on the actual total costs for prototype elementary, middle, and high schools built and opened from 1995-2003, in Brevard County. The cost factors for new schools are updated every year as construction costs and land prices rise. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 38 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Table 13: School Facility Costs Cost Factors Manatee Elementaty Longleaf Elementary Central Middle Bayside Hi h Facility Built August 2003 August 1996 August 1995 August 1997 Actual Construction $873,111 $0 $848,241 $1,721,352 Cost $11,327,615 $8,822,856 $20,294,627 $36,735,785 Inflation Rate 1,885 1,899 2,484 6,268 (construction)' 1.0060 1.1805 1.2145 1.1549 Inflated Construction Cost $11,395,581 $10,415,382 $24,647,824 $42,426,158 Actual Land Cost N/A $620,548 N/A $613,054 Inflation Rate (land) 2 N/A 1.4070 N/A 1.384 Inflated Land Cost N/A $873,111 N/A $848,467 Total Inflated Cost $11,395,581 $11,288,493 $24,647,824 $43,274,625 Total Cost by School Type $22,684,074 $24,647,824 $43,274,625 *Figures may not add due to rounding. (1) Inflation rate for construction of school facility is based on Florida Student Station Cost Factors. (2)The inflation rate for land is based on percentage change in property values from the Brevard County 2001-02 Budget Summary. Based on the Table above costs per student station were calculated and shown in Table 14 below. This Table demonstrates that the costs per student station for the three school types used in this report are conservative for Brevard County, and only represent the costs as they were in the year of construction. Table 14: Cost per Student Station by School Type Cost Component Elementary Middle(2) High Total School Building(1) $21,810,963 $24,647,824 $42,426,158 $88,884,945 Land $873,111 $0 $848,241 $1,721,352 Total $22,684,074 $24,647,824 $43,274,625 $90,606,297 Student Stations 1,885 1,899 2,484 6,268 Cost per Student Station $12,033.99 $12,979.37 $17,421.35 $14,455.38 Source: Dane G. Theodore, AIA, Brevard School District architect, Uctober 24, zuus. (1) Construction costs inflated according to the CPI from the month and year facility was opened until December 2003. (2) Land was not required for construction of middle school. The Impact Fee Report provides that the five-year annual average of total enrolled students from the 2003-03 to 2006-07 school years is used to weight the average cost per student by school type. Included in capital costs are the costs associated with school buses and school bus compound needs. These are considered separate costs above and beyond school facility costs. The five-year annual average of total enrolled students is used to calculate the school bus cost per student, is added to the impact cost per student. It should be noted that only the school bus cost used to accommodate new students is used in the calculation of the school bus cost per student. School bus costs towards Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 39 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 replacing existing buses are not used in the impact fee calculation, but must come from other capital sources. The cost of debt for school buildings is also added to the impact cost. This is based on the present value interest of the current debt, including Certificates of Participation, per student. Present value of interest is based on 5.0 percent debt over a 20 -year time period. The result is the impact cost per student considering construction costs per new student station. The present value interest of the debt cost is added to the cost per student to calculate the total impact cost per student. The items discussed in this section, as well as the resulting total impact cost per student, are included in Table 15. Table 15: Total Impact Cost per Student Impact Cost Per Student Station Calculation S!qp Elementaty Middle Hi h Total Cost Per Student Station $12,033.99 $12,979.37 $17,421.35 $14,455.38 Utilization Rate 0.85 0.85 1.02 Students five-year average' 35,442 9,286 23,792 68,520 Student Distribution' 51.7% 13.6% 34.7% Bighted Cost Per Student Station $14,157.64 $15,269.85 $17,079.75 $15,323.00 Total Bus Cost $2,756,670 Bus Impact Cost Per Student $40.23 Impact Cost Per Student $15,363.23 Debt Cost Per Student Total Debt, from Work Plan $51,111,955 Amount Financed Per Student $745.94 Bond Yield Rate 5.0% Interest $37.30 Capitalization Period, Years 20 Present Value Interest $464.80 Total Impact Cost Per Student $15,828.03 Source: Prepared for the 2004 Impact Fee Study for School District of Brevard County, October 24, 2003 and January 26, 2004. (1) Total student enrollment for the 2002-03 to 2006-07 school years is used to calculate the five-year average of total enrolled students. (2) School Bus Cost is based on $61,765 per bus for 380 buses and $1,024,000 per bus compound for 4 bus compounds. 10 percent of total estimated school bus costs were used to estimate bus costs for new students. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 40 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 School District Revenue/Funding Sources for Capital Improvement As structured, the public school system consists of students, personnel, schools, and administrative facilities. Residential development impacts the students and school facilities because increases in new student enrollment can place demands on school capacity and cause overcrowding of facilities. Therefore, an accurate inventory of both current and projected school capacity and student enrollment is crucial for school capital planning. School District Revenue Sources The school concurrency program requires identification/assessment of state and local revenue sources and funding mechanisms available for school capital improvement financing for the five (5) year planning period for financial feasibility and long range planning period including: ■ Projection of property tax base ■ Assessment ratio and millage rate (two mills levy) ■ Additional revenue sources (impact fees, recurring state revenues, etc.) ■ Projection of debt capacity ■ Projections of debt service obligations for currently outstanding bond issues Recurring State Revenues The Florida State Constitution authorizes two sources of revenue for school districts to be used for State specified needs: Public Education Capital Outlay (PECO) and Capital Outlay and Debt Service (CO & DS). The PECO funds are generated through a 2.5 percent tax imposed on the gross receipts of sellers of electricity, natural or manufactured gas, and telecommunication services in the State. The CO & DS revenues are generated from the licensing of motor vehicles and motor homes and are also used for capital renovation and expansion projects for public education facilities. In Brevard County, the majority of the PECO and CO & DS funds are used for renovation and remodeling of existing public school facilities. Since these funds are not used to provide new student stations, they are not included in the State credit calculations. Based on historical trends for the 5 year period from 1999 to 2003, the total projected PECO and CO & DS revenues utilized for new construction were $1,413,265 (source: Impact Fee Report). Further, the PECO and CO & DS funding for new student stations in the School Board's 5 Year CIP Plan from 2003 to 2007 is zero. In order to provide a conservative state credit calculation, the historical trend for the last five years, as discussed above, is used in the credit calculation. Thus, the 5 -year Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 41 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 annual PECO and CO & DS funds of $1,413,265 are divided by the 5,931 student stations expected to be constructed according to the School Board's Five -Year Capital Plan 2003 to 2007. Table 16 presents the results of the projected state revenue per student. The 5,931 student stations reflect the number of stations projected to be needed in order to maintain the average current utilization rates or level of service. (Source: Impact Fee Report) Table 16: State Revenue Credits (2003-20071 $1,413,265 (1) PECO, CO & DS revenues are from the 5 year period 1999 to 2003 (Dane G. Theodore, AIA, Architect for the School District of Brevard County, January 26, 2004). (2) 5,931 student stations expected to be constructed according to the School Board Five -Year Work Plan, 2003 to 2007. Another revenue source is the credit for local revenues which include taxes on the sale of property. This revenue may be used for capital facility expansion purposes. Table 17 below shows how much per student is estimated based on the projected growth of 5,931 students, according to the School Board's Five -Year Work Plan 2003 to 2007. (1) Pr Table 17: Local Revenue Credits per Student Revenue Credits Per Student roperty Sales, Food Service Transfer $1,000,000 roiected Student Stations 5,931 Total Property Sale Proceeds per Student $168.61 ooertv sales and food service transfer revenues are estimated in the School Board Five -Year Work Plan 2003 to 2007. Recurring Local Revenues The 2 -mill ad valorem tax levied by the School Board generates revenues used for both capital renovation and capital expansion. Revenue projections used in this five-year School Board Work Plan for the 2 -mill ad valorem tax were based on an annual increase of 2.5 percent per year. However, recent revenue trends indicate that 6.0 percent annual increase revenue is more appropriate. Given this assumption, the amount of revenue available for capital based on the 35.4 percent ratio calculated above was adjusted to $74.7 million. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 42 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 A review of historic trends from 1999 to 2003 indicates that debt service paid on Certificates of Participation (paid by the 2 -mill tax) total $57.2 million. Since the adjusted five-year total revenue for 2003 to 2007 for new construction ($74.7 million) is greater than the five-year period from 1999 to 2003 ($57.2 million), it will be used to develop the 2 -mill ad valorem tax credit. This will provide a conservative estimate of the credit amount from the 2 -mill ad valorem tax. This calculation is made by dividing the average annual amount of the 2 -mill ad valorem tax used for new construction or to pay debt service by the average number of students expected to utilize public school facilities during the 2003 to 2007 time period. This results in average 2 -mill revenue per student. The present value of this annual revenue per student is based on a bond yield rate of 5.0 percent over a 20 -year time period. See Table 18 below. Table 18: 2 -mill Debt Service Revenue Credit 112 -mill Debt Service Factors Revenue I Adjusted average annual five-year projected 2 -mill Revenues, based on a 6 percent annual increase. $42,157,554 Percent of five-year 2 -mill revenue used for capital expansion'. 35.4% Five-year 2 -mill revenue used for capital expansion $14,936,964 Number of Students, 5 -Year Avg. 68,438 -mill Annual Revenue Per Student $218.26 Bond Yield rate 5.0% Ca italization Period, Years 20 Present Value Annual 2 -mill Revenue per Student $2,720.00 (1) Based on the School Board's Five -Year Work Plan , 2003 to 2007, approximately 35.4 percent of the five-year average of 2 -mill revenues is used for the expansion of student stations (Dane G. Theodore, AIA, Architect for the School District of Brevard County, January 26, 2004). A summary of all revenue credits and the resulting net impact cost per student is provided in Table 19. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 43 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Table 19: Summary of Revenue Credits and Net Impact Cost Total Cost per Student " $15,828.03 State Revenue Credit $238.28 Local Revenue Credit $168.61 2 -mill Debt Service Revenue Credit $2,720.00 Total Revenue Credit $3,126.89 Net Cost per Student (less above credits) $12,701.14 Source: 2004 Impact Fee Study, Tindale -Oliver and Assoc., Inc 'Based on the School Board's Five -Year Work Plan, 2003 to 2007 While the above analysis, excerpted directly from the 2004 Impact Fee Study, provides the methodology to calculate cost per student station, the DOE provides and updates costs per station that limit the expenditures by the District. It is often these values that are utilized in computations for additional capacities. The School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan The Capital Plan is developed to provide funding to build new capacity as needed to meet the projected student growth. It must address updating schools on a systematic schedule to meet educational needs, and provide funding for maintenance and system renovation to ensure that facilities function safely. As structured, the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan identifies the School District's capital needs based on current costs per student station and projected growth to meet the capacity needs to address facility improvements and long-range capacity requirements. The School District's Capital Plan is developed with an annual 5—year adoption to develop a long-range financially feasible plan. An assessment of the ability to finance capital improvements is based upon the projected enrollment and state and local revenues during the five-year planning period; the forecasting of expenditures for five years; the projections of other revenue sources such as impact and user fees; and projection of facilities cost considerations. The District's Five -Year Facilities Work Program (Attachment C) provides information regarding the ability to fund capital projects to meet the anticipated capacity needs through the 2011/12 school year. Tables 22 and 23 are replaced with updated figures in Attachment C. The School Concurrency mandate requires that the School District annually update and adopt a Plan that contains sufficient capacity to meet the anticipated demand for student stations, ensuring that no schools exceed their adopted level of service for the five year period. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 44 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 While the five-year capital plan must be adopted into the Capital Improvements Element of the local governments' Comprehensive Plans, the school district's capital improvements program does not require county or city funding. The School District has provided an assessment of the ability to finance capital improvements based upon the revised projected enrollment and revenues during the five-year planning period. These are summarized as follows: • Forecast of revenues and expenditures for five years. This information is provided in Attachment C. Revenues are summarized on page 9 of 24, while capacity projects are listed on pages 10 and 11 of 24. • Projection of debt service obligations for currently outstanding bond issues - located in Attachment C — Page 5 of 24. • Projection of facilities operating costs — located in new Appendix B • Projection of debt capacity - located in Appendix C • Projection of other tax bases and other revenue sources, such as, impact and user fees — located in Attachment C — Page 8 of 24. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 45 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Financial Feasibility and Adopted Level of Service Summary As required by the state for school concurrency, the School District must implement a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan that provides for school capacity improvements to accommodate projected student growth. Achieving and maintaining the adopted level of service standard identified for the five-year planning period, and for the end of the long range planning period (ten to twenty years) is based on the identification and assessment of the estimated costs to meet future needs. The School District uses COFTE projections for the State -funded portion of the Five -Year Plan and will use locally -generated funds (School Impact Fees) to meet the projected capital needs to achieve and maintain the financially feasible adopted LOS for students projected above the COFTE forecasts, if any. Those improvements, which are budgeted and programmed for construction within the first three years of the Plan, are considered committed projects for concurrency purposes. Based upon revised student COFTE projections and relying upon school boundary adjustments to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service within the School District's proposed Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, the capacity -providing capital improvements have been revised and schools have been rescheduled for the long range planning period. Table 20 below indicates the revised capital projects timing for capacity projected for construction in the ten and twenty year planning period. With coordinated population and student projection planning, boundary adjustments and some capacity added, the school district will achieve and maintain an adopted LOS. Tahla 7n Ravicarl Fnrilitiac Wnrk Prnnram Sr.hPdiilP Project Area Planned construction date New Middle "DD" 1 2011-12/ 2016-2017' Elementary "U" 111 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "W" I 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "V"' I 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "X" IV 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "Y" I 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "Z" II 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) New Middle "EE" IV 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) New Middle "IFF" III 2018-19/2026-27 (Long range) Elementary "A1" Removed from plan Elementary "B1" Removed from lan High Schools DDD and EEE' Removed from lan`. Source: Brevard Schools Facilities Department 1UUd — revised to rerlect uur- i t student projections Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 46 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Class Size Reduction Issues In addition to meeting school concurrency mandates to achieve and maintain an adopted level of service, the need to meet the constitutional requirements of Classroom Size Reduction by 2010 has placed additional financial burdens on the School District. The school district performed an exercise to determine an approximation of the additional classrooms required in 2008 due to the change in CSR requirement from classroom average to classroom size maximums (without mitigating strategies). The results show at elementary school level a deficit of 172 classrooms or 2,967 seats; at middle schools 60 classrooms or 1320 seats may be needed; and at the high school level 198 classrooms or 4356 seats may be needed. The School District made some assumptions to obtain these numbers based on the CSR implementation rules. Assumptions: Different schools will be overcrowded but new space will have been built, but the fundamental problems and quantities will be similar. A rough estimate of the number of classrooms required by the CSR change to classroom maximums can be done based on 2004-05 student populations, school capacities, core class definitions and course schedules even though all those will change by 2008. Attempting to forecast student population growth, class schedules, and even capacity changes to the year 2008 may introduce more error than it would preclude. Secondary schools are assumed to all be currently fully utilized so that any additional class sections required to meet the final CSR class maximum requirement will require additional classrooms. Methodology. At the elementary school level, a school with portables is considered to be at its effective full capacity regardless of the percentage so additional capacity will have to be added to accommodate the maximum class size rule. A school without portables and sufficiently below full capacity that adding 69 students would not put it above the 100 percent average capacity does not need new classrooms. Elementary schools that need new capacity will need 3.5 additional classrooms each, rounded to 4. Half of the grades will have between 1 and 10 students too many, the other half of the classrooms will have between 1 and 10 students too few. The savings from the grades that are short 1-10 students will not help make room for the grades with 1-10 students too many. Therefore for 7 grades, on the average 3.5 classrooms will be needed, rounded to 4. Class schedules for all the secondary schools were examined. Core courses were identified. For every core class that had more than 22 students at the middle school level and 25 students at the high school level, another classroom period was required. The number of required classroom periods was divided by 4 for the schools on Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 47 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 block schedule and by 6 for the schools with one hour class periods to determine the number of classrooms needed per day to accommodate the classroom maximum constraints. Caveats: This exercise was intended as a quick worst-case scenario, not as a formal estimate. A number of mitigating strategies have been assumed, there are several that would reduce the number of classrooms needed which include: putting schools on a split schedule - 6-12 and 12-6 - two schools in one building; a genuine year-round school with 4 school sections and sliding window vacation schedule; mandating that some secondary courses, especially non-core electives, be taken online with Florida High School; reducing the number of secondary non-core elective courses and allowing their class sizes to rise; encouraging more dual enrollment courses; at the elementary level, cap and bus at the grade level as soon as class size maximums have been reached. The State DOE has suggested these strategies as ways to mitigate the capacity impacts. If these strategies were employed, it may be possible to eliminate the need for any additional classrooms to meet the CSR maximum, but the recommendation would not be popular and possibly not even feasible. Financial Summary With the revision of the student projections triggering an update to the capital plan and the removal of additional capital improvements, the school district will rely on projects already in progress, along with the attendance boundary changes permitted by school board policies to address existing deficiencies and enrollment imbalances and achieve the adopted level of service within the five year period. Table 21 below describes the projected capital costs and the projected revenue for the School District from years 2007-08 through 2011-12. Table 21: Projected Capital Costs and Projected Revenue $76,365,977 1 $12,440,620 1 $12,000,000 1 $37,313,775 1 $13,400,000 $76,365,977 1 $12,440,620 1 $12,000,000 1 $37,313,775 1 $13,400,000 Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 48 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 School Planning and Shared Costs By coordinating the planning of future schools with affected local governments, the school district can better identify the costs associated with site selection and the construction of new schools. Coordinated planning requires the School Board to coordinate school planning with the Capital Outlay Committee (COC) for review. The COC consists of representatives from various government agencies. Prior to the COC review, the affected jurisdiction may coordinate with School District staff to perform its own technical review of the site. This analysis permits the School Board and affected local governments to jointly determine the need for and timing of on-site and off-site improvements necessary to support each new school. Because Brevard County is undergoing significant infrastructure development, analyzing the infrastructure needs of planned school sites is necessary. With this process, shared funding for capital improvements for school sites can be determined according to the responsibility of each party for each specific school site. Necessary infrastructure coordination may include: potable water lines, sewer lines, drainage systems, roadways including turn lanes, traffic signalization and signage, site lighting, bus stops, and sidewalks. These improvements are assessed at the time of site plan preparation. Approval conditions can cover the timing and responsibility for construction, as well as the operation and maintenance of required on-site and off-site improvements. Any such improvements should be in keeping with the financially feasible capital plan adopted by the School Board. Other cost-effective measures should be considered by local governments during the process of formulating neighborhood plans and programs and reviewing large residential projects. During those processes, the County and the cities can encourage developers or property owners to provide the School District with incentives to build schools in their neighborhoods. These incentives may include, but are not be limited to, donation and preparation of site(s), acceptance of stormwater run-off from future school facilities into development project stormwater management systems, reservation or sale of school sites at pre -development prices, construction of new school facilities or renovation of existing school facilities, and provision of transportation alternatives. The unknown costs of associated with maintaining a school concurrency program which does not exceed its adopted LOS, including on-site and off-site infrastructure, will be met and shared by all affected parties, consistent with the requirement for a financially feasible capital improvements program as provided in Attachment A, the adopted Interlocal Agreement Section 6, Joint Consideration of On- site and Off-site Improvements. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 49 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Co -location / Joint -Use Analysis Co -location and Joint -Use of facilities is required as a portion of the data and analysis requirement of Rule 9J-5.025, F.A.C, as well as a policy for the Public School Facility Element. Brevard County's Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency (ILA) also addresses the consideration of co -location and shared use in Section 8 of the ILA. The following co -location maps, Figures 9-12, have been provided as a reference. Budget Considerations: Co -location and shared use of facilities are important tools in budgeting and community building for the School Board, County and local governments. According to the ILA when preparing its Educational Plant Survey, the School Board will look for opportunities to co -locate and share use of school and civic facilities. Likewise, co -location and shared use opportunities shall be considered by the local governments when updating their comprehensive plan's schedule of capital improvements and when planning and designing new, or renovating existing, community facilities. Public Opportunity: As the population continues to mature, leisure and cultural activities become desirable in a community. Middle and high schools are particularly well equipped to serve as community centers because of the capacity, parking and multi-purpose classrooms. Community associations and private organizations serving a range of needs could utilize schools located away from downtown areas. Middle and high schools should provide opportunities for community use. Elementary schools located in less urban areas may offer opportunities for use of their large rooms, such as the cafeteria or libraries. School Opportunity: The School District would benefit from joint use of parks adjacent to or in the vicinity of public schools. The County's public golf courses could provide the high schools with more competitive scholastic opportunities through joint use. Development Opportunity. Co -location is intended to provide efficient use of existing infrastructure and discourage sprawl. Identification early in a budget cycle and coordination among agencies will promote successful and effectively utilized public facilities. Cost effective co -location or joint use of district, county or city owned property could provide substantial savings for public facilities for existing and future facilities. Through school concurrency, proportionate share options for school district, local governments and developers to consider may include parks, and libraries near a planned public school. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 50 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 As residential development proceeds, opportunities for co -location and joint use should be incorporated in public facilities. Mutual Use Agreements: For each instance of co -location and shared use, the School Board and Local Government shall enter into a separate mutual use agreement addressing legal liability, operating and maintenance costs, scheduling of use, facility supervision and any other issues that may arise from co - location and joint use. Coordination: The Florida Statutes require the School District and the local governments to consider co - locating public schools and public facilities. The co -location and shared -use of facilities provide important economic advantages to the County, School District and local governments. During the preparation of its Educational Plant Survey, the School District can identify co -location and shared -used opportunities for new schools and public facilities. Likewise, co -location and shared use opportunities should be considered by the local governments when updating their comprehensive plan, schedule of capital improvements and when planning and designing new or renovating existing libraries, parks, recreation facilities, community centers, auditoriums, learning centers, museums, performing arts centers, and stadiums. Co -location and shared use of school and governmental facilities for health care and social services should also be considered. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 51 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 n r-� 0 -I, N LO O C 00 N � r- - O W � a w O f6 (� u _T O ca C U Q cu U cu M d � T � C 70 7 � O •� U m >U a) m0 Figure 10: ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 11: "N, Co -Location Opportunities - Planning Area III Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 54 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Figure 12: w Co -Location C)C�1C1t}11 %)11�aO1tt11I 1 8 YIalin nor Area IV Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 55 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Summary Florida law requires that the public school facilities element of a local government comprehensive plan address how the level of service standards will be achieved and maintained for school concurrency. The ability to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service must be based on a school district's financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. Furthermore, the law requires that the public school level of service (LOS) standards be adopted into local government capital improvement element, and must apply within each concurrency service area (CSA) to all schools of the same type (elementary, middle, Jr/Sr high and high). Brevard County uses the school attendance boundaries as the CSA, therefore the LOS standard applies for each school. Initial shortfalls in Brevard County School District's capacity over the five-year period following adoption are addressed by adopting a tiered level of service standard and if needed a longer term for capacity catch-up with a concurrency management system. The Brevard School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan is required to be financially feasible and to address existing deficiencies to attain the adopted level of service, and maximize school utilization. Capacity is added in accordance with the annually adopted financially feasible Five -Year Capital Plan. Once the adopted level of service for each type of school has been achieved in 2011-12, the level of service will apply to all schools of the same type (elementary, middle, jr/sr high and high). Brevard County's adopted level of service of 100 percent can be met by school year 2011-12 through coordinated planning, enrollment adjustments and a financially feasible capital plan. Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 56 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 APPENDICIES Brevard County Public School Facilities Element 57 ORC: Revised Data and Analysis Report 07-18-08 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Date: 09-02-08 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item 11 No. E -Mail Request AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: DISCUSSION: CAPE CANAVERAL LESSONS LEARNED AS A RESULT OF TROPICAL STORM FAY DEPT/DIVISION: LEGISLATIVE Requested Action: City Councilmember Shannon Roberts requested a discussion item on Cape Canaveral lessons learned as a result of Tropical Storm Fay. Summary Explanation & Background: N/A Exhibits Attached: E -Mail Request City Ma • s Department LEGISLATIVE - k \m s\admin\council\meeting\2008\09-02-08\faylessons.doc Bennett Boucher From: C. Shannon Roberts [csroberts@cfl.rr.com] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:42 PM To: Bennett Boucher Subject: Additional Agenda Item for 9/2/08 Council Meeting Bennett, If possible, would like to add an agenda item to the 9/2/08 Council Agenda, which would be " Cape Canaveral Lessons Learned as a Result of Fay". Thank you. Shannon